http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_ELFl2_1q7D...if_serious.jpg

"you guys give Spags way to much credit, his superbowl D which was his best to date was ranked 7th with elite guys like Osi,Tuck and Michael Strahan it wasnt like he had a awesome scheme just awesome players. You all are seriously fooled if the saints D will be that good. "



Actually, his 2008 Giants defense was ranked 5th.

So you're saying that since he could only get as high as a 7th (which was really fifth) ranked defense that we're "seriously fooled" if we think he can help the Saints 24th ranked defense?

And I think what was so impressive about those Giants defenses is the turn around they made over such a short time frame. In 2006, the year before he got there, the Giants were ranked 25th in overall defense. In 2007, his first year, they finished 7th overall and in 2008, 5th overall. You are correct that he had some big names on his defensive line but I don't think anyone would believe the personnel turned completely over in just one or two years.

Let me guess....you're here to bash the Saints in every possible way during the offseason and will be no where to be found when we beat the Falcons twice again this season....

Good point but Im not saying he wont make the D better Im saying they wont be anything close to what his one year wonder Giant defense was, do you really think he's going to turn you guys D around into a elite bunch like the Giants with average to below average players minus Jabari Greer(no offense intended)?

Ill be here whenever the Falcons are mentioned.

I just read back through the thread again. I didn't see where the falcons were mentioned. Or where any Saints fans claimed that Spags would make this defense elite. Just some respectful discourse with a Redskins fan and pointing out advantages the Saints would have in the opening game at home.

You're the only one throwing around the word elite.

My only fear is our recent performance against rookie or 2nd string QB's.

Here's the link ... 63 pages (and growing), all mentioning the Falcons ... you got some catching up to do, eh?

http://blackandgold.com/showthread.php?t=29111

This is actually kind of a myth, or only half right. The Saints (at least under Gregg Williams) didn't actually struggle against rookie or 2nd string QB's that much. They really only struggled when the QB that they faced in the game was not the one they expected to play during the week. The Rams and the Titans games last year. One changed QBs during the game itself, and the other, Sam Bradford was practicing for the Rams the week before, then decided he couldn't go. Arizona in 2010, Derek Anderson was supposed to be the starter but the Cardinals benched him unexpectedly. Cleveland in 2010, Colt McCoy had only started one game, one week before. The rest of the year had been somebody else.

We all remember they looked extremely terrible against Seattle in the 2010 playoffs, but all week long that week there was a QB controversy, and the starter wasn't announced until Thursday afternoon before the game. In games where the defense absolutely sucked, every one of these teams had some kind of QB controversy or injury, so the QB that was out there on the field was not the one that the team had game planned for.

They actually looked pretty great against young or 2nd string QBs like Matt Stafford or Mark Sanchez in 2009, Painter in Indy, even playing against Cam. Because they were prepared. It's only when people pull the switcheroo at the last minute, that the Saints defense looks really bad, and if you look around the league, almost any team would experience a drop off in their defense if it isn't the QB they prepared and expected to play.

It still sucks to watch it, though!

Good info. I hadn't thought of it that way before. It still doesn't speak well for the coaching though. Being prepared for the individual is very important but being prepared for the unexpected is also important. It seems those defenses weren't able to adjust on the fly very well.