As I admitted Rice and Porter are a huge upgrade from Rison and Jett. Still the Raiders receivers as a group are not blazing fast, and like I said before the Bucs were even able to contain the even more field stretching Rams core from 99. Also, the Raiders did run the ball more in 2000--but in 2000 and 2001 Gannon had similar passing numbers and efficiency as this year (in fact more TDs 2000 & 2001 than this year actually) with the exception of total yards. Thoses teams like this one were also Gannon's teams, and everyone knew to beat the Ravens they were going to have to throw the ball. Also, no Garner is not a better receiver than Marshall Faulk. This year Garner was healthy, had a consistently healthy QB, and an offense that threw the ball at a record pace--yet he did not match Faulk's superbowl year receiving performance as Faulk had only 4 less catches, but more yards per catch, more total yardage, more TDs, etc. Further, besides the stats, I don't think many people trully believe Garner runs better routes, has better hands, or is more dangerous in the open field than Marshall Faulk. This is no knock on Garner--a fine player who really adds a dimension to the Raiders, but Faulk is probably the best RB to ever play at this. Most of the plays and the sets are the same, correct? What I was getting at more has to do with knowledge of this than of how Gruden versus Callahan manages a game or changes in individual personel. Also, The Raiders have different starters on defense, but the defense itself didn't perform much different--this year it was 311 YPG, 304 points, last year it was 317 YPG, 327 points. Bottom line is they are a mediocre defense both years, compare these numbers with TB's 252 YPG, 196 points--both the best in the league by a wide margin this year. The key to the Buc's defense is keeping teams from constinently moving the ball at all, especially through the air. The TOs are a byproduct of teams not being able to do what they normally can and taking risks. Sure Oakland can not take risks, and simply punt and punt, and hope the defense outplays TB's offense. Neither was the Rams defense. Also, take nothing away from the Pats, but they gave up over 400 yards, more than 150 than they were able to produce themselves. And as someone who did pick the Pats to play close and have a shot to win--I admit if those teams play a 10 game series the Rams win at least 7 out of 10--NE just wanted in more and played clutch in the key momenets that day. ...and Sapp, Brooks, Barber, Lynch, Keyshon and B. Johnson have similar hunger and karma working. I think it is setting up as a great superbowl--I just like TBs chances because Brad Johnson's job is going to be a lot easier than Gannon. Even though Gannon is better, I don't think Brad Johnson will screw up in the situations TB puts him and Gannon will have to continue to make special plays and avoid TOs to move the ball. I just think that is too tough and order. some more tidbits In Oaklands 5 losses, they averaged 2 TOs--with Gannon responsible for more than half. The best defenses they faced all season was Miami (291 YPG, 301 points)--who themeselves are not close to Phily's level, let alone the Buc's level, and Oakland mustered only 17 points to go with two TOs against them. Gannon wasn't exactly error prone and efficient against a number of teams--especially one's putting heat from the ends (Miami, 49ers, Rams). Now in TBs 4 loses the opponents averaged around 180 in the air (most was 250 by NO) and 120 on the ground. That tells me teams had to establish the run first and thrown only when TB wasn't set up for it. What also helped in two of those games (Pittsburgh, Phily) was that TBs offense was completely shut down. Brad Johnson didn't plat at all in the Pitts game, and not the whole game versus Phily--even though it may not have mattered in that loss as they had no answer for Phily's D on that day. In the other two loses, the Saints pounded them with McAlister. In the second one even with McAlister running solid Brooks was only 9 of 24 for 155 yards. I guess I sum it up this way. I don't think Oakland's defense is good enough to completely shut down the Bucs--healthy it would have a chance, but losing Armstrong (nobody mentions this but I think he was pretty important as a playmaking end in passing situations) and a less than 100% Woodson and Buchanon may really hurt here. The Bucs, their OL, and Brad Johnson have played well in the playoffs--even did some positive things against the Eagles. So that brings us to the Buc's D versus Oakland's O. To be successful Oakland needs to run first, pass second, or rely on a magical performance from Gannon. Oakland tried and failed the run first approach against lesser Ds already in the playoffs, and are going to have to go with what got them there--pass even when they know you are going to pass--in my opinion. The brings me back to whether Gannon can pull off a magical performance. He can do it, he showed signs of it this year like versus Denver, but it isn't likely against a defense that reacts this properly, this swiftly, with this kind of stage pressure, with a week of the Bucs focusing on the Raiders sets by the Raiders former coach. Moe, you know I have been calling the Raiders the best AFC team and probably best overall team all year--I just think they drew the absolute worst match-up possible for them and the Bucs offense is playing just well enough to make the plays they will need.
The Bucs will win. Gruden proved his coaching genius. Any team that can whip Philly at the Vet like that can do up the Raduhs as well. Bucs - 31 Raiduhs - 17
Callahan left the passing offense sets alone, but what he did was implement different options. Gruden liked to throw out of 2 WR, 2 TE sets. What Callahan did was take out that extra TE and put in a lot of 3 WR sets with Jerry Porter. The Raiders have 5 very capable receivers in on nearly every play with Brown, Rice, Porter, Garner, and Rookie Doug Jolley. The Defense was completely simplified, instead of zones and coverages, They are just letting Romonowski or Barton blitz a lot. Callahan also put in a Jumbo, or "Elephant" formation when he wants to pound the ball. He will use rookie OT Langston Walker (6-8, 350) as a 3rd TE to create holes for the power runner (Wheatley, Crockett) Charlie Garner is still what powers the Offense, even though he doesn't get 25 carries a game, He makes the most out of his touches, 941 yards receiving on 91 catches means he averaged 10 yards a catch. that stat shows that even though he takes a lot of 4th option dump-off passes from Gannon, he can make something out of nothing. The Raiders Defense is too quick to let Pittman run against us, and too big to let Alstott do anything. The Raiders D isn't great, but they make plays when the team needs them the most. I think Jurevicius will be key again, Woodson and James shouldn't have too much trouble against possesion WR's like Keyshawn and McCardell. Again though, Jerry Porter is the X-Factor and Key in this offense, if he gets open, forget about it, he will make the catch and blow past you. He is confident, and he will be a Superstar in this league when the Rice/Brown era is done in Oakland. He will be the key in this game.
Raiders win. Philadelphia was victimized by a below-par defensive performance, coupled with dropped passes and a general inability to execute the offense. Tampa's defense was strong, but it wasn't the sole reason that Philly couldn't score. The Raiders won't have the same problems that the Eagles did. Raiders 28-17
Raiders 9 Bucs 8 This is according to Madden 2002. Bucs finally score with about a minute left, but blow the onside kick and don't get the ball back. Raiders did not get a touchdown, but scored early with 3 FGs. I'm going to see if I can sim on 2003, but I only have that for PC. So when I'm done, I'll start.
I still see the same weaknesses I did the last time we played them. Our OL have at least a 50 pound advantage per a man Their LBs are undersized They play zone We raped them 45-0...and i don't really see any difference. The Ravens defense and Bucs are different. The Ravens had physical corners who played man-to-man like Miami. We struggle much more against these types of teams. The Bucs like to play a zone, and it works to our advantage. Gannon picks apart teams who play zone. I think you are sadly mistaken. Raiders have had the toughest strength of schedule this year. In terms of quality of competition, the Raiders would be the better prepared team. If you're referring to the playoffs, the Jets were considered the hottest team, and we killed them. Bucs had a much easier time through the NFC, and they will be surprised how tough the AFC is. If you think Gannon cannot make the right reads, please watch the Denver game. 20+ completions in a row. He has proven he can do it, and that's one reason why he's the league MVP. As I mentioned before, Miami matches up with us better. The Bucs and the Eagles are ranked higher, but doesn't mean they match up better. Raiders as Super Bowl XXXVII Champions!!!
If you are going to bring up the fact that the Bucs held the Rams to 11 points in 99, you also have to remember The Bucs lost to the Raiders 45-0 a litle more than a month before that game.
Porter is the key no doubt. You have to figure Brown and Rice are going to get a few catches however Porter vs whoever is left not covering Jerry/Tim is in trouble. People forget that Oakland has beat 2 of the hottest teams in the league back to back and by more than 2 TD's in both games. Tennessee and the Jets had won a combined 19 of the last 22 games they played? How Philly or San Fran was playing any better I dont know. If Oakland can run even a little Tampa is in hot water. And with 50+ lbs per man they will. Should be a great game though.
The Rams-Bucs was much more comparable in terms of the stakes involved. Tennessee mopped up on a weak division. The Jets played the Raiders off a bye--the previous Jets game was much closer. Do you really believe the Jets and Tenn were as quality as Phily, let alone San Fran? San Fran gave Oakland a lot of trouble on both sides of the ball--and in fact beat them. If you look at yardage differential & points differential--it is clear to me the best 3 teams were the Bucs, Eagles and Raiders. Tennesse was not close to their caliber in yardage differential. The difference between the 3 best teams is the Raiders did it more on offense, the Bucs more on defense, and Phily on both. I prefer to look at it if Oakland can't run on Tampa a little they are in deep trouble, because nobody has been able to throw on them when they know you are throwing. Given Oakland had to throw first, run second to start moving it against the Jets & Titans & even the Eagles with their tough inside running game couldn't muster much against Tampa--I don't like Oakland's chance to be successful if they run first, pass second. Oakland must rely on Gannon seeing the whole field in pass-first situations and playing nearly error free--or they will not win the game.
Excuses, excuses. You give the Raiders little credit for knocking 2 of the hottest teams out of the playoffs. I do think the Jets were playing the best football in the NFL heading into the Raiders game. And Tennessee was as hot as anyone before last week. The "weak" schedule they played during the win streak included Indy twice, Pittsburgh twice, the Giants and the Pats so it wasnt all a cakewalk. Not the hardest schedule but games they won. San Fran played the Raiders during the losing streak and won in OT. Oakland is a different team now. Its like saying Dallas is better than Tenn because they beat them at a down time. Yards differential isnt the total story as last year proved. New England was not the most dominant statistical team but was hot at the right time and tough to beat. Where we agree is that Oakland must get some sort of ground game going if only to keep Tampa honest. Without it Oakland will be looking at trouble.
Bus play same defense as Titans did. Rush 4 and drop 7. That was fatal. Raiders. But if the bucs are willing to blitz I think they will win.
If you blitz us, you'll get killed (example : Pittsburgh in week 2) If you don't blitz and drop everyone back you'll get killed (example Denver in week 10) I expect this game to be a lot like the Steelers game in Week 2, The Steelers Defense will come out strong, But the Raiders will overcome turnovers and force turnovers to win the game.
The Bucs will win this game. Yes the Raiders beat two very good teams in the last two weeks, but the Bucs beat the BEST team last week, and beat them on the road! The Raiders offense depends on protecting Rich Gannon, and the Raiders OL has never seen a DL like the one the Bucs have. Watch Gannon get knocked out of the game, and then watch the Raiders get knocked out of the Super Bowl.
I think we handled Kevin Carter, Jevon Kearse, Carlos Hall and Albert Haynesworth pretty well. The only Defense that was able to disrupt Gannon this season was the Dolphins, They played Madison and Surtain up on Rice and Brown, even though Gannon found Porter and Jolley open and nearly brought the raiders back, The Fins were able to apply pressure on Gannon by shutting down the receivers. I just don't think Barber and Kelly have the strength to physically take Tim Brown and Jerry Rice out of this game. Also - Jerry Rice has played in 3 super bowl games. His Average per game is - 9 catches, 190 yards and 2 TDs. Jerry knows how to play in the spotlight. The Raiders have the edge maturity wise, and experience wise. The Bucs have more talent, but none of the Bucs players have a ring, They'll get lost in the hype.
Ill tell you this right now, there is a better chance of good ol' injury prone Brad Johnson getting knocked out of the game than Gannon. Gannon may be old but he is still alot tougher than Johnson. Plus the Raiders are more likely to lay the hits and take the 15 yarder than TB. Johnson isnt very mobile either. The Philly win was big for Tampa but when it comes to straight passing McNabb is no Gannon. I agree Oakland hasnt seen a DL like Tampa but by the same token Tampa hasnt seen a QB that reads as quickly and as accurately as Rich.
Excuses? I based my arguments on facts. Yardage differential. Point differential. Yes they are not perfect but they are a whole lot more solid than whether the team they played was "hot" or not. Again do you really, honestly, believe beating Phily on the road was easier than beating the Jets at home coming off a bye, or beating the very statistically medicore Titans at home who came off an OT game? I agree yardage differential isn't the whole story. And I was one who picked the Pats to win or keep it close because I liked the match-ups (really like the Pats secondary). However if you play that game 10 times the Rams win 7 of them, NE just seized the day. Jason Taylor was a big thorn in Oakland as well. You have a similar player in Rice for TB. However make no mistake the Fins D--though probably the best in the AFC, is at best TB extra lite. TBs team speed, especially in linebackers who can cover like most safeties, make TB a completely different animal defensively. Phily was the only defense close--but they had much slower linebackers than TB as well. The only teams to make headway against the Bucs defense ran the ball, and then selectively passed via play action. If any team team could set up to throw and still throw on them it would be Oakland, but given the Rams in 1999 couldn't throw that well against Tampa in a zone--I don't expect the Raiders to win the game this way either. Oakland is going to need a monster OL performance and Garner/Wheatley running between the tackles for steady yardage or they are in big time trouble. Either they run the ball or Gannon has to put forth a flawless Joe Montana-like superbowl effort or they will not win.
I am only saying that beating those 2 teams (Tenn and NY) back to back after both had been red hot says just as much to me as TB beating Philly does.. Are you forgetting how Tommy Maddox and Plaxico Burress of the Steelers made the TB secondary look like swiss cheese a few weeks before the playoffs in TB? Maddox completed 74% of his passes vs TB. The Bucs defense while very good is no Ravens of a few years back.
Maddox still only threw for 233 yards and only 1 touchdown that day--most of which done in the 1st quater. Also, Pittsburgh's offense only managed 10 points the whole game on a day TB's offense (without Brad Johnson) could not get anything accomplished--in fact the TBs offense turned the ball over 3 times and gave Pittsburgh just as many points as they scored (TB didn't score at all until the 4th quarter). It was the TB's offense that lost that game, not the defense--besides the whole team kind of showed up flat, TB did not go in with playoff intensity at all. Basically if you count this game against the Bucs defense you should count Oakland's offensive performance against the Fins (which at the time looked like it had major playoff implications) at least equally. BTW the Pittsburgh receivers are probably harder to handle than the Oakland receivers--especially in 1 on 1 situations versus DBs. Burress is bigger, stronger and faster than Rice or Brown is now, Ward is stronger and faster than those guys as well with just as good of hands as Rice/Brown. With Porter it is a little harder to compare, he is certainly very explosive and great target with space, but in bump and run I am less sure of how savvy he is or the quality of his shorter precision routes. Basically Oakland and Pitts' passing games are set up quite differently. Pittsburgh's passing game was more predictabed on their two main wide outs creating match-up problems, especially with deeper routes or the threat of deep routes (NO did the same with Horn & their rookie at times), Oakland's offense is more short/mid range throws based using multiple targets (including 3rd wide outs, TEs, RBs) and creating miss-matches. But against TB there won't be many mismatches--their LBs can cover backs, TEs, and even stay with most WRs for a short time. Gannon is going to need a lot of time and be pin-point accurate, Porter is the only field stretcher they have and TB can scheme like they did to take out Owens as a downfield threat if they need to.
Not as physical and not as impenatrable to run on, but faster and better in coverage. Overall pretty much as good IMO.
