The Key to Why We Lost

SaintPauly · 01-21-2007, 09:51 PM

So, I guess the Bears just played the "perfect" game today. No mistakes at all, just completely perfect football, in all aspects. That's the only explanation for the lack of calls on their side of the ball. Not the refs being somewhat biased. We have all witnessed greatness in Grossman. Why even play the Superbowl?

bulldog1865 · 01-21-2007, 10:22 PM

Sure the bears didn't turn the ball over, but rex grossman does not deserve any credit for that win... he was timid and off the mark all day, and that touchdown was about as lucky as you can get. which brings me to fred thomas.... he's terrible which i'm sure you all noticed... asante samuel of new england will be a free agent after this year, and i'm sure will be looking for a big contract... saints will have plenty of cap room and i think they should go after him.... get rid of thomas asap and give duece the 22 jersey.

GoldRush26 · 01-21-2007, 11:00 PM

Originally Posted by saintpaul25

So, I guess the Bears just played the "perfect" game today. No mistakes at all, just completely perfect football, in all aspects. That's the only explanation for the lack of calls on their side of the ball. Not the refs being somewhat biased. We have all witnessed greatness in Grossman. Why even play the Superbowl?

Refs being biased or not, any team that loses 4 fumbles is going to lose the game. Even if you take away the Lewis fumble, that's still 3. I don't see how anyone can overcome that. Rex didn't have to play a great game when they are wacking the ball loose from our players deep in our own territory.

But "the refs are biased" line is bogus. Other fans this season could've (and did) make that same claim that the refs were in favor of us in more than a few of our games. We got a lot of good calls go our way in games too.

Their D is outstanding still. I think a lot of people got swept away with the media falling in love with the Saints and saying how absolutely horrible the Bears were and how they had no chance at all this week. That D is still outstanding, although not as good as they were in the first 7 weeks of the season. The Ravens and Bears both beat us by hitting us in the mouth.

kurtrus · 01-21-2007, 11:20 PM

I have mixed feelings. On one side I feel the Saints didn't get into the rhythm that marked successful games but on the other hand, I saw some horrible officiating that created significant swings in momentum.

Case 1: Michael Lewis fumble. He didn't fumble. He was down. Result was a short field for the Bears and a field goal.

Case 2: Offensive interference call. Casual contact within five yards. Official makes the call behind the defensive player. How could he have seen Copper? Result was a swing of 17 yards -- 2-3-NO31 vs 1-20-NO14. Saints punt. Another short field and a Bears field goal.

Case 3: Brees fumble in the fourth quarter. Brees had the ball knocked out of a tucked position but still held it on his side when he went down. Result yet again. Short field. Demoralized defense. Bears touchdown.

Take these mistakes by the zebras away. What happens? Of course, we'll never know. But, I feel cheated that we didn't get the chance to play without having the deck stacked against us. No, we didn't play at the same level we were capable of but, I firmly believe, we could have still beat this team, this day, on a head-to-head in the final minutes. Their defense caused the safety that changed the tone of the game. But, what if the score had been 14-12 New Orleans at that point? Would the Saints have folded or the Bears been so confident?

If Deuce was hurt as conjectured, then our gameplan was obviously disrupted. If not, we made a vital mistake not to use him more.

Brees looked like he was trying everything he could. He threw behind a few receivers but on a couple of those on replay, it appeared that he had little choice because of the pass rush.

So, at some level, I want to credit the Bears defense with humbling our offense. They created the situations in which we did not execute. They caused the safety via a strong rush. But, I can't give credit to the so-called Bears offense. They got short fields and couldn't convert when the game was still being contested. With our offense, it would have been Cha-Ching.
I'm at a lost to understand how the current play of Rex Grossman gets him the honor of playing in a Super Bowl. Cruel world.

I feel the Saints played honorably although the score does not reflect it. I feel they were not playing their best although I think it might have been good enough if the officiating had been better. I am saddened that a golden opportunity has passed us by. Success is fleeting (remember the year 2000) and this combination of players/coaches/staff will surely shift. One or more fine players will be traded, be past his prime, be hurt, or fall to free agency. So, it will be a different Saints team next year - not this one that had made history. I am sad. A great chapter has ended and I miss it already. Today is for grief and pain. Tomorrow I can talk about what a ride it's been. But, today I will cry in my beer and think about the Super Bowl that could have been.

xan · 01-22-2007, 01:09 AM

The true turning point of the game came when Reggie Bush pointed his finger at Brian Urlacher and hot dogged over the goal line. Say what you will about turnovers, refs, etc, that was the single rallying moment for the Bears. During the press conferences after the game, each player pointed to that event as their transcendant moment.

There's a difference between winning and beating. If you go into the game thinking you have to beat the opposition, you've lost. If you go into the game trying to win it, you've got a chance. The bears kept everything in front of them and waited until the Saints self destructed trying to beat them. I wasn't all that impressed with the Bears, but I was mystified by practically everything the Saints did in losing.

I hope this feeling lingers into next season and pisses them off so much that they never want to feel like this again.

rich006 · 01-22-2007, 02:16 AM

I also was calling Deuce's name all game. Had no clue he was hurt. Now it makes sense. I agree that Bush didn't help his team with the taunting. I think he'll learn from it.

A lot of things went right for the Saints this year--very few injuries, some lucky bounces, and the unexpected success of Colston for example. Next year will be tougher, but I think the team will be better. They've built a solid foundation on the model of the Patriots, with good coaching, team-first mindset, and the critical decision to hire players with heart and smarts instead of good athletes who can't play football. I'm optimistic the Saints' success will continue for a long time, much like the Patriots. I'm not predicting 3 Super Bowls in 4 years, but I think the Saints will be in the playoffs most of the time in the next several years.

And if not, at least we had one good year.

Thanks, Saints!

SaintPauly · 01-22-2007, 05:16 AM

Once again, with all due respect, this "we had a great regular season" attitude, has got to stop. Contrary to popular belief, this is NOT, the first time we've won the division, and also NOT the first time we've been in the play offs. For all of you hardcore fans in here, you guys' memories are not so good. I take it as an insult, that you guys seem to dismiss the work that the Mora era Saints did. No, they didn't win a play off game, but they were busting their butts for us fans, every game they played, helping bring the little bit of respect we did have at the time. Last time I checked, Mora has taken the Saints to more play off appearances than any other coach we've ever had. YES, this was a great season, but this is not the first good season we've had in our history. I seem to remember Atlanta being in the championship game a few years back, where are they now? I remember the Bucs winning a Superbowl, where are they now? Getting to the play offs, is not an easy feat, and there's also a damn good chance, we might not go back to the play offs for another ten years. The game is over, yes, and their's nothing we can do about it, but damn guys, don't disrespect all of the players who came before this team, by demeaning their efforts. They were, and are just as much a part of the Saints family, as Brees, Bush, or McCallister.

DJLengai · 01-22-2007, 12:14 PM

Man,

I'll try and make it real simple: Bad weather = run the ball
Deuce had 6 carries for 18 yards. Knowing we were playing in wet and muddy conditions our coach should have activated Branch for Stecker so we could impose our will running the ball with Karney and our O-Line with Harris out. Payton totally ignored the fact that it was a wet, snowing, muddy game and tried to play like we were in a dome. The Bears realized this basic, fundemental rule of football and ran it down our throats. We should have ran at least 1 of the 3 plays before Cundiff's kick and we most probably would have gone up 17-16 and the game would have been different. At 14-16 you do not have to abandon the run becuase of turnovers, except we never tried to run from the first play. The turnovers were in the passing game becuase it's stupid to be "pass only" in a wet, muddy game. Things were rocky in the first half and the way to right the ship when down by 2 FGs is to run the darn ball! We didn't plan well for it and Lombardi is turning over in his grave screaming, "What the hell is going on here?!" just like me. You run in wet muddy games. Horrible game plan.

Bise · 01-22-2007, 03:22 PM

Concerning Bush pointing at Urlacher..... I loved it. I saw it as Bush trying to motivate the team. He gave them something to hang there hat on for a short time.

Cheesy? probably but we needed a spark. I laughed at all the Bears trying to catch him..... gotta admit they didn't have a chance.

DJLengai · 01-22-2007, 05:36 PM

Originally Posted by DJLengai

Boy,

Stecker did a great job today! Seriously, If a regular fan like me knows that in a wet and muddy game you power run, why did Payton keep throwing? Chicago used the power run and won. Where was Deuce? He had what 5 carries and did well each one.

We should have used Stecker's roster spot for Jamaal Branch and run it with Karney down their throats like they did us and use the FG and field position to our advantage.

Prime example: The key drive where we lost was Cundiff's FG try. We threw the ball 3 times before that kick. If we would have run the ball for extra yardage, Cundiff would have had extra room for the kick and we would have gone up 17-16. The safety and all that afterwards would ahve not occured.
We beat Philly with Deuce and we didn't even TRY Deuce today. Branch and Deuce could have hammered them all game long.

In the first half we struggled and kept throwing. When you need positive momentum, you run the ball and get 3rd and short. Payton was totally pig headed to not go to Deuce when it was obvious we needed it.

Yibiddy Dibiddy turnovers, not pounding the rock is why we lost...period.

Here's a quote from Sean Payton today discussing exactly what I was talking about:

Q: Did you see the safety as a turning point in the game?

A: There was a sequence in the third quarter where I thought we had some momentum. We had just scored and (Reggie) Bush had just scored on the long touchdown. We forced the three and out and had a decent drive. On a run, Mike Karney put us down to about the 29 (yard line). That three and out really hurt. It was a field goal. We were a little bit further than we wanted to be for John (Carney) at that point, so Billy (Cundiff) kicked it. If there is one series I wrestle with myself as a play-caller, it would be that sequence of when we are at the 29 and maybe punching it a little bit closer. I think that there was an opportunity to go ahead. We weren't able to. Consequently, they ended up punting. Brad Maynard did a great job of pinning us back. I would say that within that seven or eight minute time block, there was a chance to take advantage of the momentum and we came up short. Right there I think was a critical point. I think Chicago had given up a couple of big plays, but had played pretty well defensively. I wouldn't argue with that.

01-21-2007, 11:00 PM	#23
GoldRush26 500th Post Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 594	Originally Posted by saintpaul25 So, I guess the Bears just played the "perfect" game today. No mistakes at all, just completely perfect football, in all aspects. That's the only explanation for the lack of calls on their side of the ball. Not the refs being somewhat biased. We have all witnessed greatness in Grossman. Why even play the Superbowl? Refs being biased or not, any team that loses 4 fumbles is going to lose the game. Even if you take away the Lewis fumble, that's still 3. I don't see how anyone can overcome that. Rex didn't have to play a great game when they are wacking the ball loose from our players deep in our own territory. But "the refs are biased" line is bogus. Other fans this season could've (and did) make that same claim that the refs were in favor of us in more than a few of our games. We got a lot of good calls go our way in games too. Their D is outstanding still. I think a lot of people got swept away with the media falling in love with the Saints and saying how absolutely horrible the Bears were and how they had no chance at all this week. That D is still outstanding, although not as good as they were in the first 7 weeks of the season. The Ravens and Bears both beat us by hitting us in the mouth.
GoldRush26 500th Post Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 594

01-21-2007, 11:20 PM	#24
kurtrus Rookie Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 5	I have mixed feelings. On one side I feel the Saints didn't get into the rhythm that marked successful games but on the other hand, I saw some horrible officiating that created significant swings in momentum. Case 1: Michael Lewis fumble. He didn't fumble. He was down. Result was a short field for the Bears and a field goal. Case 2: Offensive interference call. Casual contact within five yards. Official makes the call behind the defensive player. How could he have seen Copper? Result was a swing of 17 yards -- 2-3-NO31 vs 1-20-NO14. Saints punt. Another short field and a Bears field goal. Case 3: Brees fumble in the fourth quarter. Brees had the ball knocked out of a tucked position but still held it on his side when he went down. Result yet again. Short field. Demoralized defense. Bears touchdown. Take these mistakes by the zebras away. What happens? Of course, we'll never know. But, I feel cheated that we didn't get the chance to play without having the deck stacked against us. No, we didn't play at the same level we were capable of but, I firmly believe, we could have still beat this team, this day, on a head-to-head in the final minutes. Their defense caused the safety that changed the tone of the game. But, what if the score had been 14-12 New Orleans at that point? Would the Saints have folded or the Bears been so confident? If Deuce was hurt as conjectured, then our gameplan was obviously disrupted. If not, we made a vital mistake not to use him more. Brees looked like he was trying everything he could. He threw behind a few receivers but on a couple of those on replay, it appeared that he had little choice because of the pass rush. So, at some level, I want to credit the Bears defense with humbling our offense. They created the situations in which we did not execute. They caused the safety via a strong rush. But, I can't give credit to the so-called Bears offense. They got short fields and couldn't convert when the game was still being contested. With our offense, it would have been Cha-Ching. I'm at a lost to understand how the current play of Rex Grossman gets him the honor of playing in a Super Bowl. Cruel world. I feel the Saints played honorably although the score does not reflect it. I feel they were not playing their best although I think it might have been good enough if the officiating had been better. I am saddened that a golden opportunity has passed us by. Success is fleeting (remember the year 2000) and this combination of players/coaches/staff will surely shift. One or more fine players will be traded, be past his prime, be hurt, or fall to free agency. So, it will be a different Saints team next year - not this one that had made history. I am sad. A great chapter has ended and I miss it already. Today is for grief and pain. Tomorrow I can talk about what a ride it's been. But, today I will cry in my beer and think about the Super Bowl that could have been.
kurtrus Rookie Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 5

01-22-2007, 01:09 AM	#25
xan Professor Crab and Site Donor 2014 Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Princeton Posts: 3,355 Blog Entries: 34	The true turning point of the game came when Reggie Bush pointed his finger at Brian Urlacher and hot dogged over the goal line. Say what you will about turnovers, refs, etc, that was the single rallying moment for the Bears. During the press conferences after the game, each player pointed to that event as their transcendant moment. There's a difference between winning and beating. If you go into the game thinking you have to beat the opposition, you've lost. If you go into the game trying to win it, you've got a chance. The bears kept everything in front of them and waited until the Saints self destructed trying to beat them. I wasn't all that impressed with the Bears, but I was mystified by practically everything the Saints did in losing. I hope this feeling lingers into next season and pisses them off so much that they never want to feel like this again.
	Calvin: "I wish I was a Tiger." Hobbes: "Common lament."

01-22-2007, 02:16 AM	#26
rich006 100th Post Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 335	I also was calling Deuce's name all game. Had no clue he was hurt. Now it makes sense. I agree that Bush didn't help his team with the taunting. I think he'll learn from it. A lot of things went right for the Saints this year--very few injuries, some lucky bounces, and the unexpected success of Colston for example. Next year will be tougher, but I think the team will be better. They've built a solid foundation on the model of the Patriots, with good coaching, team-first mindset, and the critical decision to hire players with heart and smarts instead of good athletes who can't play football. I'm optimistic the Saints' success will continue for a long time, much like the Patriots. I'm not predicting 3 Super Bowls in 4 years, but I think the Saints will be in the playoffs most of the time in the next several years. And if not, at least we had one good year. Thanks, Saints!
rich006 100th Post Join Date: Oct 2003 Posts: 335

01-22-2007, 05:16 AM	#27
SaintPauly Senior Citizen Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Gulfport, MS Posts: 3,180 Blog Entries: 1	Once again, with all due respect, this "we had a great regular season" attitude, has got to stop. Contrary to popular belief, this is NOT, the first time we've won the division, and also NOT the first time we've been in the play offs. For all of you hardcore fans in here, you guys' memories are not so good. I take it as an insult, that you guys seem to dismiss the work that the Mora era Saints did. No, they didn't win a play off game, but they were busting their butts for us fans, every game they played, helping bring the little bit of respect we did have at the time. Last time I checked, Mora has taken the Saints to more play off appearances than any other coach we've ever had. YES, this was a great season, but this is not the first good season we've had in our history. I seem to remember Atlanta being in the championship game a few years back, where are they now? I remember the Bucs winning a Superbowl, where are they now? Getting to the play offs, is not an easy feat, and there's also a damn good chance, we might not go back to the play offs for another ten years. The game is over, yes, and their's nothing we can do about it, but damn guys, don't disrespect all of the players who came before this team, by demeaning their efforts. They were, and are just as much a part of the Saints family, as Brees, Bush, or McCallister.
	What's popular is not always right, and what's right is not always popular.....

01-21-2007, 09:51 PM	#21
SaintPauly Senior Citizen Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Gulfport, MS Posts: 3,180 Blog Entries: 1	So, I guess the Bears just played the "perfect" game today. No mistakes at all, just completely perfect football, in all aspects. That's the only explanation for the lack of calls on their side of the ball. Not the refs being somewhat biased. We have all witnessed greatness in Grossman. Why even play the Superbowl?

Latest Blogs
2023 New Orleans Saints: Training Camp Last Blog: 08-01-2023 By: MarchingOn Puck the Fro Browl! Last Blog: 02-05-2023 By: neugey CFP: "Just Keep Doing What You're Doing" Last Blog: 12-08-2022 By: neugey

01-21-2007, 10:22 PM	#22
bulldog1865 Rookie Join Date: Dec 2006 Location: Louisiana Posts: 29	Sure the bears didn't turn the ball over, but rex grossman does not deserve any credit for that win... he was timid and off the mark all day, and that touchdown was about as lucky as you can get. which brings me to fred thomas.... he's terrible which i'm sure you all noticed... asante samuel of new england will be a free agent after this year, and i'm sure will be looking for a big contract... saints will have plenty of cap room and i think they should go after him.... get rid of thomas asap and give duece the 22 jersey.

01-22-2007, 12:14 PM	#28
DJLengai 100th Post Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 168	Man, I'll try and make it real simple: Bad weather = run the ball Deuce had 6 carries for 18 yards. Knowing we were playing in wet and muddy conditions our coach should have activated Branch for Stecker so we could impose our will running the ball with Karney and our O-Line with Harris out. Payton totally ignored the fact that it was a wet, snowing, muddy game and tried to play like we were in a dome. The Bears realized this basic, fundemental rule of football and ran it down our throats. We should have ran at least 1 of the 3 plays before Cundiff's kick and we most probably would have gone up 17-16 and the game would have been different. At 14-16 you do not have to abandon the run becuase of turnovers, except we never tried to run from the first play. The turnovers were in the passing game becuase it's stupid to be "pass only" in a wet, muddy game. Things were rocky in the first half and the way to right the ship when down by 2 FGs is to run the darn ball! We didn't plan well for it and Lombardi is turning over in his grave screaming, "What the hell is going on here?!" just like me. You run in wet muddy games. Horrible game plan.
DJLengai 100th Post Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 168

01-22-2007, 03:22 PM	#29
Bise 100th Post Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 154	Concerning Bush pointing at Urlacher..... I loved it. I saw it as Bush trying to motivate the team. He gave them something to hang there hat on for a short time. Cheesy? probably but we needed a spark. I laughed at all the Bears trying to catch him..... gotta admit they didn't have a chance.
Bise 100th Post Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 154

01-22-2007, 05:36 PM	#30
DJLengai 100th Post Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 168	Re: The Key to Why We Lost Originally Posted by DJLengai Boy, Stecker did a great job today! Seriously, If a regular fan like me knows that in a wet and muddy game you power run, why did Payton keep throwing? Chicago used the power run and won. Where was Deuce? He had what 5 carries and did well each one. We should have used Stecker's roster spot for Jamaal Branch and run it with Karney down their throats like they did us and use the FG and field position to our advantage. Prime example: The key drive where we lost was Cundiff's FG try. We threw the ball 3 times before that kick. If we would have run the ball for extra yardage, Cundiff would have had extra room for the kick and we would have gone up 17-16. The safety and all that afterwards would ahve not occured. We beat Philly with Deuce and we didn't even TRY Deuce today. Branch and Deuce could have hammered them all game long. In the first half we struggled and kept throwing. When you need positive momentum, you run the ball and get 3rd and short. Payton was totally pig headed to not go to Deuce when it was obvious we needed it. Yibiddy Dibiddy turnovers, not pounding the rock is why we lost...period. Here's a quote from Sean Payton today discussing exactly what I was talking about: Q: Did you see the safety as a turning point in the game? A: There was a sequence in the third quarter where I thought we had some momentum. We had just scored and (Reggie) Bush had just scored on the long touchdown. We forced the three and out and had a decent drive. On a run, Mike Karney put us down to about the 29 (yard line). That three and out really hurt. It was a field goal. We were a little bit further than we wanted to be for John (Carney) at that point, so Billy (Cundiff) kicked it. If there is one series I wrestle with myself as a play-caller, it would be that sequence of when we are at the 29 and maybe punching it a little bit closer. I think that there was an opportunity to go ahead. We weren't able to. Consequently, they ended up punting. Brad Maynard did a great job of pinning us back. I would say that within that seven or eight minute time block, there was a chance to take advantage of the momentum and we came up short. Right there I think was a critical point. I think Chicago had given up a couple of big plays, but had played pretty well defensively. I wouldn't argue with that.
DJLengai 100th Post Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 168