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

Just what are the Saints about?

this is a discussion within the Saints Community Forum; Just what are the Saints about? Geez.. how many times have I asked myself that question? Too many times!! Is Aaron Brooks the QB? Is our defense any good? Do we need a LB or two? Do we need to ...

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-21-2005, 12:10 PM   #1
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,616
Just what are the Saints about?

Just what are the Saints about?

Geez.. how many times have I asked myself that question? Too many times!!

Is Aaron Brooks the QB?

Is our defense any good?

Do we need a LB or two?

Do we need to retool our offensive line?

Do we need help in the secondary?


Lots of questions and not a whole lot of definitive answers. Sure, we like to think we know, but, we don't!!!

One thing is for sure, though. Something is wrong. And its been wrong for a while.

Some say its coaching. Some say its the players. Some say its both!!!!!!

I've always believed winning starts at the TOP. It comes from the owner and it filters all the way down to the field.

Tom Benson is a very smart man when it comes to running a business. But football is different than your normal business.

I don't believe Benson knows how to build a winner. But, hey, lots of owners don't know much about "football.

That's why most owners seek a qualified GM who does know how to build a winner.

I belived top notch GMs are the "key" to it all.

Benson once signed a guy by the name of Jim Finks. Mr. Finks knew football. And he built a great team in New Orleans. It just happened to be before the free-agency era, when dynasties prevailed.

Oh how I wish Mr. Finks was still running the show.

But enough about that era.

Since Finks has been gone Benson has made some bad decisions. And I mean really bad...

... Think Ditka. As in Mike Ditka.

Then there was Randy Mueller. I think that was a great hire. But he was fired and the rest is history. I don't pretend to know why he was fired. And really don't care.

What I care about is getting a proven GM who is calling the shots.

Coachs shouldn't be allowed to control everything. Shannahan and Holmgren proved that doesn't work.

Mr. Benson -- Get us a GM!!! NOW!!!

I don't know what the answers are. But there's a GM out there who does!!



GumboBC is offline  
Latest Blogs
REFUND Last Blog: 12-07-2014 By: xan




Saints: A glimpse of the future Last Blog: 11-19-2014 By: lee909


Old 01-21-2005, 12:19 PM   #2
5000 POSTS! +
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: San Antonio, TX
Posts: 6,941
Just what are the Saints about?

Coachs shouldn\'t be allowed to control everything. Shannahan and Holmgren proved that doesn\'t work.
Gosh, I can\'t help it. So are you saying Haslett calls the shots? If so, you are saying he is to blame for the bad drafts and poor showings in free agency? And if so, why again is he not to blame for this team always being mediocre? And why is it again the coach should NOT get the blame? I see no mention of Loomis here so I have to rely on what you said, and our coach is making bad moves according to what you said so we need a good GM. Correct?
saintswhodi is offline  
Old 01-21-2005, 01:17 PM   #3
500th Post
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 954
Just what are the Saints about?

i have to agree-there is something wrong..mueller said that a good football person will not be successful with the saints-why is that?

I think that it starts with benson-he reminds me of the clippers owner--looking strictly for a profit..

then we have bad personell guys-whoever is making the decisions.

then our players seem to always be inconsistent and underachievers.
baronm is offline  
Old 01-21-2005, 03:20 PM   #4
Retired
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: New Orleans
Posts: 10,616
Just what are the Saints about?

Randy Mueller... sigh we need you. Oh that\'s right, he\'s back with the Seahawks after we let him go. Then we decided to promote Loomis... man what a great decision that was.
papz is offline  
Old 01-21-2005, 09:01 PM   #5
5000 POSTS! +
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 5,631
Just what are the Saints about?

Hey Billy - glad to see you\'re finally asking for help. Good move.

Is Aaron Brooks the QB?
No. Long-term he is not the answer, though there may not be immediate alternatives for a year or two - we traded them all away. But he is CLEARLY not the solution in the long-term.

Is our defense any good?
Probably not. They should be BETTER, but being 20th in the league is a 12 spot jump. They are generally less than average at best.

Do we need a LB or two?
Are you serious? LMAO. Yes. You just figuring that out? LOL

Do we need to retool our offensive line?
Nope. Our interior line is OK, and will be solid with more time together and two bookends at T that aren\'t generally jumping offsides, holding, and being flat-backed.

Do we need help in the secondary?
Long-term S is a more immediate area of concern, though a young relatively high draft pick to groom to play across from MM would be good. If our LBs improve enough and the D-line plays all year like they did in the last 4, then no, secondary is not an immediate concern.

If you need anymore help, just ask.

\"Excuses, excuses, excuses. That’s all anyone ever makes for the New Orleans Saints’ organization.\" - Eric Narcisse


\"Being a Saints fan is almost like being addicted to crack,\"
he said.[i]\"You know you should stop, but you just can\'t.\"
WhoDat is offline  
Old 01-22-2005, 01:19 PM   #6
Banned
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,616
Just what are the Saints about?

WhoDat --

Hmm.. Is Brooks the QB we need? Well, quite honestly, I don\'t know.

Until he puts together a season in which he QB\'s the Saints deep in the playoffs that can\'t be answered. At least in my mind.

But that\'s true of every NFL QB.

Is David Carr the right QB in Huston? Who knows? He might be. Then again, he might fail.

So, that question CANNOT be answered. Now, it can be DEBATED, but not answered.

The QB position is different from the receiver or runningback. Or any other position.

QB\'s are defined differently. A team can have a poor regular season record but if a receiver or runningback has a great statistical year, then they are considered very good or even great.

Not true for a QB. They are defined by their win/loss record. At least by most. It\'s not fair, but that\'s the way it is. There are cases, like Archie Manning, where that\'s not true, but for the most part that\'s the way it is.

Brooks has made enough mistakes to where a case can be made that he\'s not the answer. He\'s been the starter for 5 years and he\'s still got questions surrounding him. The case can be made that he needs to go.

But the same arguement could have be made about Terry Bradshaw in his first 5-years in the league. Along with a long list of other QBs throughout history.

Brooks\' play HAS been affected by other factors outside his control. More than anyting else, our defense has really hurtthis team and Aaron Brooks\' success. Always having to play catch-up is tough. It\'s tough on any QB.

Playing from behind in almost every game causes mistakes. It causes a QB to try to do too much. He starts pressing and makes mistakes. He has to take an inordinate amout of risky plays. He feels like he has to make something happen to put points on the board to overcome all the points the defense gives up.

And then injuries affect the QB a lot. If the runningback gets hurt and you can\'t run the ball, well, you become a one-horse show and you become predictable.

And if your offensive line can\'t block, well, the QBs time to make a good decision gets cut down to the point where they make bad decisions.

Brooks has had all those problem since he\'s been with the Saints. Well, except for his first year. Which happens to be the year we won our first playoff game.

Brooks has made his fair number of mistakes that can be directly pinned on him and no one else. But what QB hasn\'t?

In my mind, I\'ve seen good play out of Brooks to believe he should be the QB. I\'ve also seen enough problems around Brooks to know a lot of the problems at QB are not his fault.



GumboBC is offline  
Old 01-22-2005, 01:22 PM   #7
Cold as Ice!
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Da Big Easy
Posts: 2,978
Just what are the Saints about?

Randy Mueller... sigh we need you. Oh that\'s right, he\'s back with the Seahawks after we let him go. Then we decided to promote Loomis... man what a great decision that was.
Randy is good enough to have mediocre to good teams,,but not a champion!!!
FireVenturi is offline  
Old 01-22-2005, 01:24 PM   #8
Cold as Ice!
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Da Big Easy
Posts: 2,978
Just what are the Saints about?

on the contrary Randy is bettter than what we currently have, which is a :shrug:
FireVenturi is offline  
Old 01-23-2005, 09:32 AM   #9
5000 POSTS! +
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 5,631
Just what are the Saints about?

Quarterbacks don\'t deserve to be held to a higher standard? Of course they do. You claim that the play of all 10 guys on the offense affects the QB position more than any other. Yet you deny that the QB\'s play, individually, affects the team\'s play more than any single person.

The bottom line is that the QB is the most important player on the field 99 times out of 100. He affects the team\'s play like no other player can. Thus, when the team plays well, he gets accolades. When they suck, he\'s criticized. That\'s the nature of the beast, and EVERY QB deals with it. I\'m not going to feel sorry for little ole Aaron.

Look at the teams \"deep\" in the playoffs Billy. You will always see one thing. That have a QB who either is great, or is temporarily playing great ball. Brady, Roethlisberger, McNabb, Vick, Manning, Culpepper...

Even when you have guys like Delhomme and Dilfer, their team is there b/c they are extremely effective at playing their role. Now you can argue night and day about what you think AB\'s role in the offense is, or what it should be, but you cannot suggest with a straight face that he is performing it at a very high level. If his job is to be a game breaker, a la his cousin Vick, he is successful at breaking the game for the other team more often than for his own. If he is supposed to be a pocket passer who manages the team and efficiently distributes the ball, then he deserves to be fired on the spot.

Finally, your colors are coming through yet again my friend. You said that you can\'t tell if AB is right for the Saints until he takes them deep into the playoffs. By that I assume you mean an NFC Championship b/c he\'s been to the Divisional round. I guess then that the plan would be to keep him until the Saints either get the the NFC Championship or he retires without getting them there, at which time you would suggest he was wrong for the Saints all along?

Meanwhile, you criticize Peyton Manning, but he has taken his team \"deep\" into the playoffs. He\'s proven he can get them there. But when they don\'t succeed it\'s all his fault. Not his terrible defense\'s, or his RB\'s, or his line\'s, or his WR\'s. Peyton is the man to blame. But with Brooks - he must be without blame. All those other positions on the team hurt him, and that\'s not fair.

Double standard much?

\"Excuses, excuses, excuses. That’s all anyone ever makes for the New Orleans Saints’ organization.\" - Eric Narcisse


\"Being a Saints fan is almost like being addicted to crack,\"
he said.[i]\"You know you should stop, but you just can\'t.\"
WhoDat is offline  
Closed Thread

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:41 AM.


Copyright 1997 - 2014 - BlackandGold.com
no new posts