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

McKenzie was the main reason

this is a discussion within the Saints Community Forum; I believe that you play as good as the guy next to you. What I mean is....they ALL started to play great when Haz made those lineup changes....they ALL worked together. They finally came together as a team!! They finally ...

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-07-2005, 08:51 AM   #21
Rookie
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 18
McKenzie was the main reason

I believe that you play as good as the guy next to you.
What I mean is....they ALL started to play great when Haz made those lineup changes....they ALL worked together.
They finally came together as a team!! They finally became the team that we wanted to have and see. I hope it carries into the next season.
KEEP THE FAITH........GEAUX SAINTS!!!
bayouboy1 is offline  
Latest Blogs
How to really handle Ray Rice and AP Last Blog: 09-17-2014 By: neugey


The Lost Art of the Trade Last Blog: 08-30-2014 By: jeanpierre


Childhood Trauma Prevention Last Blog: 08-29-2014 By: Barry from MS


Old 01-07-2005, 10:21 AM   #22
100th Post
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Posts: 102
McKenzie was the main reason

How about that horrible non call on him vs Mohammed that was a sure pass interference? Or the two times Mohammed burned him deep but Delhomme overthrew him by about a yard?
What\'s your excuse for him allowing that final touchdown to Mohammed. Remember the one that almost let the Panthers back in the game. Mono e Mono and Mohammed was the one with the ball in his hands. Was McKenzie hurt? Had the pass rush failed to show up yet?
Champ Bailey probably picks off that pass and heads the other way for 6. So does Woodson, C. McAllister, Ty Law and a few other shut down corners.
There is a reason Green Bay dealt this guy for a second round pick. You don\'t let a shutdown corner go for any amount of discontent. Look at Ty Law. He was malcontent as well. The Patriots put him in time out but they never would have traded him or waived him.

[Edited on 6/1/2005 by stockman311]

[Edited on 6/1/2005 by stockman311]
Get a grip....number one, there\'s no such thing as a \"shut down\" corner. Repeat...THERE\'S NO SUCH THING AS A \"SHUT DOWN\" CORNER. All corners get beat. Even when he was at his best, the guy who Deion Sanders was covering still caught balls. Maybe not as many as with some other corners, but the myth of a \"shut down\" cornerback \"completely taking away a side of the field\" is just that--a myth.

Number two, if it\'s Champ Bailey in the McKenzie/Muhammed goal line situation like you said, what happens is.....the same dang thing. The balls thrown to the side opposite the defender, and Muhammed uses the fact that he knows where and on what timing the ball will be thrown, and more importantly, his size and strength advantage to completely screen Bailey away from the ball, and either he (Muhammed) makes like a basketball post player and receives an \"entry pass\" while bodying his defender away from the ball (which is what happened this time), or the pass\'s placement and timing aren\'t just right, and the ball falls incomplete. You needed to pick a different example than that, because with a receiver with the size and hands combo that Muhammed possesses, that route\'s success depends much more on the execution of the offense than on anything the defender can do. If the balls thrown AT the receiver, the CB has a chance...if it\'s thrown AWAY from the receiver to the off side, and the receiver is adept at screening a guy while reaching out and pulling the ball in, then there\'s not much the CB is going to do about it other than hope the ball\'s out of reach or grab the receiver and give up first and goal at the one.

Number three...as far as \"Muhammed burned him deep but Delhomme overthrew him\" goes...you DO understand that there\'s at least two ways to play man-to-man coverage, depending on what the DC\'s overall defense call is for the play? \"Normal\" coverage might be starting five or so yards off the receiver, with the responsibility to give enough of a cushion that the guy doesn\'t get behind you...you likely are in this if you\'re having trouble stopping the running game (like the case for most of the Saints\' season) because you\'re having to walk one or both of the safeties up into run support, and you won\'t have deep help over the top. You give up more of the three- and five-step drop dink and dunk stuff, but do more to avoid the big play. When the defensive line is just mauling the O-line (like the game on Sunday), or you\'re using a lot of LB blitzes to create pressure and you know the QB won\'t have time to hold the ball long enough for a receiver to get deep, you might call for \"press\" coverage with the CB mauling the receiver right off the line of scrimmage--he\'s told to jump the guy and keep him from being open in the \"line of scrimmage-to-5 to 10 yard\" range because you\'re not planning on there being enough time for him to get much deeper and you\'re gonna give the CB help over the top from a safety. In the instances where \"Muhammed burned McKenzie but Delhomme overthrew him\", McKenzie was in press coverage. If I remember in all cases Muhammed happened to be running a corner route, meaning he was running away from the safety help when he broke behind the corner. And as for the \"overthrows\"....you think they might have had something to do with the fact that Delhomme had either Grant, Howard, or Smith in his face by that time and was essentially (as he\'s prone to do) pitching it up for grabs with the hopes his receiver is somewhere close? Sort of just like the defense is designed, save the route happening to be the one going away from the help?

As for Charles Woodson...I can\'t believe you\'d use such a gutless slacker as him to try to bolster your point. Woodson broke onto the scene as a guy with wonderful athletic ability who could use it to take advantage of when a QB gets a little careless, trying to squeeze something where he shouldn\'t or letting a pass hang in the air just a little longer than he should. In his first three seasons, Woodson intercepted 10 passes. In the three and a half (injured half of the 2002 season) since he\'s picked off 6. In those first three years he defensed passes 38 times...in the next three and a half years, only 25 passes defensed. Just for comparison, in the three seasons prior to this one, when Fred Thomas was the starter at CB, he intercepted 10 passes and defensed 37. Essentially the exact same production as Woodson\'s top three years of his career as a \"shut down\" CB. McAlister\'s top three consecutive seasons (2001-03)? 37 passes defensed and 5 interception. And helped by a much better pass rush than the Saints have usually generated.
Puddinhead is offline  
Old 01-07-2005, 12:40 PM   #23
500th Post
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 690
McKenzie was the main reason

Gotta agree with Puddinghead. The real definition of a shut down corner is one who is comfortable playing man to man on their best receiver and has a better than average outing at the same time. The advantage is not the their best receiver catches no balls -- the advantage is gained in reallocating the other defenders. In essence you shut down their best receiver without double coverage giving you an extra defender.
4saintspirit is offline  
Old 01-07-2005, 09:10 PM   #24
Registered
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Baton Rouge
Posts: 96
McKenzie was the main reason

along with the comfortability of MM, the emergence of Fakhir, the return of Whitehead;

there was a point late this season where Haslet took away responsibility from Venturi. ive heard Haslet took as little/much as \"a more active role\" to \"play-calling\".
perhaps this decision should have been made earlier this season, or, dare i say(I DARE!), seasons ago.

id be happy to take a look on travelocity or expedia and find Venturi and Brooks a good price on a oneway ticket somewhere else.


jbutts is offline  
Old 01-08-2005, 09:28 AM   #25
Cold as Ice!
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Da Big Easy
Posts: 2,978
McKenzie was the main reason

along with the comfortability of MM, the emergence of Fakhir, the return of Whitehead;

there was a point late this season where Haslet took away responsibility from Venturi. ive heard Haslet took as little/much as \"a more active role\" to \"play-calling\".
perhaps this decision should have been made earlier this season, or, dare i say(I DARE!), seasons ago.

id be happy to take a look on travelocity or expedia and find Venturi and Brooks a good price on a oneway ticket somewhere else.

Who would be our QB
FireVenturi is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:04 AM.


Copyright 1997 - 2013 - BlackandGold.com
no new posts