Go Back   New Orleans Saints - blackandgold.com > Main > Saints

Cut Names Worth Considering

this is a discussion within the Saints Community Forum; How many of you agree that we should have kept Jamaal Branch over Aaron Stecker. It must be the Aaron Curse....

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-03-2006, 01:15 PM   #11
Rookie
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1
How many of you agree that we should have kept Jamaal Branch over Aaron Stecker. It must be the Aaron Curse.
achillesjaden is offline  
Old 09-03-2006, 01:46 PM   #12
Part Time Pimp
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,967
I think the plan was to keep both. Jamaal Branch is going to the practice squad. This may have been a smart move after all.
gandhi1007 is offline  
Old 09-03-2006, 01:54 PM   #13
Registered
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 42
LB Danny Clark Raiders
"That one was hard on me, that one was the hardest," Shell said of releasing Clark. "He gave us everything he had, worked hard. Not to say the rest of them didn't, but this kid was demoted to the second team and he worked his tail off and never said a word, just kept working. Hopefully he'll catch on with somebody." Art Shell
i'd take a chance here...
MJS2k7 is offline  
Old 09-03-2006, 02:01 PM   #14
Registered
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 42
http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/player...e?statsId=5275
MJS2k7 is offline  
Old 09-03-2006, 02:20 PM   #15
Registered
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 42
I think freddie roach got cut as well...if so, he'd be a good backup linebacker.

SUMMARY
Roach is a good athlete with good instincts and toughness, but he does not deal well with blockers and is not a consistently productive player. He tends to make most of his plays downfield because even when he uses his hands well against blockers, he tends to back up and give ground. While Roach has flashed the ability and willingness to fill the hole aggressively and the strength to stack the point of attack, he does not consistently get free to make the play and often he just gets tied up in the hole while the ball carrier runs right by him. He is a smart and instinctive linebacker, which helps him to do a solid job in zone coverage and to pick up running backs on short routes, but he lacks the playing speed and explosiveness to stay with RBs and tight ends down the field in man-to-man coverage. Does not use his hands well against low blocks and struggles to move around in traffic to make plays -- he needs a clear path to the ball to make plays. Overall, Roach has the ability to start at middle linebacker in the NFL, but he is not productive enough. Will do well in short-yardage situations and on special teams.



STRONG POINTS
Roach is a tough linebacker who can fill the gap aggressively, has the strength to stand up the lead blocker in the hole, free up and make the tackle. Has good instincts, which helps him consistently read and react to the play. Smooth and fluid dropping off the ball in zone coverage, reads the quarterback well and breaks and closes on the ball quickly to make the tackle right after the catch. Flashes the quick hands to jolt the blocker to stay free.



WEAKNESSES
Roach does not move through traffic well -- gets bumped around and struggles against low blocks in traffic. Does not use his hands consistently against blockers, and once a blocker gets a hold of him, he struggles to consistently shed and make plays. While he has athleticism to pick up running backs out of the backfield, he lacks the playing speed to stay with RBs and tight ends down the field. Lacks explosiveness to finish plays consistently.

MJS2k7 is offline  
Old 09-03-2006, 02:28 PM   #16
Registered
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 42
some other guys worth considering:

Stephon leflors qb-better than bouman.
http://www.nfl.com/transactions

Duane Starks CB
http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/12727
MJS2k7 is offline  
Old 09-03-2006, 02:33 PM   #17
1000 Posts +
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Williamsburg, VA (aka Southern Canada)
Posts: 1,689
Originally Posted by achillesjaden
How many of you agree that we should have kept Jamaal Branch over Aaron Stecker. It must be the Aaron Curse.
I'm very disappointed about Branch. See, just because Branch gets signed to our practice squad doesn't mean he can't be signed by another team. I'm not sure as to the exact procedure and rules, but I've heard this before. So, in reality he'll be as available to anyone else as he is to the Saints. That's why I'd have kept him over Stecker, who I've always liked, but for the money difference and the way Branch had played, Branch would have been my guy.
ScottyRo is offline  
Old 09-03-2006, 02:55 PM   #18
LB Mentallity
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Posts: 15,698
Blog Entries: 67
I go with danny clark oakland also. that is a cut that made no sense. just look at the #s from the last 2 yrs.

Year Team ................G Total Tckl Ast Sacks Int Yds Avg Lg TD Pass Def
2004 Oakland Raiders 16 129 ..98.0 31 ...2 ......0 ...0 ...0.0 ..0 ...0 ....5
2005 Oakland Raiders 16 113 ..82.0 31 ...1 ......0 ...0 ...0.0 ..0 ...0 ....7

Okay you DE freaks here is guy to put in your 100+ tackles a year and he is 29. now go for the 4 year deal and dump him at 33.

"We may have lost the game, but you'll be hurting tomorrow." Doug Atkins
hagan714 is offline  
Old 09-03-2006, 03:01 PM   #19
Part Time Pimp
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Posts: 1,967
Duane Starks would be an upgrade at the #2 CB position for us.
gandhi1007 is offline  
Old 09-03-2006, 05:37 PM   #20
500th Post
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 578
Starks is like 50 yrs old, go with the younger just as good player in Warfield, add Clark and a few corners
D24pick is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:13 PM.


Copyright 1997 - 2018 - BlackandGold.com
no new posts