Month: January 2010 (Page 53 of 65)

Did Russell ditch Raiders for Las Vegas?

Beat writer David White of the San Francisco Chronicle is reporting “someone using the name JaMarcus Russell checked into The Palms in Las Vegas” the day after Russell was excused from a team meeting for “personal reasons.”

White notes that this could potentially save Tom Cable’s job in Oakland.

Russell is believed to be the major sticking point between Cable, who benched Russell after nine games, and Davis, who preaches patience for his prized No. 1 overall draft pick.

Russell has been criticized by Cable publicly, and teammates privately, for not working hard enough off the field. The reason reporters knew about Russell’s absence Monday was because of a tip from a teammate in the locker room who couldn’t hide his disgust.

Cable can take Russell’s Vegas-over-team trip to show Davis the extent of his disconnect from the rest of the team. Maybe Davis will see Cable handled Russell the right way all along, that his struggles were about more than Xs and Os.

That, or Davis says about Russell what he said about Randy Moss in September — that the Raiders failed him. If that’s his stance, then yeah, Cable is gone.

If Davis choices Russell over Cable it would be a colossal mistake. Russell will never live up to his lofty expectations because he’s not prepared to put in the work. Furthermore, he doesn’t have the overall talent. (It takes more than a strong arm to be a quarterback in the NFL, which he has proven time and time again.)

If this rumor/report (not sure what to call it) is true, then Russell should be released immediately. I don’t know how much proof Davis needs to unload that gigantic bust. That said, maybe Russell really did have a “personal” issue to attend to, so we’ll just have to wait and see if more details emerge.

I don’t want to make Cable out to be Vince Lombardi, but he proved this season that he’s capable of winning games. With Russell on the bench, the Raiders showed promise down the stretch and actually fought hard under Cable. He wasn’t Oakland’s biggest problem this season and deserves a shot to see what he can do without worrying about Russell infecting the team with his horrible play.


Photo from fOTOGLIF

Top 10 reasons why it’s okay that fantasy football season is over

Originally published 12/28/07. Updated 1/6/10.

It’s that time of year again. Much like the post-draft letdown all fantasy owners go through in August or September, the end of the fantasy football season can be a depressing time indeed. I know a lot of baseball fans are already looking forward to spring training and their fantasy baseball drafts, but I’m not a baseball guy, so I need to look elsewhere for comfort. Here are 10 reasons why it’s good that the fantasy football season is finally over. (Seriously, guys, it’s not that bad.)

1. Your busted picks won’t haunt you anymore.
Just think about it: you don’t have to set your lineup for another nine months. No more looking at the injured Michael Turner or the disappointing Brian Westbrook wasting away on your bench. You can add Larry Johnson, Terrell Owens, Marshawn Lynch, Ronnie Brown, Steve Slaton and Matt Forte to that list. All of these guys were early picks that managed to sabotage fantasy seasons to one degree or another. If you only had one of these guys on your team, count yourself lucky. Two or more and your season was probably over before it started.

2. You can start (truly) rooting for your favorite team.
No more fragmented alliances. If you have a favorite team (and who doesn’t?), chances are that at one point or another, you were rooting against them this year. Either your favorite team was playing against a particular player on your fantasy team, or you needed a field goal instead of an extra point from your favorite team’s kicker. At some point, you wanted your team – whose colors you claim to bleed – to fail, somehow or someway. The best thing to do is fess up, ask forgiveness, and cheer as loudly as you can if your team was fortunate enough to make the playoffs.

Continue reading »

Report: John Fox is interested in Browns’ job

According to Tony Grossi of the Cleveland Plain Dealer, Panthers’ head coach John Fox is reportedly “very interested” in the Browns’ job if it becomes available this offseason.

1. Fox is “very interested” in the possibility, according to a league source.

2. Panthers owner Jerry Richardson would be willing to arrive at a contract settlement to get out of the $6 million owed Fox for the 2010 season.

3. Richardson, seeing a potential owners’ lockout in 2011, would not replace Fox with Bill Cowher, but might promote from within.

4. Behind the scenes, most if not all of Mike Holmgren’s coaching and executive “ready lists” are made up of clients of agent Bob LaMonte. Fox is in that stable.

This doesn’t make sense to me. Why would Richardson allow Fox to go if he wasn’t going to replace him with Cowher? The Panthers have been the model of inconsistency under Fox over the past couple years, but his teams always play hard and usually find a way to finish respectable. So why allow Fox to jettison if Cowher (who has been linked to Carolina before) wasn’t going to be his replacement? (Unless there’s an internal candidate that Richardson really wants to promote that I’m just not aware of.)

The Browns have an interesting dilemma on their hands with Eric Mangini. Cleveland finished the season winning four in a row, including a 13-6 victory over the defending champion Steelers in mid December. But this was also the same team that looked completely inept for 13 weeks under Mangini, so why should Holmgren believe that Mangini has the Browns heading in the right direction? Four wins over the Steelers, Chiefs, Raiders and Jaguars is nice, but that’s the only thing they were: Four wins over the Steelers, Chiefs, Raiders and Jaguars.

We’ll see if there’s any teeth to this Fox rumor and monitor Holmgren’s big decision regarding Mangini.


Photo from fOTOGLIF

Portis questions Campbell’s leadership during radio interview

During a recent radio interview with ESPN980, Redskins running back Clinton Portis questioned why quarterback Jason Campbell was made a team captain and he wasn’t, then essentially questioned the signal caller’s leadership ability.

From NFL.com:

Asked on ESPN980 why Campbell was a team captain and he wasn’t, Portis replied: “I wonder the same thing. It’s no disrespect to Jason, but everybody in that locker room will tell you — you will never see Jason mad, you will never see Jason’s tempo change.”

Portis continued: “(He’s) going to give you everything (he’s) got. But as a leader … it was always, ‘Jason couldn’t take control of the huddle,’ or ‘He didn’t do this’ or ‘He didn’t do that.’ That wasn’t Jason’s character. … I think Jason, you can’t place so much on somebody who’s not ready for that situation. I think Jason has enough trouble in getting the plays in and worrying about this, compared to controlling the huddle.”

Portis told ESPN980 that Campbell isn’t the type of player who would go to a coach and say, “‘Well, we need to do this or we need to do that,’ or ‘This is how the players want it.'”

Campbell wasn’t pleased about Portis’ comments and responded to them during a Tuesday telephone interview with The Washington Post.
“How is he going to say I’m not a leader?” Campbell said. “I mean, that’s just not true. To me, that’s somebody who shows that they don’t know what a real leader is. A leader is not someone who leads by the wrong example. A leader is someone who is trying to do the right thing and trying to lead by example, and not just [being] about themselves.

“There’s a reason guys get selected as captains, and there’s a reason guys don’t get selected as captains. Obviously, he doesn’t have the respect of the locker room to be a captain. For someone to try to take a shot at me at the end of the season, after they haven’t even been around, only speaks about their character anyways.”

Campbell informed The Post via text message Wednesday that Portis had called him to clear the air. The text read: “We’re just going to move on. We don’t want to have any issues out there between us for the offseason, so we’re just going to squash all of this right now.”

I agree with what Campbell said. Leaders don’t talk about internal matters with the media, even if they sandwich what critical comments around positive reinforcement. It’s great that the two of them cleared the air, but Portis was still in the wrong here.

That said, maybe there is something to what Portis said about Campbell’s leadership skills. Nobody can argue that Campbell doesn’t work hard and give everything he has for his team. That guy took a beating this year behind a bad offensive line and he kept showing up the next Sunday. But there’s a major difference between being a good teammate and being a leader.

There’s a good chance that neither of these players will be back in Washington next year. With Mike Shanahan taking over the reigns, one would assume that he’d make wholesale changes and clean house. But we’ll have to see what transpires in Washington over the course of the next couple months.


Photo from fOTOGLIF

Mark Cuban is mad at the NFL

Dallas Mavericks owner Mark Cuban is none too happy with the NFL for scheduling the Cowboys playoff game at the same time as the Mavs’ home game against the Utah Jazz.

“I know we’re just little pissants compared to the NFL, but seriously, the NFL is turning into the ugly American when it comes to sports leagues. They don’t give a crap about anybody but themselves.”

— Mark Cuban, via ESPN.com

Cuban has a good point here. The Cowboys game didn’t have to be scheduled against the Mavs game, so why do it? The NFL easily could have held the ARI/GB game on Saturday and the DAL/PHI game on Sunday. (In case you’re wondering, the Suns don’t have a home game on Saturday.) This smells like a case of the NFL wanting the DAL/PHI game in primetime on the East Coast, so they decided to hold the game in primetime on the East Coast, Mavs be damned. In fact, I doubt the NFL even took the Mavs game into consideration. The NFL’s silence on the matter is telling.

Mike & Mike tackled this subject on their radio show…

Should the NFL take the NBA into consideration when scheduling playoff games?
Total Votes: 20 Started: January 6, 2010 Back to Vote Screen
« Older posts Newer posts »