Raiders' History: Do other AFC West Teams have it wrong?
In doing a report for college, I was asked by a classmate to explain why the Raiders were better than the Denver Broncos, San DIego Chargers and the Kansas City Chiefs. What made the question into an assignment, was the kicker...I wasn't allowed to use the stanard-fare reply, "three rings should do it".
First and foremost, I had to look over the regular season numbers, for each club. Oakland has won 410 games, while Denver has won 394. Kansas City has 385 and the Chargers are last, with 375. Oakland has played in two markets, spending several seasons in LA, as San Diego was once in LA for a year and the Chiefs spent their first three years as the Dallas Texans.
How about going one on one? The Raiders have winning records against the Broncos and San Diego, while having a losing record against the Chiefs. The Chiefs, meanwhile has winning records against all three AFC West clubs, Denver only has a winning record against the Chargers....where does that leave the Chargers?
Dead last....they even have a losing record against the Seahawks. Ouch.
Of course, yes, we have more Hall of Famers. We've won more Super Bowls. We've played in more Championship games, for a team that has started since 1960.
Most people who have followed the Silver and Black know of the 15 playoff appearances, between 1967 and 1985. Our history is a proud one.
some have to wonder, is hating the Raiders a required class in San Diego, Denver or Kansas City? Or is it born from parents bitter of a bad history?
