Re: Run the damn ball
 

Yeah I know all that, bro. But even a really good thing can become predictable. Last year is last year; now there is plenty of film of Pete Carmichael calling the plays for the Saints from last year, for people to study and look for tendencies and figure out what he likes to do and get a feel for his playcalling and stuff. Last year, when the Saints O were doing so great, on that big tear, other teams DIDN'T have that film to look at, and say THIS IS PETE CARMICHAEL CALLING THE PLAYS, what does he like to do in certain situations? Nobody had a clue what was coming at them; but now I think they maybe kinda do, or can sniff it out a bit better.

I have been watching ever since he started taking over the playcalling, my friend, and it's getting to where I can almost sorta see certain plays coming from a mile away, on certain downs and distances and situations. Not ALL the time, just sometimes. That's what I'm saying.

Last year was great -- but did the offense lead the league in anything yesterday, or during this preseason? Have they really lit it up? Not really. One explanation is that defenses may be adjusting to Carmichael now that they can study and dissect him, which before they couldn't.

Re: Run the damn ball
 

How do you explain the second half? We did put up 32 points with a chance for 8 more in the end?

Without the penalties and drops the offense would have been rolling like always...

Re: Run the damn ball
 

You're probably right. It's probably not as bad as I'm making it sound. Our offense was rolling in the second half. They looked great -- whenever Washington was up by two scores.

Re: Run the damn ball
 

It's a passing league. Really need to catch the ball and hang on to it.

Re: Run the damn ball
 

I think I just woke up in Bryant-Denny Stadium!

Re: Run the damn ball
 

I said something about running the ball in another thread and it was replied that we had to throw because we were behind.

My beef is why we weren't running the ball in the opening series (3 and out, three straight passes) or on the goal line (FOUR straight passes, eventually completing to Sproles).

We have good running backs and I just don't get why Carmichael didn't want to use them. PT looked good, Ingram was never really given a chance (two or three carries I think), and if you're gonna activate Cadet over Ivory, put him in the freakin' game and give him a chance to do something

Re: Run the damn ball
 

Whilst we did have to throw the ball because we were behind, your exactly right

Throwing the ball constantly is what put us in a bad position (along with the penalties) and Pete tends to turn crazy when the passes don't work so he passes some more

Our offense runs the ball to help the pass, that's the way it is, this formula was found in 2009 when mike bell and PT combined for 150 yards every game and we went on a 13 game win streak, Pete needs to take a step back and let PT do his thing

Re: Run the damn ball
 

"All man," Haslett said. "All man. We didn't want him having easy areas to throw to.
You run vs. man.
4 WR spread them out and run.

Re: Run the damn ball
 

Agreed. How about a freaking draw play? Running for 10 yards and a 1st down is more effective than an incomplete pass or interception. Trust me, I did the math.

Re: Run the damn ball
 

Five RB's. Ten carries. Only two of them touched the ball on run plays. I don't care how many penalties there were or how far we were down. That is absolutely ridiculous. If you have that many weapons at your disposal, USE THEM!