Why should Cable disrespect himself like this? (1 Viewer)

[Hoss_Cartwright]

I would rather get fired by Davis than give in to his demands of playing Heyward-Bey, especially if it cuts into Murphy's snaps. It's obvious that Heyward-Bey belongs on the bench.

Louis Murphy-WR-Raiders Sep. 16 - 10:40 am et

Raiders coach Tom Cable inidicated that when Chaz Schilens returns, he'll cut into Louis Murphy's snaps more than Darrius Heyward-Bey's.

We'll see. Murphy looks much better than fellow rookie Heyward-Bey and JaMarcus Russell already seems to like throwing to Murphy more. Schilens isn't expected back until Week 3 at the earliest. It would be hard to take Murphy off the field if Heyward-Bey looks as bad as he did in Week 1.

Source: Oakland Tribune

 

[Hoss_Cartwright]

Hoss, I suppose that you engage in blatant acts of insubordination in your place of work? (Or are you one of those "do as I say, not as I do" kind of guys)

I guess I'm one of those "I wouldn't have taken the job in the first place kind of guys" if I had to be someone's puppet.

 

[Multiple Scores]

Hoss, I suppose that you engage in blatant acts of insubordination in your place of work? (Or are you one of those "do as I say, not as I do" kind of guys)

I guess I'm one of those "I wouldn't have taken the job in the first place kind of guys" if I had to be someone's puppet.

Cable is a head coach, hard to turn that down, I don't think any other teams were knocking on his door begging him to be a head coach in the NFL.

 

[DrJ]

Hoss, I suppose that you engage in blatant acts of insubordination in your place of work? (Or are you one of those "do as I say, not as I do" kind of guys)

I guess I'm one of those "I wouldn't have taken the job in the first place kind of guys" if I had to be someone's puppet.

Cable is a head coach, hard to turn that down, I don't think any other teams were knocking on his door begging him to be a head coach in the NFL.

I'd think it would depend on what you felt the liklihood of you getting another coaching job at another point was. For instance, what Lions coach has ever gone on to do anything else? And at least in the case of the Lions they give you more than a year or two of pay for destroying your career, Al gets rid of these guys every other year. Just because the title of the job is better than the one you currently have doesn't necessarily make it a good career move.

 

[thehornet]

It's pathetic and predicatable coming from the Raiders. Why would anyone think that Al Davis would be able to understand DHB just isnt ready yet. he needs to let his coach, coach.

 

[karmarooster]

Hoss, I suppose that you engage in blatant acts of insubordination in your place of work? (Or are you one of those "do as I say, not as I do" kind of guys)

I guess I'm one of those "I wouldn't have taken the job in the first place kind of guys" if I had to be someone's puppet.

I would gladly get paid to be the Raiders HC, no matter how terrible the team is or who Al Davis forced me to draft at WR. You wouldn't take the job in the first place?

 

[Multiple Scores]

This team isn't going anywhere this year. It comes down to the Stafford argument here, do you play your high picks to get them experience? I don't see anything wrong with playing DHB since he has the potential, I wouldn't steer clear of my plan after one week, this notion of Cable being an idiot is on par with somebody dropping Andre Johnson for Michael Clayton because of week 1, lets let the Raiders follow through on their plan for more than a whole week before calling the coach an idiot.

 

[az_prof]

Do you really think starting Murphy over DHB is going to make that much of a difference for this team in terms of real world performance? Murphy looked better but one big play in one game doesn't turn him into Randy Moss.

 

[Hoss_Cartwright]

Do you really think starting Murphy over DHB is going to make that much of a difference for this team in terms of real world performance? Murphy looked better but one big play in one game doesn't turn him into Randy Moss.

It has a lot to do with Murphy's development, which is just as important as DHB. It's not out of the realm of possibility that Murphy is 5 times better than DHB, and many scouts had DHB rated as high bust potential.

 

[az_prof]

Do you really think starting Murphy over DHB is going to make that much of a difference for this team in terms of real world performance? Murphy looked better but one big play in one game doesn't turn him into Randy Moss.

It has a lot to do with Murphy's development, which is just as important as DHB. It's not out of the realm of possibility that Murphy is 5 times better than DHB, and many scouts had DHB rated as high bust potential.

You may be right--and you may be wrong. Time will tell. But I don't know too many teams that would bench a high first round pick for a second day pick based on one game's performance. This isn't just the Raiders and Davis--this is how the NFL works. The Raiders have alot invested in Russell, McFadden, and DHB, and they have to give those guys the chance to develop to see what they have. Murphy appears better now, but who is to say that by years end or by next year that he will be? Most people would agree that DHB has a higher ceiling.

 

[Knobs]

I don't know I would do anything differently if I were the head coach, even if Davis wasn't forcing me.

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

Murphy's starting position is rock solid and Heyward-Bey is terrible based on one game? This is why we're posting on a message board and not head coaches.

 

[baconisgood]

Hoss, I suppose that you engage in blatant acts of insubordination in your place of work? (Or are you one of those "do as I say, not as I do" kind of guys)

I guess I'm one of those "I wouldn't have taken the job in the first place kind of guys" if I had to be someone's puppet.

So you wouldn't be a QBs coach unless the HC gave you free reign to name your QB? You wouldn't be a D coordinator unless 100% of the defensive personal was up to you? You wouldn't be a head coach unless you were a head coach /GM with not ownership involvement? Not being the one to make the final decision does not make you a "puppet" if you are the one to implement it. Everyone knows that Al Davis makes the decisions, its not like hes taking the fall for them if they go bad (other than in Al's eyes).

 

[flintpanthers]

Do you really think starting Murphy over DHB is going to make that much of a difference for this team in terms of real world performance? Murphy looked better but one big play in one game doesn't turn him into Randy Moss.

It has a lot to do with Murphy's development, which is just as important as DHB. It's not out of the realm of possibility that Murphy is 5 times better than DHB, and many scouts had DHB rated as high bust potential.

You may be right--and you may be wrong. Time will tell. But I don't know too many teams that would bench a high first round pick for a second day pick based on one game's performance. This isn't just the Raiders and Davis--this is how the NFL works. The Raiders have alot invested in Russell, McFadden, and DHB, and they have to give those guys the chance to develop to see what they have. Murphy appears better now, but who is to say that by years end or by next year that he will be? Most people would agree that DHB has a higher ceiling.

Well their was this team named Arizona who did it. Played a later round wr (boldin) over a first round guy(johnson). Seemed to pan out ok.

 

[massraider]

They play different positions. Flanker/split end.

 

[gpthatsme]

If anything, maybe they don't worry about rushing Chaz back from the injury now if Murphy continues to play well and they leave Murphy opposite DHB. Predictions are that Chaz comes back in Week 3, which is REALLY quick for his type of injury. If Murphy continues to play well then maybe they continue to let Chaz COMPLETELY heal instead of letting him play through the pain and risk further injury. Maybe Chaz comes back in week 4 or 5, just a week or two after the predictions. BUT, the Raiders schedule gets a lot tougher after week 4 when they play the Giants, Eagles, Jets and Chargers defenses 4 games in a row weeks 5 thru 8. So, the questions is, will Chaz be up to speed immediately in order to be able to significantly contribute against those top level defenses or will they try to stick with the hot hand in Murphy for the rest of the first half of the season??

 

[GoL]

Hoss, I suppose that you engage in blatant acts of insubordination in your place of work? (Or are you one of those "do as I say, not as I do" kind of guys)

I guess I'm one of those "I wouldn't have taken the job in the first place kind of guys" if I had to be someone's puppet.

Is Cable's job to do what Al Davis wants or to win football games. He is in a lose-lose situation if he is going to be evalutated on both criteria. Tough job if you ask me and I think career wise he would have been better off waiting for a better situation.

 

[strong]

Hoss, I suppose that you engage in blatant acts of insubordination in your place of work? (Or are you one of those "do as I say, not as I do" kind of guys)

I guess I'm one of those "I wouldn't have taken the job in the first place kind of guys" if I had to be someone's puppet.

Cable is a head coach, hard to turn that down, I don't think any other teams were knocking on his door begging him to be a head coach in the NFL.

I'd think it would depend on what you felt the liklihood of you getting another coaching job at another point was. For instance, what Lions coach has ever gone on to do anything else? And at least in the case of the Lions they give you more than a year or two of pay for destroying your career, Al gets rid of these guys every other year. Just because the title of the job is better than the one you currently have doesn't necessarily make it a good career move.

i'm sorry, but coaching for the raiders has proved to be a very useful step in a coach's career. recent coaches:kiffin: got great gig at tennesseeshell: he was done anyway. doesn't matterturner: san diego -- doesnt seem to even be a good coach and he's got a great jobcallahan: great job at nebraska -- screwed it up thoughgruden: coached at TB for a long timebugel & white: baahhshannahan: Denverthat's not a bad list and most went on to have really great head coaching jobs elsewhere immediately after their time in oakland. detroit lions, on the other hand... most of those guys don't jump into head coaching jobs.

 

[Wadsworth]

Zach Miller = 6 targets, 6 catches, 96 yards

If Al Davis had any sense he'd forget DHB and tell Cable to target Miller.

 

[massraider]

If anything, maybe they don't worry about rushing Chaz back from the injury now if Murphy continues to play well and they leave Murphy opposite DHB. Predictions are that Chaz comes back in Week 3, which is REALLY quick for his type of injury. If Murphy continues to play well then maybe they continue to let Chaz COMPLETELY heal instead of letting him play through the pain and risk further injury.

I never heard which kind of injury it was. I know it was a broken 5th metatarsal, but I also know there are different kinds of breaks of that bone. And some take a lot longer than others.

 

[S.K.A.]

They play different positions. Flanker/split end.

this.

 

[Chaka]

They play different positions. Flanker/split end.

And in typical SP fashion the correct response is all but ignored (except by you SKA).

 

[Casting Couch]

They play different positions. Flanker/split end.

And in typical SP fashion the correct response is all but ignored (except by you SKA).

Thank you.end of thread.

 

[Johnny Ice]

Al Davis invested a lot of money in Heyward-Bey. He definitely can't throw in the towel after Week 1, the deal is done. Cable is doing the right thing as an employee, there are hundreds of millions that "disrespect themselves" everyday if you look at it like that.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

They play different positions. Flanker/split end.

This is true, but those positions are somewhat interchangeable. No team is going to keep one of its two best WRs off the field just because he plays flanker instead of split-end or vice versa.Any WR should be able to play either position, even if he's a little better suited to one or the other.(The main difference is that the split-end is often subject to more harassment off the line of scrimmage since he doesn't have the extra yard cushion. Also, in most offenses, the split-end is easier to isolate in single coverage on the backside of the pattern while the flanker will run combination routes with the TE more often and the secondary will rotate coverage in that direction more often. But that's not always the case.)

 

[Maroney=Sped]

Tom Cable looks like a Looney Toons villain.

 

[JohnnyU]

They play different positions. Flanker/split end.

Are you saying they aren't interchangeable to a talented WR?

 

[fatness]

They play different positions. Flanker/split end.

This is true, but those positions are somewhat interchangeable. No team is going to keep one of its two best WRs off the field just because he plays flanker instead of split-end or vice versa.Any WR should be able to play either position, even if he's a little better suited to one or the other.

Since Malcolm Kelly and Devin Thomas are in their second years with Washington, and since they're each learning one, not both, of those positions, I don't think it's as interchangeable as you're making it out to be. Especially with younger WR's.

 

[massraider]

They play different positions. Flanker/split end.

Are you saying they aren't interchangeable to a talented WR?

That must be what I am saying! I mean, what else could I be saying?Wait, let me check..................oops, my bad, it looks like I was saying:

They play different positions. Flanker/split end

I am quite happy with Cable letting the players learn one position at a time. Frankly, it seemed like the receivers didn't have their individual positions mastered on Monday, I'd just as soon let them get comfortable at the X and Z.

Does seem silly that the coach won't dump the #7 pick after one game, I mean, we all know he stinks, but that coach, he's pig-headed.

 

[fatness]

Why are both your identities posting?

 

[PlasmaDogPlasma]

They play different positions. Flanker/split end.

And in typical SP fashion the correct response is all but ignored (except by you SKA).

Thank you.end of thread.

Some teams move their WRs between those positions during the course of a game.

 

[Chaka]

They play different positions. Flanker/split end.

Are you saying they aren't interchangeable to a talented WR?

That must be what I am saying! I mean, what else could I be saying?Wait, let me check..................oops, my bad, it looks like I was saying:

They play different positions. Flanker/split end

I am quite happy with Cable letting the players learn one position at a time. Frankly, it seemed like the receivers didn't have their individual positions mastered on Monday, I'd just as soon let them get comfortable at the X and Z.

Does seem silly that the coach won't dump the #7 pick after one game, I mean, we all know he stinks, but that coach, he's pig-headed.

And again massraider hits it.

 

[massraider]

They play different positions. Flanker/split end.

And in typical SP fashion the correct response is all but ignored (except by you SKA).

Thank you.end of thread.

Some teams move their WRs between those positions during the course of a game.

Definitely true, and I am sure we will see players moved around. But Johnnie Lee Higgins might be a better player, right now, than Murph or DHB. But he stays in the slot. The whole thread is an overreaction to a statement, based on assumptions taken as fact.

 

[Bruno2]

You can't abandon the plan after week 1. Murphy looks to be the more polished WR than Cliff Branch Jr., I mean DHB. They aren't gaining anything right now by sitting him, might as well see if your first rounder can hack it in the NFL right away, mentally and phyically, its not like he's a QB and needs to hold a clipboard for a year. Even that philosophy is being tested recently (Ryan, Flacco, Sanchez, Stafford) I'd suspect the team is taking it week by week.

 

[JohnnyU]

You can't abandon the plan after week 1. Murphy looks to be the more polished WR than Cliff Branch Jr., I mean DHB. They aren't gaining anything right now by sitting him, might as well see if your first rounder can hack it in the NFL right away, mentally and phyically, its not like he's a QB and needs to hold a clipboard for a year. Even that philosophy is being tested recently (Ryan, Flacco, Sanchez, Stafford) I'd suspect the team is taking it week by week.

Have you guys ever considered that the best thing for DHB is to sit and learn? From what I've read he's like a deer in headlights. Did you ever think that playing him under these circumstances can ruin him, just like in other circumstances where rookie QBs are ruined by playing them too early? Maybe DHB isn't ready and this could destroy his confidence.

 

[Chaka]

You can't abandon the plan after week 1. Murphy looks to be the more polished WR than Cliff Branch Jr., I mean DHB. They aren't gaining anything right now by sitting him, might as well see if your first rounder can hack it in the NFL right away, mentally and phyically, its not like he's a QB and needs to hold a clipboard for a year. Even that philosophy is being tested recently (Ryan, Flacco, Sanchez, Stafford) I'd suspect the team is taking it week by week.

Have you guys ever considered that the best thing for DHB is to sit and learn? From what I've read he's like a deer in headlights.

Then again maybe it isn't.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

You can't abandon the plan after week 1.

I agree, but you also can't commit to sticking to the plan through hell or high water no matter what the future brings.If the Raiders want to keep going with the current plan until further notice, that's fine. But if they're already announcing that DHB will start over Murphy several weeks from now -- what's the point? They don't have to announce anything yet. Why not just wait and see how things play out?

Without going back and looking, though, I think this was all based on a rotowire blurb? So it's probably nothing.

 

[JohnnyU]

You can't abandon the plan after week 1. Murphy looks to be the more polished WR than Cliff Branch Jr., I mean DHB. They aren't gaining anything right now by sitting him, might as well see if your first rounder can hack it in the NFL right away, mentally and phyically, its not like he's a QB and needs to hold a clipboard for a year. Even that philosophy is being tested recently (Ryan, Flacco, Sanchez, Stafford) I'd suspect the team is taking it week by week.

Have you guys ever considered that the best thing for DHB is to sit and learn? From what I've read he's like a deer in headlights.

Then again maybe it isn't.

I wouldn't put my trust in the Raiders brass making the right decision on that

 

[Bruno2]

You can't abandon the plan after week 1. Murphy looks to be the more polished WR than Cliff Branch Jr., I mean DHB. They aren't gaining anything right now by sitting him, might as well see if your first rounder can hack it in the NFL right away, mentally and phyically, its not like he's a QB and needs to hold a clipboard for a year. Even that philosophy is being tested recently (Ryan, Flacco, Sanchez, Stafford) I'd suspect the team is taking it week by week.

Have you guys ever considered that the best thing for DHB is to sit and learn? From what I've read he's like a deer in headlights.

Then again maybe it isn't.

I wouldn't put my trust in the Raiders brass making the right decision on that

I get what you're saying JohnnyU. I would have to imagine most rookies not named Randy Moss at any position on any team is gonna have "the deer in headlights" look starting in his first NFL game. Time will tell. You can't always rely on what the Raiders put out to the media. Who knows if DHB plays poorly enough they may have no choice but to sit him when Schilens gets back

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?i...ce=NFLHeadlines

nice......

Two women, including his former wife and a recent girlfriend, say that Oakland Raiders coach Tom Cable has a history of violent behavior toward women.

In separate interviews with ESPN's "Outside the Lines", Sandy Cable and Marie Lutz say that Cable hit them during relationships dating back more than 20 years.

I wonder how many raiders fans ##### about belichick.

 

[The Comedian]

Disrespect himself? Really?

 

[S.K.A.]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?i...ce=NFLHeadlines

nice......

Two women, including his former wife and a recent girlfriend, say that Oakland Raiders coach Tom Cable has a history of violent behavior toward women.

In separate interviews with ESPN's "Outside the Lines", Sandy Cable and Marie Lutz say that Cable hit them during relationships dating back more than 20 years.

I wonder how many raiders fans ##### about belichick.

This link probably deserves it's own thread. I know he is 'innocent' until proven guilty, but he is guilty as far as I'm concerned. I'm done with him and hope for his quick dismissal as the head coach. If these allegations are true, which I believe the women interviewed, he is a low character scum bag.

 

[massraider]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?i...ce=NFLHeadlines

nice......

Two women, including his former wife and a recent girlfriend, say that Oakland Raiders coach Tom Cable has a history of violent behavior toward women.

In separate interviews with ESPN's "Outside the Lines", Sandy Cable and Marie Lutz say that Cable hit them during relationships dating back more than 20 years.

I wonder how many raiders fans ##### about belichick.

This link probably deserves it's own thread. I know he is 'innocent' until proven guilty, but he is guilty as far as I'm concerned. I'm done with him and hope for his quick dismissal as the head coach. If these allegations are true, which I believe the women interviewed, he is a low character scum bag.

http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2009/...nce-to-respond/Cable accuses ESPN of not giving him a chance to respond

Posted by Mike Florio on November 1, 2009 10:48 AM ET

Raiders coach Tom Cable has issued a statement in response to ESPN's Outside The Lines report regarding allegations that Cable had committed violence against two former wives and a former girlfriend.

"On only one occasion in my life have I ever touched a woman inappropriately," Cable said in a statement read on the air by ESPN SportsCenter anchor Bob Ley. "More than 20 years ago, during my first marriage, I became aware that my wife, Sandy, has committed adultery. I became very angry and slapped her with an open hand. What I did was wrong, and I have regretted and felt sorrow about that moment ever since. . . .

"The incident involving Ms. Lutz in which she came to my home uninvited was fully investigated by the Alameda police department and I cooperated fully with that investigation. I never battered her in any way. The police concluded correctly that I had done nothing wrong and that was the end of the matter. It is most unfortunate that ESPN has given Miss Lutz this forum to revisit this incident when I did nothing wrong and . . . ESPN further chose not to provide me with an appropriate opportunity to respond."

The allegation in the last sentence is significant. If true, ESPN failed to follow one of the primary principles of investigative journalism -- giving the subject of damaging allegations a chance to tell his side of the story.

The alleged failure of ESPN to give Cable an appropriate chance to respond becomes even more curious in light of the specific history between the Raiders and ESPN. Last year, Chris Mortensen admitted that he failed to seek a comment from the Raiders regarding a story relating to the potential sale of controlling interest in the team.

"The Raiders have lost the privilege with me of running stories past them for comment," Mort said at the time. "This stems from their history of denials to most stories I have reported -- as well as others in the media -- when those stories have eventually proven to be true." Mortensen later admitted that he was wrong, and he apologized to the Raiders.

Meanwhile, Mort now reports that the league will soon issue a statement soon regarding the situation. In the statement, the league will commit to reviewing the allegations to determine whether Cable has committed any violations of the Personal Conduct Policy.

As Mort points out, Goodell still hasn't spoken to Cable regarding the allegations made by Raiders defensive assistant Randy Hanson. Mort assumes that Goodell hasn't spoken to Cable because he has been cleared by authorities of any criminal responsibility.

Still, and as we've pointed out a few times, the fact that Cable won't face criminal punishment doesn't mean he didn't do something to result in the fracturing of Hanson's jaw, and we continued to be astounded by the fact that the league has, by all appearances, failed to conduct its own thorough, in-person investigation of the situation.

 

[phthalatemagic]

They play different positions. Flanker/split end.

And in typical SP fashion the correct response is all but ignored (except by you SKA).

Thank you.end of thread.

Some teams move their WRs between those positions during the course of a game.

You can't expect 2 rookies to get shuffled around and not have a huge CF on most plays. Maybe veterans can get moved from position to position, but 2 rookies?

 

[S.K.A.]

Massraider,

Thanks for the story from Cable's perspective. Be that as it may, where there is smoke, there is fire. I've made the decision that he is a violent person given the independent sources of violent allegations. It may prove out that my decision is rash and unfair, but I will be the first to admit it. For right now, he is a woman-beater in my eyes. I hope Al fires if these violent allegations turn out to be true.

 

[Knobs]

Raiders football.

 

[massraider]

Massraider,Thanks for the story from Cable's perspective. Be that as it may, where there is smoke, there is fire.

That's not an argument. And if that were true, then we'd have no such things as false allegations.I have no idea what happened. And neither does anyone else. Anyone who chooses to believe Cable can feel as strongly as someone that doesn't. My only gripe is with ESPN, again not getting the Raiders comment. They have a history of not getting both sides of the story. it seems like they have an axe to grind with Oakland. Where there's smoke, there's fire.

 

[S.K.A.]

I've come to expect hack job reporting from ESPN.

I am just saying that I believe the four independent sources (two ex-wives, one ex-girlfriend, and assistant coach) over Tom Cable at this point.

 

[Chaka]

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/news/story?i...ce=NFLHeadlines

nice......

Two women, including his former wife and a recent girlfriend, say that Oakland Raiders coach Tom Cable has a history of violent behavior toward women.

In separate interviews with ESPN's "Outside the Lines", Sandy Cable and Marie Lutz say that Cable hit them during relationships dating back more than 20 years.

I wonder how many raiders fans ##### about belichick.

What the heck does any of this have to do with Bill Belichick?

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

Massraider,

Thanks for the story from Cable's perspective. Be that as it may, where there is smoke, there is fire. I've made the decision that he is a violent person given the independent sources of violent allegations. It may prove out that my decision is rash and unfair, but I will be the first to admit it. For right now, he is a woman-beater in my eyes. I hope Al fires if these violent allegations turn out to be true.

This is why reporters need to attempt to get both sides when putting together a story. Poor journalism.