A few weeks ago, I wrote an article about the NFL draft, and in said article, I mentioned the Oakland Raiders as one of the three teams who, in my view, had the worst draft classes.
For the most part, my assertion was met with good natured, but rather pronounced disagreement from those who bothered to respond to it.
My rationale revolved around two key points. One, Oakland was already stacked at running back so picking another one would be superfluous, especially if said running back was taken with a top five pick.
Two, Darren McFadden's ability to be an every down running back in the NFL is quite questionable due to his slight frame. I also took issue with McFadden's 15 fumbles during his last college season, but a more thorough look at McFadden's stats reveals that 10 of his 15 fumbles took place while he was playing quarterback or returning kicks.
Due to the fact that McFadden averaged a paltry 19.8 yards per kick return during his last college season, it is pretty safe to say that we won't be seeing him on special teams come October.
More to the point, a few weeks after my writing, solid veteran Dominic Rhodes was released by the Raiders, leaving the team with incumbent starter Justin Fargas, and unproven injury risk Michael Bush to fill in the gaps.
For the record, I happen to think that Bush will be an absolute stud for whatever team he ends up with (he could be traded a la Matt Schaub) but I can see the rationale behind the Raiders going with McFadden for the simple reason that they don't have a sure future at the running back position.
Aside from Bush, all the Raiders have at running back (besides D-Mac and soon to be ex-Raider Lamont Jordan) is current starter Justin Fargas, who, despite an impressive1,009 yards over 9 starts, is still not a long term answer at running back in Oakland.
Furthermore, a cursory look at his game by game statistics reveals that he accrued a whopping 565 of his 1,009 yards on the ground against Miami, Denver, Kansas City, and Houston, whose run defenses were ranked 32nd, 30th, 28th, and 19th in the league respectively. 92 more yards came in games that he did not start in.
With those games against lesser competition factored out, Fargasran for 352 yards in his other five starts. This is not to say that Fargas' best games do not count, but the lack of consistency that is apparent from his stat sheet reveals that Fargas isn't consistent enough to be a full time NFL starter.
Frankly, Fargas' sheer heart and determination give me tremendous respect and admiration for the guy as a player, but I just can't say that I would be comfortable with him as the starter on my team.
Another thing, McFadden may not have the power and versatility (as a runner) to carry the load immediately, but Fargas and Bush can take at least some of the burden off of McFadden's shoulders for the time being.
McFadden may not have the ideal frame for the NFL at 6-foot-two, 211 pounds, but his height gives him the leeway to bulk up a little bit without taking a page from Calais Campbell's playbook.
However, my biggest beef with the McFadden pick at the time that it was made was the fact that Oakland needed a lot of help at defensive tackle, and blue chip prospects Sedrick Ellis and Glenn Dorsey were there for the taking.
Oakland's current rotation at defensive tackle consists of the unproven Tommy Kelly, the average Gerard Warren, disappointing former Giant William Joseph, and of course Terdell Sands (need I say more?)
Kelly has the potential to be a good 3-technique pass rusher for the Raiders, provided he lives up to Warren Sapp's characterization of his abilities. However, Warren is a stopgap at best, and expecting Joseph to find himself in Oakland is very wishful thinking.
That said, Oakland's real troubles lie in their run defense, ranked 31st in the NFL last season. Oakland has a couple of decent pass rushers in Derrick Burgess, Greg Spires, and Kelly if he lives up to his potential.
Dorsey and Ellis, the only defensive tackles worthy of the fourth pick, are 3-technique pass rushers, just like Kelly. Drafting another rusher after giving Tommy Kelly the biggest contract for a defensive tackle in NFL history would have been redundant.
The only other player worth taking at the fourth spot was maddeningly inconsistent Ohio State DE/OLB Vernon Gholston, whose tendencies to take games off was a red flag heading into draft day.
Another argument that I've heard against McFadden details similarities between the former Razorback and well known bust Reggie Bush. However, McFadden and Bush differ in the respect that McFadden is known to seek contact and has been lauded for his aggression and durability, despite his seemingly unimpressive physique.
McFadden's mean streak and ability to stay up after initial contact is also often overlooked by his detractors, including me at one point.
I think that my conclusion about Oakland's draft was hasty on my part, and although its pretty safe to say that few people care what I think, I still felt the need to re-evaluate my stance on this issue, as I owe it to myself to keep what little journalistic integrity I have as a blogger intact. (Take that Buzz Bissinger!)
However, I still maintain that Oakland made a mistake in passing up big, run stuffingdefensive tackles like Red Bryant, Ahtyba Rubin, Frank Okam or Carlton Powell in the later rounds in favor of workout warriors like Tyvon branch, Armon Shields, and Trevor Scott.
All in all, I still dislike where Oakland went later on in the draft, but McFadden was not a bad pick by any stretch of the imagination. Not only was he clearly the best player on the board, but the other available players did not fill pressing needs, with the possible exception of Gholston, who would've been a great replacement at linebacker for mediocre current starter Robert Thomas.
comments (36) write a comment »
write a new comment
4 months ago
Max, interesting article.
Did a little lookieloo on Robert Thomas.....ya, two years, 78 Tackles....30 games.
One thing, that has been witnessed, in past couple years, is there's two sets of players, for the Raiders.....the team, and then, Al's favorites.
Some guys stick around, and all we can do, is scratch our heads, and wonder, what Al sees in this guy.
Take Rashard Lee. One game, he fumbled away a good drive. Kiffin, last year, started a little game called damage control. Guys like Mike Williams. Gone. The bar was set, and if guys didn't perform, they were given walking papers.
Oh, and I don't think the Raiders even considered Gholston. I have a feeling, that he's going to wind up the booby prize of the draft....in a way, I feel bad for the Jets.....but, they gotta learn the hard way....repeatedly.
4 months ago
Basically your saying we should excuse your ignorance and previous article on the Raiders. What makes your insight this time relevant?
The intelligent football fan already has moved on with McFadden and anticipates great TD runs. Your articlw sound like your inner thoughts still trying to work themselves out. Why do some writers insist on the bashing/neg article on the Raiders ...???? Like we havent heard it enough..Every Tom Dcik and Larry throws his latest ten cent article criticizing the Raiders on well take your pick..the draft ...senile Davis...the fans...Enough Already?
What kid of professional reports Russel weighs 300 lbs. Hating the Raiders has developed into its own marketing tool...So Pathetic. I guess a ten year old can have a blog if they write how bad the raiders web site is..( Damon Bruce aka...broom up his but white dude on radio) has actualy complained about this!
Stop writing on the Raiders you Haters! Bad Drafting Bill Williamson...ugh I guess you never Heard of Kirk Morrison or Thomas Howard and how bout that TE they drafted last year..
Th Raiders know more than al of you so BACK OFF !
from 4 months ago
Look buddy, I never asked for you to excuse my "ignorance". Just because I happened to disagree with a move I saw doesn't make me ignorant, and the fact that I admitted that I was wrong proves that I'm not so full of myself as to ignore it if I know I was wrong. I don't hate the raiders and if you actually took the time to pay attention to what I have written you'd know that. The Russel report was a load of crap and I completely accept that.
When have I ever written a negative article on the Raiders? I simply thought that they had made the wrong decision and when i took a closer look, I was wrong, and i admitted it. Get over yourself buddy nobody actually hates the Raiders outside of the occasional niners fan, broncos fan, or chargers fan.
The Raiders did make fantastic picks with guys like Howard, Morrison, Asomugha, Miller etc. but they, like every team, have their shortcomings, hence the 4-12 record. I never bashed the Raiders without backing up my arguments so therefore i am not a "hater" as you seem to claim. Good natured disagreement does not qualify one to be a hater, only if I had thrown the kitchen sink at Oakland without evidence would I have been as ignorant as you seem to insinuate that I am. I never called Mr.Davis senile and I never took a shot at the Raiders' draft record as a whole. I simply dislike the fact that they drafted a 4th corner and a 5th receiver instead of a potential starting DT.
So basically, don't assume that I disagree with your team out of hatred or bitterness, everyone makes mistakes dude. Besides, why are you bashing me now when I admit that I may have been wrong? a bit late for this comment I guess.
Thanks for the catch on the beginning of football season though, that was my bad.
4 months ago
by the way Football begins in September.
4 months ago
Once again Well done, Max! I would just like to make some quick, few points though.
As you know Tommy Kelly was signed to a hefty contract last year showing that the Raiders hold a strong belief in him at the Three technique DT position (coached and endorsed by one of the best Dts, Wareen Sapp at the three technique). The thing is that Glenn Dorsey plays the same three technique spot as Kelly and it would just seem absurd picking him when they already have a lot of investment in Tommy Kelly?!?! Besides you just offered one Dt a hell of a contract and now you plan on spending hell lot more at the same, exact position??? These words were spoken by Lane Kiffin himself in a post draft press conference. I felt the same way as you on draft day not understanding a FOURTH OVERALL pick being spent for the best aspect of the team but after I read some comments, news and articles, I finally understood! Oh, lets just hope for the best for Joseph. He was a first round pick, so he definately has the potential to be good and as far as I know, his contract looks something like 2 years for $750,000, so he better step it up!
Yeah those later selections were out of my mind. But you know Al Davis, he loves speed and power and both Shields & Branch both fall under that!
Great Job again dude!
from 4 months ago
good point about Kelly, in fact I pretty much made that exact point in my article about 3/4 of the way in... great minds think alike I suppose. I tried to avoid the phrase "Al Davis loves speed" in my article because god knows it's been beatan into the ground, but Shields, Branch, and Shilens all ran a 4.4 or below, Scott ran a 4.58 (great for a DE) so it looks like history repeated itself later on, if he loved power though, Ahtyba Rubin would be an Oakland Raider, the man is an absolute monster, he's versatile enough for the nose in a 3-4 or DT in a 4-3, he's a prototypical run-stuffer at 6'2" 315 pounds and he absolutely dominates the line of scrimmage (except on passing downs) he's not an every down starter but he's the 2-down run-stuffer that Oakland (and their 31st ranked rush defense) needs
Here's my exact quote on Ellis and Dorsey: "Dorsey and Ellis, the only defensive tackles worthy of the fourth pick, are 3-technique pass rushers, just like Kelly. Drafting another rusher after giving Tommy Kelly the biggest contract for a defensive tackle in NFL history would have been redundant."
Thanks for the comment,
Max
4 months ago
Yeah, max maybe a Patty cake fan but really...
The dudes a stand up guy and is ANYTHING but ignorant.
Max is also very classy so please...
Just having a difference of opinion isn't a bad thing.
Besides, he knows his stuff so insulting him or accusing him
of ignorance is more a reflection on you than Max...
from 4 months ago
Thanks for sticking up for me, I appreciate it.
Peace,
Max
4 months ago
We still need a DT up front to play along side TK. Rod Coleman and Grady Jackson are still out there. Bring one of them back. Go Raiders.
from 4 months ago
Coleman's a rusher so he'd be useless, Jackson would be a decent fit though despite his age, they really need a run-stuffer badly, especially if they're considering a 3-4 as some training camp reports indicate
from 4 months ago
Grady Jackson does sound intriguing, we probably could get him cheap and if his gas is gone it won't be much of a loss. We may get lucky.
I'm remembering Coleman as a little mack truck with deceptive traits but Max has a good point here. Colman is a rusher and we don't need one of them.
Well, what ever "D" we play I hope its consistent, solid and relentless.
Go Raiders
4 months ago
I would also like them to take a look at Koren Robinson due to all the injuries our recievers have had. I do believe if who we have now can stay healthy I think we should be good but it never hurts to be safe. But wonder how much money Al has left to spend. If he can swing it i would like to see another DT and WR added to the roster and I will be happy. All in all i am looking forward to a very good season. Go Raiders.
4 months ago
Coleman left the Raiders and I wouldn't want him back. On the other hand we let Grady go so I would like to see him make a full circle.
from 4 months ago
It would be fun to see ol Grady waddle around and put some hurt on LDT and the like...
Hopefully, we get to see it and he uses this year or two as his last and best stamp, or "STOMP" on his NFL career & ends it as a RAIDER.
4 months ago
good points. ur about a month late, but good points nonetheless. no typos, and no factual errors so by default ur the best writer on the bleacher report lol....everybody aint always gonna agree with your opinions, but as long as u got ur facts str8, then u square with me.
go raiders!!!
4 months ago
I take issue with your evaluation about Fargas. Every team that played the Raider played one basic defense against them and it was 8 or 9 in the box (with single coverage). Teams have no fear of the Raider passing game, so they put all their effort against stopping the run. They dared the Raiders to pass. To get the yards Fargas did was an achievement in itself. Now this year it will be interesting if the passing game shows improvement then team will not be able to stack the box to stop the run, because if they do it will give Jamarcus single coverage most of the time. However, there is one small problem the Raider must fix and its their offensive line to pass block. They can run block fine but they still need to improve their protection for the q/b or nothing will change. By Jamarcus rolling out it will help, but we all know what teams are going to do with the roll and with their defensive ends on most passing downs. "Keep Jamarcus in the pocket"..this is when we need pass blocking ability..I think the Raiders will be greatly improved and it appears Al is letting Kiffin cut the players he wants, and keep the ones who want to play. That is a big improvement over most recent coaches we have hired.
from 4 months ago
Hmmm, good points, I am not a Raider fan and I don't follow the team very regularly so I went on what the stats told me, and what they said was that Fargas is an inconsistant back, I knew that the raider passing game was bad last year but if there were indeed 8-9 men in the box for so much of the time, perhaps I was wrong. I also should've mentioned that Fargas only had one really great year and that he is nearing 30 (he'll be 29 in January) and that is generally the end of the line for running backs. I love the guy but as i said, I would not be comfortable with him as my starter. Also, while the Raiders did indeed improve mightily over the offseason (at 4-12, the only way to go is up) they will need a year of transition with an inexperienced player like Russel at the helm and the large roster turnover they went through, they will be between 7-9 and 8-8 (maybe 9-7 due to the weakness of the AFC west) but the real promise lies in 2009, although the Chiefs may be a tough opponent by then judging by their draft.
4 months ago
Max you are a fool, and you try to act much much younger than your picture indicates that you are. Why would a 60+ year old be talking "peace" and what not. Any real sports writer would have realized that Dorsey and Ellis were 3 tech defenders while they were still in college not two weeks after writing a hate column against McFadden. You are a joke! If we didn't draft McFadden this year we would be looking for a RB next year to compliment Bush and would be stuck with two highly paid 3s or a questionable DL/LB in Gholston. Think before you write, that is all any fan can ask for out of the media.
from 4 months ago
I never wrote a "hate column" I wrote a piece on the draft that happened to mention the Raiders... did you even read the other article? from the sound of it the answer is no so you are in no position to complain about my "hate column" I was wrong about Dorsey and Ellis and at the very least I was man enough to admit it, I wrote this piece two weeks after the other and not immediately after because it didn't occur to me until a few days ago.
from 4 months ago
You know Tim, just because you have just heard something it doesn't mean it's new.
"Peace" is a term used in the 60's... That's almost 50 years ago dude!!! And "DUDE", also from about that time came about strongly in the early 70's, as did "Bro".
Even though "BRO" was used heavily among the Black community. it really wasn't until the 70's that the rest of Americans embraced it more. So I really don't know what you're talking about son... (See, now that one I think is a 50's term)
Besides, a guy wanting to hide his age doesn't show you a picture of himself like... Well like ME!!!
Bottom line here my friend. (See I called you friend, AND I don't even know you) So is that bad or insulting?!?!?! Are you going to answer me with insults and warnings and put downs just because I used a word YOU disapprove of???
I certainly hope not because as I started to say... bottom line is you need to try and see others points, That way you can either take from them or throw them away and believe me... It won't hurt you, instead it will en-richen your own points and opinions.
And I'm not only sticking up for Max here I'm sticking up for me! I'm closer to Max's age than yours dude, & frankly, I'll talk anyway that I see fit son, regardless of who likes it or not...
And You Should TOO!!!
Raider Nation BABY, Can you feel it!!!!!
4 months ago
Max,
For a Patriots fan I'm impressed with how much you stick to the Raiders. I bet your comment on Bush was wishful thinking on your part, because Bush and McFadden are a-coming to play your Patriots this fall in Oakland. If you are local, do come. I think the atmosphere will impress you. The main thing about your article that sits as a criticism is how much like the national pundits are your arguments about our need for DL or another DE (the C. Long possibility). Now I'm interested to hear your stance on the fumble, uh... I mean, the Tuck play. What follows comes from me not being able to post in previous articles. Curious to see if I'm disallowed again.
... must have been something I said to the niner fan...
see if this works.
Raider on,
Guamanian Raider
from 4 months ago
The tuck was a clear fumble... there was no forward pass on the play and barely even a motion to indicate one, Walt Coleman saved our season and that's all there is to it... thanks Walt. They do not need another DE, I know that much, but their run defense was downright porous last year and a big guy in the middle is needed, Kelly is a rusher and Warren/Sands/Joseph are all average or worse unless Joseph finds himself in Oakland. They also could use a veteran wideout that's better than Drew Carter but that's just my two cents, if one of the young guys works out there, the need may not exist for much longer but I'm not sold on Shields, Shilens, Higgins etc. guess we'll have to wait till the season to find out.
4 months ago
its a little too early to call Reggie Bush a "well known bust". If he doesn't bring it this season, then say what you will. but right now thats a sweeping statement.
from 4 months ago
I don't believe I ever said that but I sure do think it, RBs have a short shelf life so Bush really has to come in to his own this year to be worth that draft pick. I respect your opinion though. I may be a bit premature.
from 4 months ago
In retrospect, I definitely called Bush a bust with those exact words, my apologies, thanks again for the comment. I tend to write in flashes of inspiration so I sometimes forget a sentance or two that I have written, thanks again.
Peace,
Max
4 months ago
Max,
I am a friend of Michael Bush and everything I have heard from him and his family he will play a huge part in the Raiders offense for the forseeable future. I don't expect to see him traded any time soon.
from 4 months ago
Thanks for the scoop dude, I just noticed that Oakland had a lot of talent at the RB position and like in Atlanta, someone would be expendable, McFadden was a top 5 pick and the RB of the future and Fargas just resigned so i thought it would be Bush, then again the NFL is becoming a 2 back league and fargas isn't young any more, Bush-McFadden would be one helluva combo for the next decade.
4 months ago
I as a big time US fan love Reggie but until I read what Kiffin said about R-bush I also thought he was if not a bust, certainly not worth the high pick. But after reading Kiffin who I dare say is more qualified to know Reggie than anyone of us here.
He said that McFadden was NOT going to be utilized in everything hes capable of doing as to not overwhelm in the same fashion the Saints have done to R-Bush.
I'm no whiz at this, i love the Raiders but I don't know facts, stats and figures like so many of you guys here but I do know this.
It doesn't matter if you're the second coming of Gayle Sayers... If you're in the wrong system or used improperly you ain't gonna flourish, no matter who the heck you are or what position you play...
Let's see how Reggie does this year... we're going to have a good look at him and I just feel this is his coming out year. I only hope he doesn't do it when we play him.
4 months ago
A 3-4 defense would be moronic! The Raiders only have 2 linebackers that could play that scheme and no true every down NT. The Raiders have built a very formidable defense and I think with a rotation of fresh DL we should be able to slow if not stop the run. The addition of Gibril will help tremendously.
We are going to see plenty of running from our opponents due to the stacked DB position and how well Howard and Morrison play the pass. Thats why McFadden was the only pick for us. A good offense is the best defense we need to score and what better way to do that than drafting a "one cut and gone"
runner with blazing speed, a nose for the endzone and extreme versatility. With Bigboy being relatively green I see a lot of pounding with Fargas and Bush and some screens to D-mac, quick easy throws to a playmaker should help the confindence. I love the pick Schilens! Big and fast with good hands. He has a lot to learn but thats what coach Lofton is for. Can anyone say "playaction". I don't expect playoffs this year, hell we have our hands full winning the division but we are building one hell of a team and the window will open and when it does good luck closing it "Just win baby"
from 4 months ago
Actually they have 3, Hartwell has some experience in the system from his days in Baltimore, also, burgess is too small for DE in a 3-4 but he would be a fantastic rush LB in a 3-4 so it would look like this: ILBs Hartwell and Morrisson, OLBs Howard and Burgess, DL: DEs, Kelly and Warren/Richardson or Spires, DT: Either Joseph or Sands, yes they have no true NT so a full time 3-4 is a bad idea but it would be a good change of pace given the fact that Oakland's defense was very predictable last year. Shilens is a project, I think they should have taken Red Bryant or Ahtyba Rubin (both ideal nose tackles) instead of Tyvon Branch or Arman Shields.
4 months ago
Exactly my point, no dominant NT and the 3-4 does not work. You can mix and match as much as you like but the NT is the foundation. The NT needs to get the respect of a double team. I definitely agree with you about Red Bryant. Arman Shields will not have the impact of a player like Bryant. I do like Branch though, Huff needs a little competition and Stu or Hiram aren't going to give any. BTW I was not calling you a moron I was just saying if Rob Ryan decides to go to a 3-4, or even mix it in, I think it would be a terrible idea. Unless Sands can REALLY step up. I think we have a solid lineup for a 4-3, which happens to be the one the Super Bowl champs used to beat probably the most dominating offense anyone has ever seen. It's all about pressure no matter how it comes.
from 4 months ago
Yeah I know you meant no disrespect dude, it's all good, Sands has the body of a great 3-4 NT and apparently he lost a family member in '07. and I know what you'rw talking about with the 4-3... I had the displeasure of watching that slugfest from the loser's perspective, but Oakland doesn't have Strahan, Tuck. and Umenyiora, I think Sands should be given one more shot, if he's anything near decent, a 3-4 would work well with the good LB core
4 months ago
Here's the thing. Anyone who actually watched Raider games in 2007 -- yes I was one -- knows that the Raider OFFENSE was terrible. Justin Fargas was inspirational because anything they got was on his shoulders, while Josh McCown and Daunte Culpepper occasionally found a receiver for a big play. What happens then is that the DEFENSE spends more time on the field and in turn gasses-out. Even Hall of Famers eventually gas-out. Thus, it's hard to truly assess the abilities of Oakland's defensive-tackles. In taking Run DMC (Darren McFadden), the Raiders now have a runningback situation that rivals what Atlanta had in Michael Vick, Warrick Dunn, TJ Duckett, and Jerious Norwood and FB Justin Griffith. Dogfighting aside, we all know that Vick was primarily a runner statistically, with occasional bombs. Oakland has Atlanta's offensive-coordinator and fullback from those days, while the physical play of Michael Bush reminds me of TJ Duckett, while Fargas reminds me of Warrick Dunn. Some compare Darren McFadden to Reggie Bush. I think I'd compare Darren McFadden to Michael Vick. Seriously. So anyway, there's no real question that the Raider defense is talented, the question is: How much will the tackles hurt them? In my mind, if Oakland can sustain an offense and let those tackles rest, then they should be good enough--considering the talent around them.
from 4 months ago
The thing about Vick was this, what made his runs so deadly is that he had the option of passing, which means people couldn't bum rush him until he was beyond the line of scrimmage and had gotten some seperation and had reached close to top speed, D-mac is no Reggie in that he is more aggressive and willing to take some hits, but he's no AP either, I think Oakland's situation at RB is quite favorable. About the defense, you have a good point, but Joseph and Warren have had mediocre careers, even in other places, and Kelly and Sands are largely unproven, if they had proven talents that had an unexpectedly bad year last year, you would be dead on, but even on paper, Oakland is weak at DT.
4 months ago
Oakland is weak on DT but looking at it their Defense could be improved by blitzing more or more effectively. The last few years they haven't been blitzing as much as I'd like. One problem i see is they fake blitz then drop back then the running back goes though. We have the secondary to do it but we need to blitz and bring the heat and then maybe, just maybe their running D will be better.
from 4 months ago
You're right, Oakland has one helluva back 7 with Wilson, Hall, Asomugha, Huff, Howard, Morrisson, and Thomas (not so much Thomas) but the D-line is quite mediocre, the best they have is a guy who could be good in Tommy Kelly but aside from that they're pretty bare, Joseph, Warren, Sands and Richardson are pretty mediocre all around (Richardson may be good later but don't expect much right now), Burgess and Spires make up a decent pair of DEs but their DTs are so incapable of stopping the run that the secondary isn't able to do what it's capable of. More blitzing is needed, a predictable defense never succeeds, but revamping the scheme won't fix the DTs they have in there.
I also dislike their wideout situation: Walker is a broken knee waiting to happen, Drew Carter is nothing more then a somewhat injury prone slot receiver, and Curry is not a true number 1. Higgins, Shields, Watkins, Shilens etc will have to step up soon, out of the four, one will probably work out. This should be a year of transition in Oakland. They've begun to get the pieces in place for a good team but they need to adjust to one another in the locker room and Russel needs a year to prove himself. Oakland will win between 7 and 9 games this year and become better two years from now. Thanks for the input.
Peace,
Max
write a new comment