New Orleans Saints comment of the day: Here's why preseason games are important
 

In response to Mike Triplett'e report on Jonathan Casillas starting and Scott Shanle moving to strongside linebacker, nola.com regular woodruff54 wrote:
"For those of you who say that preseason games are not important, this is why the games are important. Not because of the score, but the individual performance. Because of that game:
1. Galette - Before, was a long shot to the make the team; after, you can pencil him in.
2. Casillas - Before, trying to make the team; after, starting lineup.
3. Pirleaux, Torrence, Evans - Before, even money to make team; after, longshots.
4. Beavers - Before, long, long shot; after, even money.
5. Ramsey - Before, the buzzards were circling; after, odds on to be the 2nd QB.
6. Arrington - Before, longshot; after, 50/50.
7. Gay - Before, likely to make team; After, pencil him in as nickel back, not necessarily because of his play, but because Robinson is not ready to play nickel.
But probably the most important thing that we learned in this game is that we are not as good a team without Sharper. Our secondary is just not the same without him. I don't care how much potential Jenkins has, he is no Sharper and if Sharper is not able to play this year, our defense will not be as good as it was last year. I don't care if he is limping around out there like he was in the playoffs, we need him back there playing centerfield."

Link Back

Not everybody learned from this game. Most people paying attention already knew this.

Pointing out that we as fans and the media get to see how well guys are playing is not justification for having to pay for four games that don't count.

5. Ramsey - Before, the buzzards were circling; after, odds on to be the 2nd QB.

Ok but they still have three more Presason game to play.

Preseason is critical to evaluate the players and find out what they can bring to the table. I agree with Saint LB that four games are just too much for preseason. The question is........are two games enough to effectively evaluate all the players on the roster? How many games are too many? If we are going to lengthen the season then we need to limit the number of preseason games.

One game, does not a season make...

In regards to preseason games; let's not kid ourselves here, YES coaches need the games to evaluate talent and prep for the shortest season in pro sports, but its also about revenue for the league, players and owners.

If we're gonna keep the four games then maybe we need to expand the roster by a handful of players.

Since the league is going to 18 regular season games soon, expanding the roster makes sense due to the increased propensity for injuries. It'll shorten football careers also.

Nothing has been decided about going to an 18 game schedule yet, I am absolutely against it. 16 is enough. All too often as it is, the last 2 or 3 games don't matter as play off positions are already locked up, do we want 4 or 5 meaningless games at the end of the season? Also its a real grind for the players, and it could shorten even more what are already short careers in the NFL. I"m fine with cutting preseason games but not with adding them to the reg. season.

6. Arrington - Before, longshot; after, 50/50.

I only have a problem with this one. I think SP saw Arrington not block the Pats CB in the enzone that tackled Chase on the roll out. That probably would have been a TD if Arrington had blocked.

The flip side...

If they had 2 more games, maybe every now and then one of those teams who previously would have been eliminated could now go on a run with 4 or 5 games left rather than 2 or 3 and win 4 or 5 in a row and have a story-book ending to a season that otherwise would have been over.

If we had to play two more games last season, there is a good chance that our season would have been over. Instead we rested those two weeks, got our guys healthy, and eventually won a Superbowl.