The Raider Conspiracy Theories, Fact or Fiction.

I have been fascinated by a common theme in many of the Raiders fan forums in the US that NFL officiating crews and the media in general are all Raider Haters. I took it upon myself to look into this to determine whether or not it is myth in the mind of some Raider fan conspiracy theorists or if it has in fact some level of credence.

Let me first address the issue of penalties. The raiders have, for a long time, been seen as the bad boys of the NFL. This view has been fostered by many within the Raiders organisation not least of them Al Davis himself. The fact that many players seen as rebels, outcasts or worse have been brought into the ranks of the Raiders through the years, only adds to this perception. When you look at the statistics of the teams most penalised over the years, the Raiders are nearly always at the wrong end of the table for the most penalised. Overall we are still behind the Chicago Bears for the most seasons leading the league in penalties and for several other penalty statistics. However, their franchise has been in existence longer than the Raiders. Even the Chiefs have had more penalties in a single season. Considering the Raiders reputation, they are not participants in the top three of the most penalised games or those with the most penalised yards.
The conspiracy theorists would have us believe that this is down to the officials having it in for the Raiders but the players certainly do not do themselves any favours. I think that the behaviour of Warren Sapp to get three ungentlemanly conduct in a matter of seconds, does not do the Raiders case much good. This sort of occurrence, though admittedly rare, can certainly colour the view of officials during a game but even with this game the Raiders were only just above their average for the number of penalties and penalty yardage for games during the season.
There are other aspects of officiating that could be looked at, decisions like the ”Tuck Rule” and many others that could be enumerated, but the Raiders are not alone in having decisions go against them. In fact, the general consensus is that there seems to have been a lot more evidence of poor officiating in the last few seasons than has been seen for some time. However, even before instant replay and video evidence, the Raiders reputation was well established and it didn’t seem to matter what the number of penalties or bad decisions were made, it did not stop the Raiders winning.
Does any of this mean that the officials have it in for us? I personally don’t think so. With modern television instant replay providing all the evidence necessary to prove the case for the theorists, why has some bright spark of an investigative journalist not done so and made a name for themselves? This should lead us to the conclusion that we just give away too much yardage in penalties and the Raiders are their own worst enemies in this respect. Would greater discipline lead to less penalties and perhaps better field positions and even better results. More than likely, but then would that be Raider’s football?

Now to address the case of the media. What is considered bad press. Articles or editorials that only show the negative side of a particular story. Do the Raiders get a lot of bad press? They almost certainly do. How much of this is due to the management and front office relationship with the press. Both Al Davis and Amy Trask, to name but two, are not known to be press friendly and have allegedly had a great many heated press conferences. This sort confrontational attitude, which endears them to the fans, combined with the amount of rumours that circulate without being suppressed/addressed do not help to foster good relations with the media. Hostility or silence are two things guaranteed to put journalistic backs up and looking at the type of coverage that the Raiders get, there are a lot of the media that are not particularly Raider friendly. Even within the Bay area and California as a whole, it is difficult to find any of the media journalists who have a good word to say about the Raiders. Though difficult, it is not impossible. There are a couple that do put a positive spin to what the Raiders do, particularly of late with the signings in Free Agency and the whole Davis/Kiffin situation. These are of course exceptions and the general principle appears to be that any Raider story will almost certainly be negative in content.
This has not always been the case. In the past the Raiders were always well represented for press coverage and it is difficult for me to pinpoint where the actual change occurs in the type of coverage that the Raiders get.
All of this would indeed add credence to the conspiracy theorists claims about the media, but if certain factors are taken into consideration, the type of press coverage the Raiders receive could be seen as deserving. The fact that there does not appear to be any concerted effort to provide information to the press does not help. Speculation becomes rife and a good negative story whether or not based in truth is more marketable than a good positive story. The relationship between the Raiders and the press has been allowed to deteriorate to the extent that a great many of them will always look for the scandal rather than the charitable exploits of the Raiders organisation. Mind you this could be true of any of the so-called gutter press. For this there can only be one person to blame. He who holds the reins of power. Al Davis has always been a bit of an enigma and his personal relationship with the press has been at times tempestuous.
All of these things add up to poor representation of the Raiders in press and in the media coverage that they receive. A prime example of possible media bias, could be the NFL Total Access programme. I watch this regularly and have yet to see the Raiders reported on in a positive light by anyone on the programme.

In conclusion the conspiracy theorists could be partially correct. The officiating though not beyond reproach is nevertheless seen as having no particular bias. There is no factual evidence supporting a conspiracy. This may not be true with regard to the press and the media. Though the Raiders do not appear to get fair shake, who is to blame for this? A multitude of apparently Raider hating journalists, or the Raiders organisation itself. Not a call that I am willing to make.