Given a majority of Raiders fans either weren’t alive while Kenny Stabler carved out a Hall of Fame-career, or were too young to remember, Rich Gannon has become the bar for measuring the success of current quarterback Derek Carr. In that regard, Carr comes up well short. Through the first six seasons of his NFL
Cork, this comparison eloquently makes the point about stats, they just don’t take context into account. Carr’s apparently outstanding stats last year were overwhelmingly in games we had already lost.
Gannon was no more talented than Carr physically – although he ran more often – but he had two key differences for me. First, Oakland was his last chance at a starting gig on a regular basis so he had to fight hard to step up from journeyman.
Second, he didn’t give a shit what his teammates thought about him. All he cared about was winning and that’s why he was a great Raider QB, along with Stabler, Lamonica and Plunkett. All “Just win baby” type guys.
Time for Carr to step up and show the same attitude… it becomes real leadership when you show it when the game is still on the line and you are earning your starting spot and your huge pay check!
Plus one. I watched Stabler play his whole career including Houston and New Orleans
Thanks, Andy. It’s fun to go behind the numbers and put them into context. Once a team is out of the game, that’s when stats should be split into a separate category. Call it “garbage time,” as many are wont to do. Another misleading stat is the fourth-quarter comeback. This isn’t just with Carr, but with any quarterback. It fails to mention that many times, the reason there’s a need for a fourth-quarter comeback is because the quarterback played like crap beforehand and that contributed to the deficit. It’s all about context.
Gannon immediately set the tone when he had the pool table and video game machine removed from the Raiders locker room. He was called “Redass Rich” due to his high expectations of himself and his teammates.
Gannon had a mentality like a “Philadelphia cab driver”, as described by Gruden. He lacked the classic rocket arm but got the job done with his legs, judgment and a knack for salvaging plays. These are traits the Carr lacks.
The only game under Gannon that Raiders were blown out was Super Bowl 37; ironically against Gruden who knew how to stop Gannon.
I think Gruden will continue to look for his next Gannon. I don’t think Carr fits that tough mobile QB that Gruden wants. Gruden wants a QB that is extension of his personality. Carr doesn’t fit that.
The other part of the reason is that Bill Callahan didn’t change the playbook that much, and didn’t change the terminology at all. The Bucs were able to understand what calls were being made, the formations, the audibles, essentially everything, that goes into game planning. And, it didn’t help when Barrett Robbins went MIA the day before the game.
Gannon was able to put up MVP numbers when Gruden left. The Raiders were a “pass first” offense; the run game an afterthought. When Gannon got hurt, they weren’t the same team … which sounds awfully familiar.
Let’s see if anyone can dispute these two statements:
1- The first six years of Carr’s career are vastly superior to the first six years of Gannon’s career. You say Gannon didn’t play much his first six years? That’s because Carr was better.
2-Carr is a far more talented passer than Gannon, and don’t even compare their respective arm strength.
Carr is 29 and Gannon joined the Raiders at 34. Of course, head to head as Raider QBs you’d have to go with Gannon. But it’s an unfair, and more importantly an incomplete comparison.
Solid points. At the same time, it is mentioned in the post that Carr is young enough and talented enough to change the narrative. More important, Gannon’s success later in his career offers ample evidence that Carr can enjoy greater success than he has to date.
Can’t even believe this is a question. Yes, Carr is physically superior to Gannon, but he lacks that “Mamba” mentality to do whatever it takes to win. I also don’t see Carr changing much. He seems to stubbornly reject needing to improve in areas of his game which is weird given his work ethic. I really hope that Carr proves me wrong because I want this team to win more often.
Hi Michelle. Do you have any concrete examples of Carr “stubbornly rejecting the need to improve, etc.”?
On the contrary, to me he seems coachable to a fault. Much more of a gunslinger under Musgrave but much more conservative under Gruden, which as we all know is completely in line with the way Gruden has always coached the position.
Hi Stork, yes I do have examples. He has not gotten any better at making plays when protection breaks down, he has not improved one iota in running a two minute drill, I think he has only thrown one Hail Mary (everything else is way short requiring the team to go into a lateral frenzy), and he has not improved in making plays off script (he usually rolls out and throws the ball away). Seems to me, he should be working on these parts of his game–to improve his overall game.
The one who was very critical of DC being poor in making “plays off script” is now in the Raiders locker room, Jason Witten. Let’s see how this next chapter will play out now that Witten is part of the team. But, first, we’ll need to see if the season will start. The surge in new COVID cases is not exactly pointing in the direction of everything starting on-time.
Did Witten say that? Wow, awkward!
I wouldn’t say he hasn’t improved at all in those areas Michelle. The game winner to Renfrow against the Lions was off script. One of his TDS to Williams against the Texans was off script. His two rushing TDs were off script.
Not saying it’s a strength of his or ever will be, but I’ve seen improvement.
Fair point, Stork and thank you for the reminders. I guess I expect more from the guy because there is a lot to like about him, but he just infuriates me (alot recently).
The question is How good would Carr be right now if he’s had Gruden as his HC and Play caller for his entire career?