Over-Head
05-02-2010, 01:40 PM
Davis and Russell
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/raiders/detail?&entry_id=62628
<!-- 1 -->Were you surprised that quarterback JaMarcus Russell was at the team's minicamp this weekend? Mike Wagaman of Silver and Black Illustrated (http://chiefsplanet.com/BB/www.silverandblack.com.)wasn't. I asked him to educate you like he did me yesterday.
Mike, all yours:
There are several reasons why it would make sense for the Raiders to part ways with JaMarcus Russell, Al Davis' history strongly suggests otherwise.
For starters, he went out of his way to praise Russell during the press conference when he announced that Lane Kiffin was fired, and to do a turnaround now would be a monumental admission of failure on AD's part, something he's not known for.
The fact that Russell hasn't agreed to restructure his contract has no bearing on the issue, either.
Remember, Davis is the owner who planted running back Marcus Allen on the bench in the late '90s because of a personal feud between the two men. It didn't matter how much money Allen was making. Davis was determined to make a point at any cost. He did the same thing with quarterback Steve Beuerlein a few years after that.
Those were moves he made out of spite, whereas Russell is a player he's openly spoken fondly of. While the team may eventually decide to cut ties with the former first-round pick, it won't be because of money.
Cut the freaken drama already guy's...just fire the chump, and lets get ready for the 2010 season where were gonna crush the Chiefs TWICE for a clean sweep this year....yeah, you just watch!
Ok, it's a slow day and i'm board
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/raiders/detail?&entry_id=62628
<!-- 1 -->Were you surprised that quarterback JaMarcus Russell was at the team's minicamp this weekend? Mike Wagaman of Silver and Black Illustrated (http://chiefsplanet.com/BB/www.silverandblack.com.)wasn't. I asked him to educate you like he did me yesterday.
Mike, all yours:
There are several reasons why it would make sense for the Raiders to part ways with JaMarcus Russell, Al Davis' history strongly suggests otherwise.
For starters, he went out of his way to praise Russell during the press conference when he announced that Lane Kiffin was fired, and to do a turnaround now would be a monumental admission of failure on AD's part, something he's not known for.
The fact that Russell hasn't agreed to restructure his contract has no bearing on the issue, either.
Remember, Davis is the owner who planted running back Marcus Allen on the bench in the late '90s because of a personal feud between the two men. It didn't matter how much money Allen was making. Davis was determined to make a point at any cost. He did the same thing with quarterback Steve Beuerlein a few years after that.
Those were moves he made out of spite, whereas Russell is a player he's openly spoken fondly of. While the team may eventually decide to cut ties with the former first-round pick, it won't be because of money.
Cut the freaken drama already guy's...just fire the chump, and lets get ready for the 2010 season where were gonna crush the Chiefs TWICE for a clean sweep this year....yeah, you just watch!
Ok, it's a slow day and i'm board