-
Are the Saints in a very bad position going into 2012?
Long as we keep brees we are ok cause we have the number one tight end and three dominating running backs but we shore need colston for shore we need some one on the other side of the field to jump instead of going to Jimmy everytime and Robert Meacham this guy is fast man I say cut people who's not playing to much and keep Robert and Markus I know we need secondary and its all about the salary cap we need impact players for next season because super bowl is in our house next year and we gotta be one of the teams plyin in it and the team winning itPosted 01-21-2012 at 12:36 AM by jonathon700
-
Are the Saints in a very bad position going into 2012?
We need to re sign Nicks to. He's a free agent now.Posted 01-17-2012 at 10:36 PM by Haps Biggest Fan
-
Are the Saints in a very bad position going into 2012?
Personally I think this article is way overblown. We just about beat (and should have...) a top-notch SF team WITHOUT Pierre Thomas, Mark Ingram, and Lance Moore. It would be truly sad to see either Meachem or Colston go, but I wouldn't be surprised by it.
Maybe a miracle will occur: The Saints work out a long-term deal with Brees, slap the franchise tag on Colston, and somehow keep Meachem in the process. I don't see it happening, but it's possible.Posted 01-17-2012 at 03:18 AM by SaintsRule11
-
Are the Saints in a very bad position going into 2012?
When Drew Brees is the starting quarterback for your team, you're starting off the season in great position.Posted 01-16-2012 at 02:06 PM by papz
-
Well oiled machine
OK, call me wrong on that one. Teams SF played won 115 games, teams GB played won 117 games, and teams our Saints' played won 113, so...pretty much statistically even.
Interesting weirdness on same teams played. It plays to the Saints' doing poorly against teams with really bad records, for some reason, less practice perhaps, don't have to win? Whatever.
Anyway, San Francisco beat Tampa 48-3, the Saints' lost 26-20, in their first meeting, playing as if drugged, and won 27-16 in their second.
Saints lost to St. Louis 31-21, another hapless contest, while SF won twice, 26-0, and later 34-27--did SF get worse, or St. Louis get better? You decide.
Games that mattered--Detroit, SF won 25-19, and the Saints' won with 31-17 first, then 45-28 which would've easily been 52-28 without the kindness of taking three knees, and ending the game mercifully. Plus, the late Detroit game shows much improvement, against a stronger, more healthy Detroit team.
Finally, SF beat the Giants 27-20, and the Saints smoked them 49-24, and if I remember correctly, they could've probably run that score up a bit too.
I tend to dismiss the teams that aren't doing well, as for whatever reason, perhaps they just rest a bit during weeks where they play teams they feel are inconsequential. But against the better teams, the Saints' did better, and they made a run at the end that looks better than SF did, who appears to be closer to where the Saints' were during their sag-period, losing to Tampa and the Rams.Posted 01-09-2012 at 01:19 PM by mike27
-
Well oiled machine
I think you mean "who's that," joker-saint. (who is)
Yea, you really hit on something, which is WEAK SCHEDULE at the 49ers. Actually, that might be a better tiebreak than the conference record, just add up all the wins of the opponents. Give me some time and I might just do that myself.Posted 01-09-2012 at 12:43 PM by mike27
-
Well oiled machine
Answer to ddub19's question
Answer to ddub19's question: "Why do the Saint say " who dat"? because there too stupid to know how to spell "whos that!" Maybe its time to leave the swamp and go back to school!!!!" Unfortunately that is a chant that has stuck with this team since the early 80's. As far as them being too stupid to spell "Whos that!" I believe it is who's....lol, but thats ok. You also said "Why do the Saint say"
It's a good thing spelling touchdown isn't required to put 7 on the board, because thats all Brees is going to do next week too. I believe this will be a very good game though. The niners do have a great defense. Who have they played? Seattle, 22nd in passing and 21st in rushing. Dallas, 7th in passing and 18th in rushing, and they lost.(No worries....We lost to them too when we were 13 and 0) Cincinnati, 20th in passing and 19th in rushing, pretty close game there too. Philidelphia, 9th in passing and 5th in rushing, which was a 1 point game. Tampa, 16th and 30th, and worst team in the NFC South. Detroit, 4th and 29th and you only won by 6 ^^^^ TAKE A LOOK AT THAT SCORE ^^^^ thats was you first 6 games and none of them were elite teams. ClE, 24th and 28th-WAS, 14th and 25th-NYG 5th and 32nd-17th and 24th-BAL 17th and 25th and so on and so forth.....The SAINTS are 1st and 6th. Lets hope your lights dont cut out on you during this game. Brees will definitely enjoy that down time.Posted 01-08-2012 at 03:03 AM by joker-saint
-
Well oiled machine
Still waiting on a comment from the niners fans on this one
Still waiting to hear from some niners fans: Any defense can be ranked first againt the rush when they play teams who are on average 20th and below in rushing. The niners played one team that was ranked 5th which was the Eagles. Outcome 416 yards passing and 2 TD's by Vick, 108 rushing with 75 of those coming from Vick. Vick isn't even a running back. Do you think you will stop 3 top notch running backs if you couldn't even stop Vick? The outcome told the story there. 1 point game. Now place Sproles, Thomas, and Ivory back there along with the number 1 ranked passing in the league. Good luck Niners. This is a great match up
Posted 01-08-2012 at 03:02 AM by joker-saint
-
Saints showing limited playbook on offense and defense.
With Washington's injury problems, he might have a tough time making the team.Posted 08-24-2011 at 07:39 AM by jcp026
-
Saints showing limited playbook on offense and defense.
Amaya instead of Parson. My mistake.Posted 08-23-2011 at 06:02 PM by jcp026
-
Saints showing limited playbook on offense and defense.
QB-Brees, Daniel
HB- Thomas, Ingram, Sproles, Ivory(if healthy)
FB-Hall
WR-Colston, Moore, Meachem, Arrington, Morgan
TE-Graham, Thomas, Humphrey, Lorenzen
LT-Bushrod, Brown
LG-Nicks
C-Kreutz, Tennant
RG-Evans
RT-Strief
RE-Smith, McBride, Galette
DT-Ellis, Rogers, Franklin, King
LE-Jordan, Brown
OLB-Herring, Wilson
MLB-Vilma, Dunbar
OLB Casillas, Shanle, Bussey
CB-Greer, Porter, Robinson, Patrick, Washington, Parson
FS-Jenkins, Sharper
SS-Harper, Prioleau, Ries
K-Hartley
P-Moorstead
LS-DrescherPosted 08-23-2011 at 04:55 PM by jcp026
-
Saints showing limited playbook on offense and defense.
Always get confused on the position of line backers. Should have just put LB. Rogers and Franklin are shoe ins I am sure, but King was very impressive. Franklin sprained his ankle and has already showed how fragile he can be so I chose King. Not that Franklin isn't a good choice, I just liked Kings side line to side line speed, and the solid tackles he made. I watch each game in slow motion to see the defensive mechanics of each player. King seemed to stand out the most. Probably will just get overlooked just like Casillas did last year but thats just how it is when you have other big names on the team ahead of them. No doubt Franklin and Rogers were brought in to be high impact players, but in my opinion we could have spent the money elsewhere because we have very talented young players on our defense. Maybe we should have solidified the secondary a little better? We had a chance to get Nnamd Asomugha when the lockout lifted but opted to go with a defensive front four option instead. As for your question about who do you think or would you choose, Its who would you choose?Posted 08-23-2011 at 03:27 PM by joker-saint
-
Posted 08-22-2011 at 10:20 PM by foreverfan
-
Saints showing limited playbook on offense and defense.
Is it "who do you think will" or "who would you chose?"
And do you have Mitch King starting over Rogers and Franklin? Is Vilma your starting ROLB?Posted 08-22-2011 at 05:21 PM by jcp026
-
Saints showing limited playbook on offense and defense.
Offense:
RT-Zach Strief
LT-Jermon Bushrod
G-Carl Nicks
G-Jahri Evans/Matt Tenant
C-Olin Kreutz
WR2-Lance Moore
WR3-Devery Henderson
WR4-Joseph Morgan
TE1-Jimmy Graham
TE2-David Thomas
TE3-Tory Humphrey
RB1-Pierre Thomas
RB2-Mark Ingram
RB3-Chris Ivory
RB4-Darren Sproles
FB1-What happened to Heath Evans?
FB2?-Kolby Hurt
Defense:
DE-Will Smith/Junior Galette
DE-Alex Brown/Cameron Jordan
DT-Mitch King/Shaun Rogers
DT-Sedrick Ellis/Abrayo Franklin
ROLB-Jonathan Vilma/Jonathan Casillas
LOLB-Scott Shanle/Martez Wilson
MLB-Jo Lon Dunbar/Will Herring
SS-Roman Harper
FS-Malcolm Jenkins
CB-Jabari Greer/Patrick Robinson
CB-Tracy Porter/Patrick RobinsonPosted 08-22-2011 at 04:27 PM by joker-saint
-
Drew Brees not getting the respect he deserves
Peyton only has 1 title and he still gets plenty of respect.Posted 07-29-2011 at 05:36 AM by Saint_LB
-
Saints to play 49ers in 17 days?
Well...it's the exact same boat that every single team is in. The entire league is playing their first game in 2 weeks to a couple days over that. Not much else can really be done about it.Posted 07-26-2011 at 04:10 PM by Danny Cox
-
Drew Brees not getting the respect he deserves
i think Brady is a better QB than Rothlessburger. Two-dat sounds good to me. That's all that really matters and this is the year it could happen.Posted 07-11-2011 at 09:48 AM by NOS2SB
-
Drew Brees not getting the respect he deserves
I agree, I'm just saying I would mention him before Tom Brady. Lets face it though, QB's dont get any respect unless they have multiple titles under their belts. Thats OK though, Brees will get another one before he retires. Hopefully its more than one though. I just want to be able to say TWO DAT!!!!Posted 07-10-2011 at 08:08 PM by joker-saint
-
Drew Brees not getting the respect he deserves
Are you serious? Rothlessburger? I wouldn't even have mentioned his name. The Steelers won those SBs that he played in because of defense and bad calls.Posted 07-10-2011 at 04:06 PM by NOS2SB








