Skip to content

Charlie Garner agrees with Tim Brown, sort of

p1_garner_all Getty Images

We may need to put together a scorecard of the former Raiders who disagree and who agree with the suggestion by receiver Tim Brown that former coach Bill Callahan deliberately sabotaged Super Bowl XXXVII by changing the game plan two days before kickoff.

While three teammates who have spoken out so far disagree with Brown (Rich Gannon, Bill Romanowski, Lincoln Kennedy), former Raiders running back Charlie Garner sees a little merit in Brown’s contention.

“There may be something to what Mr. Brown has been saying,” told 97.5 The Fanatic in Philly.  “I really don’t know the validity of which he despised the Raiders but I also know that he didn’t want to be there, too.”

Regardless of the reason, Garner agreed that something happened.  “We came out with another game plan and it just was not what we practiced. . . .  We as an organization and as a team had been through a lot of adversity so we were accustomed to it. Had we just stuck to the original game plan, I believe that we would have been successful.”

If Brown’s goal was to shine a fresh light on a game played a decade ago, Brown has been extremelty successful.

Permalink 48 Comments Feed for comments Latest Stories in: Oakland Raiders, Rumor Mill, Tampa Bay Buccaneers, Top Stories
48 Responses to “Charlie Garner agrees with Tim Brown, sort of”
  1. whatnojets says: Jan 22, 2013 3:30 PM

    Really….who cares???

  2. dasboat says: Jan 22, 2013 3:31 PM

    So let me get this straight. The #1 offense in the NFL, with the league MVP in Rich Gannon, was going to run the ball against Sapp, Brooks, Rice and Lynch? They actually tried: 19 yds in 11 carries. Please.

  3. onebucplace says: Jan 22, 2013 3:33 PM

    Hey Charlie, remember when Gruden signed you to play for the Bucs. Gruden let Warren Sapp walk and cut John Lynch so he could free up cap space and sign players like Gardner and give them, what was it, a $4-million signing bonus for 111 yards rushing?

    I guess ole 5-int Gannon was in on it as well — you all worked as a team to make the Bucs look like one of the best defenses in Super Bowl history (3 defensive TDs outscored the 2 offensive TDs that the Raiders had).

  4. askmarc says: Jan 22, 2013 3:33 PM

    The Raiders never ran well with Adam Treu at center. With Robbins out the plan would change automatically. The key part is whether the plan was changed before or after Robbins split. Tim Brown has never been too in touch with reality however.

  5. thekiller678 says: Jan 22, 2013 3:33 PM

    10 years is a really long time, especially in the sports world. I doubt we’ll ever know the full story

  6. jayquintana says: Jan 22, 2013 3:34 PM

    Only one thing is certain: Callahan’s coaching in that game was awful. Can’t think of anyone who did worse.

  7. onebucplace says: Jan 22, 2013 3:39 PM

    “jayquintana says:

    Only one thing is certain: Callahan’s coaching in that game was awful. Can’t think of anyone who did worse.”

    I think Rich Gannon throwing 3 TDs to Bucs players was worse. Face it, you played the BEST defense of the 90s and 2000s in that game and it showed. Stop the whinning, even if the Raiders had played a perfect game they still would have lost by 20+ points.

  8. canehouse says: Jan 22, 2013 3:40 PM

    Charlie Garner…. Haha!

  9. mackcarrington says: Jan 22, 2013 3:40 PM

    Does Tim Brown offer any logical reason or motivation for Callahan wanting to subvert his own head coaching career? Also I want to know if Brown has his own motives for some of the scathing comments he has made in the last week or so. Is he hoping to land one of those “Talking Head ” TV jobs, or does he have a radio show that no one listens to, and is trying to get a little attention?

  10. northshorejag says: Jan 22, 2013 3:40 PM

    Charlie Garner agrees that he was never part of the game plan?

  11. pacific123ocean says: Jan 22, 2013 3:40 PM

    The timing of this is very odd. Why is Tim Brown saying this now? And, why didn’t he say this years ago?

  12. JSpicoli says: Jan 22, 2013 3:40 PM

    jayquintana says:Jan 22, 2013 3:34 PM

    Only one thing is certain: Callahan’s coaching in that game was awful. Can’t think of anyone who did worse.

    __________________________________

    Speaking as a diehard Raider fan and without malice—–Gannon?

  13. thunderstruck24 says: Jan 22, 2013 3:41 PM

    Just heard Shane Lechler agree with the game plan change and that he thought it was stupid. He did not go as far as to say sabotage. He also said that the pre game speech did not sound like gruden and callahan were friends. this was on the game 95.7

  14. baymac408 says: Jan 22, 2013 3:43 PM

    Dude nobody cares about these guys anymore or that they lost… To little to late talk about something that matters.. C’mon raiders are irrelevant this time of year.. Why talk about this clown franchise

  15. steelerben says: Jan 22, 2013 3:50 PM

    I find it hard to believe that Tim Brown, a guy that has been very well respected, is coming out of nowhere with an imaginary ax to grind. He might be overreaching in the assessment that the game was thrown, but it certainly sounds like it wasn’t coached properly.

    If the other team knows what your offense is going to do, all of your checks and all of your line calls for your no huddle, then of course their defense is going to dominate you.

    Did the center go AWOL because the gameplan changed or did the gameplan change because the center went AWOL? Were the line calls not changed because Robbins freaked and bailed, or were they not changed out of neglect, arrogance, or throwing the game?

    I can’t see a man getting to the top of the mountain and saying, “Thanks, but no thanks,” but it doesn’t make it untrue.

  16. raiderdaddy says: Jan 22, 2013 3:50 PM

    Ive always said the Raiders coaching/game plan in SuperBowl 37 was garbage and Tim Brown is a true Raider but the timing of his statement is just off! 10 years later, near SB week?

  17. dalucks says: Jan 22, 2013 3:50 PM

    Seriously, why are we posting articles about the Raiders? C’mon man.

  18. eatitfanboy says: Jan 22, 2013 3:55 PM

    The thing that makes the least sense about this story, and believe there is a lot of nonsense to choose from, is that the Raiders would have initially had a run heavy game plan.

    They had a mediocre running game and an NFL MVP QB, and the Bucs were great at stuffing the run.

    Maybe they just woke up and said, what are we crazy? We gotta throw to have any chance in this game.

    And why would Brown, who last I checked played WR, be upset that the Raiders wanted to throw alot?

  19. fthrvic says: Jan 22, 2013 3:59 PM

    This story has an Ace Ventura movie script already set in motion.

  20. r8rnuck says: Jan 22, 2013 4:04 PM

    whatever…maybe this is a way of drumming support for HoF?? i have no idea of why this would come up now? unless he was goaded into talking about upon which he would make his personal feelings public…slow news day

  21. benroethlisberger7 says: Jan 22, 2013 4:07 PM

    We win SBs. Try it.

  22. holahey123 says: Jan 22, 2013 4:09 PM

    Ok I get it, Callahan changed the offensive game plan but that still doesn’t explain why the Buccaneers score 48 points.

  23. JSpicoli says: Jan 22, 2013 4:09 PM

    dasboat says:Jan 22, 2013 3:31 PM

    So let me get this straight. The #1 offense in the NFL, with the league MVP in Rich Gannon, was going to run the ball against Sapp, Brooks, Rice and Lynch? They actually tried: 19 yds in 11 carries. Please.

    __________________________________

    TBrown may or may not be correct, but the fact is that Tampa was easy to run on. They averaged 270 lbs on that light line.

    Rice was a pass rusher, Sapp could be moved by our line. did you actually name the Safety as part of some great running defense? lol. If he is getting a lot of involvement, you don’t have much run defense.

  24. nineroutsider says: Jan 22, 2013 4:14 PM

    Whatever game plan you had, unless the calls were completely changed (and they weren’t), you were going to get roasted; Gruden knew all of your calls!

    The Bucs defensive guys talk about it all the time…they knew what was coming out of Gannon’s mouth and running more would not have fixed that. They would have had to change all of their offensive calls over those 2 weeks and they didn’t.

  25. raiderlyfe510 says: Jan 22, 2013 4:23 PM

    I’m a big Gruden fan, but I will say this. The Raiders got their revenge on Gruden in 2008 when Jamarcus Russell and Michael Bush smashed the Bucs in the season finale and sent Gruden to the coaching unemployment line. The Raiders ran all over the Bucs defense in that game. Shout out to Tom Cable.

    Now that everything’s even time for Gruden to come back to Raider Nation.

  26. str8infamous says: Jan 22, 2013 4:28 PM

    This isn’t the first time Tim Brown spoke of this…it’s just at that time no one listened. I’m a Bucs fan & my belief is that we would have won regardless because of our record setting defense that year, The Pass-D was ranked 1st & they took 9INTS back for TDs. Tim Brown does make a lil sense…You can’t change an entire game plan that plays heavy to your opponents strength (Throwing too much), 2 days before the game. But everything else Tim is saying besides the gameplan sounds crazy. I’m just waiting for someone else to confirm if the plan was changed before or after the Center went AWOL.

  27. MasMacho says: Jan 22, 2013 4:35 PM

    Zack Crockett disagreed with Brown on Mike&Mike this morning as well.

  28. 8to80texansblog says: Jan 22, 2013 4:38 PM

    onebucplace says:
    Jan 22, 2013 3:39 PM
    “jayquintana says:

    Face it, you played the BEST defense of the 90s and 2000s in that game and it showed.

    ——————————————-

    Are you seriusly suggesting that the Bucs we’re the best defense over a 2 decade period?

    I’ll give you late 90’s early 00’s

  29. classicfootballplease says: Jan 22, 2013 4:39 PM

    tampa fans are delusional. Tommy Maddox came into Tampa and whopped on that defense, what top defense of all time lets Tommy Maddox beat them at home a month before the playoffs?

    Ps check the stats of the 2008 Steelers, compare them to the 2002 bucs and 2000 ravens, lots of great defensive seasons of the 2000s not just Tampa Bay.

  30. cubano76 says: Jan 22, 2013 4:40 PM

    We need a concussion test for Tim Brown STAT!

  31. okiny says: Jan 22, 2013 4:44 PM

    onebucplace says:

    Face it, you played the BEST defense of the 90s and 2000s in that game and it showed.
    ——————————–
    You are high if you think that defense was better than the Baltimore defense that won in Super Bowl XXXV. Bath salts high.

  32. thegregwitul says: Jan 22, 2013 4:51 PM

    The 2002 Bucs defense was easy to run against? In what delusional world are you living in? The Bucs were top five agains the run and number one against the pass. The Raiders were dominated, destroyed, embarrassed to such an extent that they haven’t had a winning season since. The Bucs at least won their division a couple more times with Gruden, and that’s what the haters forget to mention; Jon Gruden.

    Jon Gruden who was traded for draft picks and cash. The Raiders were in such disarray that they didn’t even bother changing the offense, something Gruden did with the Bucs, who peaked as a complete team in the playoffs by destroying SF and taking out a tough Philly team at the Vet. I hope those pics and the 8 million was worth it, because it sure was for the Bucs.

    I understand that the Raiders have a large and dedicated fan base, and I respect that. What I can’t respect is a sore loser, and I know the Bucs were the better team. Scoreboard, son. That Bucs defense, along with the Ravens and 85 Bears are the three best defensive units of the last 30 years. So hit the thumbs down, haters, I’ll savor every moment.

  33. guinsslvr says: Jan 22, 2013 5:11 PM

    First off, let me state I am a Raiders fan. Its sucked lately but hey we all choose our fate. I gotta admit its kinda weird that Ole Timmy Brown is drudging up this stuff now… I mean a little to late isn’t it? But anyways as a life long Raiders fan I am starting to remember some things about that game and that season. I loved Rich Gannon, him and Gruden were a perfect example of what can happen when a Coach and a QB really get on the same page. Kinda like Payton/Brees before their marriage…well maybe not quite that good but you all get the point. But the fact is the Raiders had one hell of a Offensive Line while in the Gruden years. The years prior to the Super Bowl appearance they consistently ranked in the top 5 in rushing offense and along with a very good Oline had some a stable of good runners in Wheatley, Garner, Crockett, and a damn good FB in Jon Ritchie. You have to wonder whether Defenses just choose to pick their poison when playing the Raiders when Gannon won the MVP that year. Look this is kind of silly to bring up now but I believe that Running the ball against the Buc’s damn well good of been in the Game plan to start. The Buc’s were probably the better team but I for one just like a watching some good competive football.

  34. jasonculhane says: Jan 22, 2013 5:14 PM

    I totally believe it. Why change your gameplan? What would be the reason to do it, if ya didn’t know the other team wasn’t planning against it.

    Now we know Gruden was simulating Gannon during their practices…Then all of a sudden a game plan is changed to PASS the ball. Well, hell thats what Gruden had been working on all week right? Gannon had 3 picks six’s.

    I don’t know why this seems far fetched. Its suspicious at the very least. The guy’s who don’t want to understand it are WWE fans who think wrestling is real.

  35. jasonculhane says: Jan 22, 2013 5:24 PM

    Since when did the Raiders run the ball anyway that year? So then why was Callahan even initially practicing it in the first place? He stayed commited to that gameplan until the friday leading up to the Superbowl. To practice it throughout the whole week, then to change the gameplan again would mean the players are going into the Superbowl with passing plays unreahearsed.

    Its exactly what that passing game looked like to me. Something that wasn’t practiced. Raiders went 2 weeks without any knowledge of what they were doing. Thats the disadvantage.

  36. justautumnwindbaby says: Jan 22, 2013 5:25 PM

    Uh, you guys do realize that jerry rice was miced up, and RECORDED…..l know thes guys that were in the truck. Perhaps someone should roll that tape?

  37. polo550 says: Jan 22, 2013 5:27 PM

    You’re dilusional if you think the Bucs had the best defense in the 90’s and 2000’s. Better check the stats of the Ravens and the Steelers over the 2000 decade. Those two franchises stayed in the top 5. I could care less about a year here and a year there. Give me longevity and those 2 franchises have been doing it long term.

  38. yyyass says: Jan 22, 2013 6:01 PM

    The Raiders were stronger with Robbins at center because it was like having three different guys all playing at the same time.

  39. ktfulmer says: Jan 22, 2013 6:35 PM

    I tend to be skeptical of stories like this. I will say that the one thing that gives me pause is how quickly the whole team quit on Callahan the next year. I said at the time that it was strange that they had no faith in a coach who had gotten them to the big game during the previous season. This would make sense a catalyst.

  40. alonestartexan says: Jan 22, 2013 6:56 PM

    polo550 says:
    Jan 22, 2013 5:27 PM
    You’re dilusional if you think the Bucs had the best defense in the 90′s and 2000′s. Better check the stats of the Ravens and the Steelers over the 2000 decade. Those two franchises stayed in the top 5. I could care less about a year here and a year there. Give me longevity and those 2 franchises have been doing it long term.

    ——–

    I think he meant that the 2002 Buccaneers Defense was the best defense of that era. Which, statistically, they could have been. I don’t think he’s trying to say that the 1990-2010 Buccaneers Defense was the best every year. Realistically, the Bucs didn’t even have a winning season until 1997, and wasn’t a good team from 2005-2010.

  41. alonestartexan says: Jan 22, 2013 6:58 PM

    For the smarties, I meant they hadn’t had a winning season since 1990, before 1997.

  42. dabears2485 says: Jan 22, 2013 7:14 PM

    thunderstruck24 says:Jan 22, 2013 3:41 PM

    Just heard Shane Lechler agree with the game plan change and that he thought it was stupid. He did not go as far as to say sabotage. He also said that the pre game speech did not sound like gruden and callahan were friends. this was on the game 95.7

    Who listens to a punter for anything but golf tips or good places to relax in the afternoon?

  43. patssteelersorgiants says: Jan 22, 2013 7:48 PM

    Slow news day at the PFT offices.

  44. judsonjr says: Jan 22, 2013 8:20 PM

    I still think it was probably Al Davis meddling.

    Overall the Bucs caused a lot of havok forcing turnovers in their secondary. The Bucs were very good against the run, so running the ball was not a sure thing.

    However, if you look at the Bucs offense: mediocre passing and terrible running game, it’s probably not a bad game plan to run the ball, minimize turnovers, and play a field position game with Lechler and Seabass.

    I’m sure Al Davis would have had his overhead projector out in a second hearing about such a gameplan.

  45. polo550 says: Jan 22, 2013 8:51 PM

    alonestartexan says

    I think he meant that the 2002 Buccaneers Defense was the best defense of that era. Which, statistically, they could have been. I don’t think he’s trying to say that the 1990-2010 Buccaneers Defense was the best every year. Realistically, the Bucs didn’t even have a winning season until 1997, and wasn’t a good team from 2005-2010
    _________________________________________

    Even if he did mean to say the 2002 Buccaneers had the best defense he’s stuck on stupid. The 2000 Ravens Defense was easily the best defense and statistics back that up. The 85 Bears D held the record for least points allowed in a 16 game season and the 02 Ravens allowed less points than they did throughout the regular season and playoffs with room to spare.

  46. drasarp says: Jan 22, 2013 10:07 PM

    jayquintana says: “Only one thing is certain: Callahan’s coaching in that game was awful. Can’t think of anyone who did worse.”

    I can think of a coach who I believe did as bad: Lovie Smith in Super Bowl XLV, Feb 4, 2007.

    In my opinion, the second half of the Bears’ game compared to the first half was awful. Clearly, Chicago was better than Indianapolis in that rainy, messy first half. Then, Lovie Smith changed his game plan and it stalled the Bears in the second. I believe that by changing the plan in the second, it allowed his buddy, Tony Dungy, to win: Colts 29, Bears 17.

    Tony Dungy was the first black coach to win the championship. In so doing, he was able to beat his good friend and protege in a history making game that featured the first two black coaches in a Super Bowl.

    I’m not saying Lovie Smith gave the game to Tony, but it appeared to me his surprisingly different coaching in the second half made it possible for his dear friend and mentor, Tony Dungy, to be the first African-American coach to win a Super Bowl.

    Call me off sides for my observation and opinion, but that’s the way it appeared to me.

  47. frankyvito says: Jan 22, 2013 11:51 PM

    Whether you believe him or not, we need to get off the “why now” bus. I’ve heard TB say this for at least over the last 5 yrs now… its just the first time he’s went into such detail & thrown Barrett Robbins into it so its been more sensationalized. I’d probably hold a grudge awhile too if my one super bowl appearance was over before it started. But sabotage is definitely a poorly worded way of expressing it.

  48. youngmouth83 says: Jan 23, 2013 11:36 AM

    I’m tried of hearing about who cares Jerry rice you alright out 4 or 5 rings give Tim brown one of yours so he can stop bitching I mean if you fell like this you should of told when if first happen not Ten yrs later …

Leave a Reply

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!