1980-83 Raiders, 2 wins in 4 years or at the bump of eras

[Gary Najman]

the 1980 Raiders won with the 1970s team with Plunkett. 1981, as noted, they got old and by 1982 is was a revived team. In 1983 they win it all

but, like the mid-1980 Bears they could be called underachievers, UNLESS the 1980 win that Plunkett, Branch, Millen, Hayes, Hendricks is part of the "1980s" Raiders. To me, it's a to-close-too call . . .

IMO the Raiders underachieved in 1984 and 1985 but they did have big qb issues. The 1985 Bears were super bowl quality defense through 1988 and super bowl quality o-line to about same time. Again, consistensy at QB was at issue.

The 1980 only had 11 players (plus Dave Casper for the first half of the season) who were part of the 1976 team (Mark van Eeghen, Cliff Branch, Morris Bradshaw, Art Shell, Gene Upshaw, Dave Dalby, Henry Lawrence, Steve Sylvester, John Matuszak, Ted Hendricks and Ray Guy).

[BD Sullivan]

I don't recall any huge hype going into the 1983 playoffs about how great the Raiders were. In fact, in the days leading up to the AFC Championship, much of the talk was about how the Raiders hadn't beaten the Seahawks that year, and how Seattle could make it to the Super Bowl.

[7DnBrnc53]

the 1980 Raiders won with the 1970s team with Plunkett.

The Raiders had several new players in 1980 that started or contributed, like Matt Millen, Dwayne O'Steen, Kenny King, Bob Chandler, and Burgess Owens. They also had several young guys that hadn't been there that long like Willie Jones, Dave Browning, Reggie Kinlaw, and Arthur Whittington.

In addition, they brought back TE Ray Chester, a guy that hadn't played with them since 1972.

[mwald]

Recently watched a few Raiders games from this era and had forgotten what an absolute beast Matt Millen was.

[26554]

Al Davis' overconfidence probably didn't help, considering he was saying in '84, that he could see a dynasty developing, since "I don't know what it lacks."

For one thing, he believed in Marc Wilson much more and much longer than he should have.

[26554]

Recently watched a few Raiders games from this era and had forgotten what an absolute beast Matt Millen was.

I think Rod Martin's actually even more underrated. Sure, most people know what he did in SB XV, but he was hardly a one-hit wonder.

[26554]

IMO the 1983 Raiders are horribly underrated. Too much emphasis on statistics. From the standpoint of one contest the team could whip anyone, which is what happened in the SB. That said, the Redskins just shanked one in the water that day. It happens.

The 1983 Raiders were a streaky team: they won their first four games, then lost three of their next five, before running off five more wins. They then inexplicably lost at home to a mediocre Cardinals team before getting back on track with a 16-point win over the Chargers to head into the postseason, where they rolled.

Raiders probably should've won, but the Cardinals were one of the hottest teams in the league down the stretch in '83. Perhaps some complacency had set in for the silver and black since they had already wrapped up the AFC West crown by that point.

[Pat McDonald]

Mike Haynes joined in week 12, and other that that hiccup against StL they looked very good as a team. His acquisition put them over the top IMO.

[JWL]

Mike Haynes joined in week 12, and other that that hiccup against StL they looked very good as a team. His acquisition put them over the top IMO.

Yeah, the defensive performance of the Raiders really went to another level when Haynes arrived. The defensive statistics help to tell the story.