How To Create a Win-Win Deal For Jamarcus Russell And The Raiders

Ben RaiderfanCorrespondent IApril 10, 2010

FOXBORO, MA - JANUARY 10:  Tom Brady #12 of the New England Patriots reacts against the Baltimore Ravens during the 2010 AFC wild-card playoff game at Gillette Stadium on January 10, 2010 in Foxboro, Massachusetts. The Ravens won 33-14. (Photo by Elsa/Getty Images)
Elsa/Getty Images

There's a lot of sparks flying in the Raider Nation regarding the quarterback situation. Recently, ESPN commentator Joe Theismann added fuel to the fire by stating that "Jamarcus Russell doesn't get it". It is clear that the Jamarcus Russell dilemma is having a polarizing effect on the Raider Nation. Cheap shots have been leveled on all sides and no one is the winner. A solution, worthy of Solomon's wisdom, is required to sever this Gordian knot. 

History offers us a glimpse of the real problem here. Ken "The Snake" Stabler was the only quarterback ever drafted by the Oakland Raiders to win a Super Bowl. Granted, it took him eight years to do it but the organization was different then. We were then known as the "winningest team in football". Each year, the elements were in place to launch a good playoff run. However, in 1980, it was a 32 year old castoff named Jim Plunkett that guided us to victory in the Super Bowl. He returned 3 years later to do the same at age 35. Our last Super Bowl appearance was again marshaled by a 37 year old Rich Gannon. 

I would argue that it is simply unfair to keep Jamarcus Russell in a system that cannot support his considerable talents. The organization does best with veteran castoffs as history has shown us. There are many organizations that are better suited to developing young raw talent such as Jamarcus. Organizations that have kept a watchful eye on Oakland since 2007 and are waiting for a misstep. Which brings us to the man in the picture....

Clearly Tom Brady's best days are behind him. Belichick knows this and is kicking himself for the Matt Cassel trade. It has been repeated by many, on Bleacher Report, that the offensive line and the talented WRs make the team. Evidence of this is the success Cassel had during Brady's injury. It has also been pointed out that Brady could not play as good as Russell if he had the WRs and offensive line Russell has had. It seems unfair to deny Russell that opportunity. Only a callous and insensitive Raider Hater would ever stand in the way of Russell and greatness. 

There's also the issue of fair play. We owe Belichick one. We pulled a slick one on him and dumped our problem child Randy Moss. We got a fourth round pick, I believe. I, for one, would like to believe Al does have a conscience. Sure, it's a dirty game but that one was pretty low. Here's an opportunity to let the Pats know we feel bad about pulling one over them. 

I'm not proposing a trade of Jamarcus for Tom Brady. That would be stupid. Belichick would be too suspicious if we do that. A raw young stud like Jamarcus for an old veteran whose best days are behind him. Also, what is in it for us? However, Pro Bowl Guard Logan Mankins is unhappy with his contract AND there's that Seymour draft pick in 2011. I say we give them Russell and take Brady, Mankins and the 2011 first round pick. We have a nice addition to the line, a quarterback with maybe 2 or 3 years left and a first round draft pick. Jamarcus gets a father figure in Belichick and the offensive line and WRs he never had. What do you think, Nation?