Which is more disgraceful?
by Sons-of-Blanda on Oct 27, 2009 9:04 PM PDT
Email
PrintMarcus Allen was a great running back, now in the HOF, with many productive years in Oakland. Despite his excellent play, he was benched during the 91 and 92 seasons. The motive behind this outrage is not sane. On the other hand, JaMarcus Russell currently enjoys a QB rating that places him 34th among 32 NFL starters. So I ask you, which is more disgraceful: benching someone who will significantly help the team win or not benching someone who will significantly help the team lose?
8 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I would say the non benching of J-Russ
Why would Tom let him start again it should show him that no job is forever in the league maybe Drew Brees will get benched…ok NOT!!!!!!!!
Amazing, Jamarcus Russell hands off to McFadden who pitches it back to Russell who finds Darrius Heyward Bey in the Middle of the Field wide open 30, 20,10,5 Touchdown Raiders! Amazing. This telecast is Brought to you by Cable.
It's even worse than that
There’s another victim, another injustice involved – Bruce Gradkowski, is now in (arguably) the Marcus Allen position. Why should the Grad be benched when he can contribute more and hurt the team less? So, because there are two injustices involved by playing the worse and benching the better – I too consider the failure to bench JR a greater travesty – at least in theory. But, I have to say, that what happened to Allen is really shameful.
Son-of-Blanda
by Sons-of-Blanda on Oct 29, 2009 6:33 AM PDT up reply actions
The problem is
Davis will overrule Cable. I bet that in any normal team, even Cable would bench Russell. In fact I bet it would have been a while ago.
Win, Lose, or Tie, Raiders til I die!
One game at at time
Cable sucked-it-up and benched him >1/2 the game. I expect the same scenario at S.D. But, with the bye-week following, Tom might not get another opportunity to direct this team.
Son-of-Blanda
contracting with Al
is dangerous; the 1-yr K sets Cable up as fall guy.
Btw, thanks to all for getting me through the darkest week. I’ve an acronym for this blogsite:
RAIDERS [Regressive Auto Immune Defense for Emotional Response Syndrome].
I hope we’ve hit rock-bottom and begin recovery – starting today v. SD …
Just Pray, Baby
Son-of-Blanda
by Sons-of-Blanda on Nov 1, 2009 8:21 AM PDT up reply actions
The benching of Marcus
If I remember right wasn’t Marcus Allen benched because of Bo Jackson.I love Marcus Allen from his time at USC and when he was with the Raiders but how do you play Marcus ahead of Bo Jackson.Now I have not looked this up but thats the way I remember it and really how can you blame Al for going either way.The problem with that team was its QB the same as it is now.
Allen sat two years after Jackson was gone
Bo arrived in ‘87 and was preferred over Marcus during Shanahan’s 88 & first quarter of ‘89 seasons. But when Shanahan is fired and Shell takes over in ’89 and Allen plays, though not a lot. There’s a change, however, during the 1990 season when Allen and Russell play together and then the Raiders kick ass – going 12-4. In the ensuing playoffs Bo Jackson’s career ends when his leg is torn out of his hip. The next year Allen sits there (he might have taken a few hand-offs, I don’t remember how many) but he was benched throughout season ‘92. Allen left the next year for K.C. and immediately played and did great there.
I can’t remember who the QB was during Allen’s exhile (some javelin thrower that Al became infatuated with) but the Raiders went 9-7 and 7-9 during those two seasons while Allen sat watching.
Son-of-Blanda
by Sons-of-Blanda on Oct 28, 2009 10:49 PM PDT reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
