Assisted coaching

Coordinators play key roles for Gruden, Callahan

SAN DIEGO -- Mailbag is being written from the Super Bowl venue, so questions requiring research will not be answered, because I didn't shlep the reference library out here with me. That's grumpy No. 1. Grumpy No. 2 concerns questions that were fully answered in the player-by-player matchups I did earlier in the week. I'll mention them anyway, but they'll get the brush-off. Grumpy No. 3 needs a new paragraph.

Zach of Pasadena, Calif., feels that I am an arrogant creep who, 1) won't admit errors, and 2) continues to blindly downgrade the Raiders, ignoring their successes for the sake of smirky one-liners. For evidence he cites the fact that I picked the Jets to beat them, and then did not show proper humility when proved wrong.

To answer these in order: I thought I was pretty good about admitting mistakes. I thought I indicated how I felt about the Raiders' offense when I gave them a big edge over Tampa Bay in my matchups column. I don't do a big number every time I pick the wrong team, because then I'd have to give equal weight to the ones I get right, and the column would become an egotistical hall of mirrors, and unreadable. Nevertheless I thought I'd explained where I went wrong with the Jets pick. I thought the Raiders' corners would still be subpar, maybe not even activated. They weren't. They dominated. That, I felt, was the difference. As far as my arrogance, I asked the Flaming Redhead, straight up, "Do you think I'm arrogant?" Her answer: "Sometimes you do things that seem arrogant." A neat copout that has me raging in the interior regions, while on the surface I'm Mr. Sweetness ... "Thank you, honey, for such a forthright and frank, blah, blah, blah ..."

Jim of Rome, N.Y., is upset because I didn't include coaching in my matchups. Too big a cast of characters would be involved, because I'd have to include assistants, such as the Bucs' Monte Kiffin, plus the Raiders' whole offensive brain trust. Oh, what the hell. Why don't I get into it? There's no better defensive coach than Kiffin. Gruden's strength is that he leaves Kiffin alone and worries about the offense, which seems more coherent than it used to be but still doesn't thrill me. The Raiders offense, on the other hand, is a finely crafted weapon. It's hard to tell how much of that is the brainwork of offensive coordinator Marc Trestman, how much is thanks to Bill Callahan, and how much is the residue of Gruden, Bill Walsh and even Mike Shanahan through the years. Whatever it is, it's a lot better than anything the Bucs can come up with. Of course the real key is the all-star cast of personnel. Can I give an edge to one group of coaches? No. Call it even.

A trio from Shailen of Chicago: Can the Raiders really beat the Bucs deep a couple of times, as I indicated? Well, I guess so, if I wrote it. Would a Bucs' blitz be able to get to Gannon quickly enough? Maybe, maybe not, but if the front four can't get to him, they have to do something, right? And you don't necessarily have to tackle him, just make him move around a bit, pull the ball down, adjust. Do I think Ronde Barber's height could be a problem, as it was against Pittsburgh's Plaxico Burress?. No. The Raiders' receivers are smaller.

C.H. from Vegas would like me to compare Jack Ham with Derrick Brooks. Ham was more instinctive, Brooks is a better athlete. Do I think Warren Sapp's late-season decline was due to the loss of Anthony McFarland? Maybe partly. It looked more to me like a lack of all-out effort on about 40 percent of the snaps.

Tom of North Attleboro, Mass., asks, "How can you possibly compare the Oakland and Tampa Bay offenses and not include Mike Alstott?" Read the matchups again. I included him among the running backs.

Michael of Layton, Utah, is all upset because I rated Jerry Rice and Keyshawn even. I'm not talking about the Legend of Jerry Rice. I'm not evaluating careers. I'm just referring to their value within their respective offenses right now.

Warren of Pittsburgh can't understand how anyone can pick the Bucs to win when they have no running game. I picked the Raiders. The Bucs managed to win 14 contests without a running game.

Gustav of Stellenbosch, South Africa, and thank you for your kind words, feels that the Raiders have not really faced a top defense yet this year. There is only one (Tampa Bay), possibly two, counting Philly, "top defense" in the NFL. The rest are hit-and-miss, one day good, one day not so good. Sure, the Bucs' defense could stall Oakland Sunday. Or Oakland could have great success. Or none of the above.

Stewart of NYC doesn't feel that the Bucs have enough defenders to handle all of Oakland's offensive weapons. Oh, I don't know. I like Barber against any of the Raiders' receivers. I like Brooks against Garner. I like guys like nickelback Dwight Smith and MLB Shelton Quarles an awful lot. I like the way they play their Cover 2 zone, although I think they'll go mostly man on Sunday. I think they have enough weapons. Wine front -- what do I think of Montepulciano from, say, Abruzzi? I'd like it better if it were from, say, Abruzzo. Or was that too arrogant a thing to say? You say you want a recommendation under $20. The 2001 Excelsior Cabernet Sauvignon ($9) from South Africa. My best in show of 25 South African wines sampled at a recent tasting.

Jaz of San Diego informs me that he loves the whole pirate theme of the Super Bowl. I take that news calmly. In fact, I didn't even know there was a pirate theme. Those things don't penetrate my thinking. Question: Which was my favorite Super Bowl city and why? San Francisco, which is 33 miles away from Palo Alto, where Super Bowl XIX was held. The reason? San Francisco is my favorite city in the U.S., period. Maybe after they get through with Houston and Jacksonville and Detroit and other garden spots they'll consider having it back there in San Francisco again -- sometime around Year 2786, I'd guess.

Chester of Green Bay, Wis., wants to know what I hate most about the Super Bowl. The crush of media coverage and the realization that I'm part of it. Once, when I was a member of the mooing, lowing cattle drive moving out of one of those mass interview areas, some joker with an NBC mobile cam shoved a mike under my nose and said, "What's the answer to this?" My answer was, "Birth control." He made a hateful face and bawled to his crew, "Kill that!" and cursed me for the rat that I am and moved off. He didn't give me a chance to elaborate on my feelings that most of these people shouldn't have been born in the first place.

Finally, to end this on a Roederer Cristal note, Bruce of Baltimore flatters the poor old doc with a rather shameful display of praise. Yes, it does reach me, and the Redhead, too, and in answer to your question, "How long do you plan to be around?" I can offer a two-parter. In life itself, longer now than I'd figured six weeks ago, because that's when I said sayonara to my beloved cigars. How long will I be around professionally? Until the old squash goes soft, or until a member of the faculty of Employer U. decides to drop the deathball on my head.

Have a comment or question for Dr. Z? Click here.

 

Related information

Multimedia

Visit Video Plus for the latest audio and video