Why not Delhomme?
 

Of the quarterbacks out on the market this off-season, Jake Delhomme looks like the best overall value to me. Sure, there are proven guys with more experience, like Plummer or Jeff George, but they're likely to cost a lot. Then there are the young guys, who are cheap but risky. The only guy I see that really seems to compare to Delhomme is Marc Bulger, who is a RFA for the Rams.

Now, the Saints will have to go out and get another quarterback if Delhomme leaves. The rumor seems to be that they would look to a veteran to come in to help Brooks and O'Sullivan along in their development. Delhomme has also said, as we all know by now, that he would love to end his career in NO, but wants a chance to start... SO

Why don't the Saints sign him and give him that shot?! No team, none at all, is going to give Delhomme a starting job on a silver platter. No matter where he goes he is going to have to earn it in Training Camp. He already knows our system, he wants to stay here, he's valuable to the team, give him that shot to start.

I know that the Saints say that Brooks is their guy, but he's coming off of a shaky second-half of the season and now shoulder surgery. We know he seemed to play better when Blake was on the sidelines looming, so challenge him. What's the worst that could happen? Either Brooks steps up and proves himself... and hopefully plays motivated all year... or he cracks under the pressure, which is not what you want in a QB anyway. On the flip side, Delhomme is given a real chance to compete. If he wins out, great, he got what he wanted. If not, then hopefully Brooks plays better and Delhomme may be one of the five best back ups in the league. Someone explain to me why the Saints wouldn't fight to keep this guy? He's young, talented, smart, loyal, and it doesn't seem to me that he'll be any more or less expensive than a veteran who we'll sign to a short-term contract. Shouldn't we want to keep this kind of young talent?

Why not Delhomme?
 

Fair is fair, and I\'d LOVE to see the Saints keep Jake. The only problem I have with what you\'re saying is that you indicate Jake was never given a fair shot at the starting position. I\'m not sure if that\'s true, but if it is then his mistreatment goes back beyond Haz\'s tenure with the team doesn\'t it? I\'m guessing you really do believe Jake has never been given a fair oppurtunity tho, as evidenced by your saying, \"Delhomme is given a real chance to compete.\" WhoDat, it\'s time for you to get real man.

I\'m not so sure we should be too worried about Brooks\' sugery, since Jake himself has recovered from the very same injury. Aaron will be ready to roll when training camp rolls around. If Jake can win the staring job then I\'m all for it, but you\'re back to the same \'ol WhoDat when you insinuate Brooks isn\'t motivated by saying you hope he \"plays motivated all year\". Here you go again. You also insinuate that Brooks \"cracks under pressure\" which is surely not the case. He didn\'t crack when he was 20 points down in the Chicago game, or bringing the team back against Atlanta and Minnesota. Once again, you\'re looking at the big picture and doing your level best to pin it on Brooks. I\'m not buying it baby, but maybe you can sell it on the street corner.

Why not Delhomme?
 

It\'s not the same old argument... b/c I\'m not saying that Delhomme should start... I don\'t know why Saintfan came in here with that Brooks noise, b/c I certainly don\'t want to hear it. I am trying to talk about a BACK UP quarterback. I started another thread for the Brooks/Delhomme argument. Keep that discussion in that thread please everyone.

In any case, to me, the best value for the Saints is Delhomme. He doesn\'t have to learn the system, he\'s still relatively young, and he has potential (oops, I said that word). Ha! Anyway, the point is that I don\'t know why the Saints aren\'t trying to keep him a little harder than they seem to be trying. They seem content to let him go.

In any case, if that happens I\'d rather see a guy like Bulger come in before I\'d want to see an older veteran. I thought that the whole idea that Haslett and this organization has been pushing is building for the future. You\'ve got three young QBs, two of which are good enough to start. I know a lot of the decision whether to stay or go falls on Jake, but why wouldn\'t the Saints at least try to resign him?

Why not Delhomme?
 

Good point, he is a liability either way... but again, like you said, how do you let this guy get away for free. I mean, the bottom line is winning right? You try to get the best player for your money in any situation, right? Is Delhomme not the best possible back up for this team, even if the have to pay him millions? I mean, if they go out and sign some veteran he\'s gonna get millions. If they sign some unproven player then they save money, but happens if Brooks goes down? Then we\'re in real trouble.

Why not Delhomme?
 

Ahhhhh, so much contradiction. Ain\'t it fun? You\'re absolutely right WhoDat, the Saints should do everything they can to re-sign Jake. He\'s more than just a quality backup. I, like you, believe that Jake could do well as the starter for this team.

Now, let me induldge you as to why I \"came in here with that Brooks noise\". It\'s because I see you trying to make your argument against Brooks by bolstering Jake. You\'re sneaky for sure, but I\'m on ya like a hawk buddy. I submit the following statement typed by YOU in the opening post of this thread:

\"I know that the Saints say that Brooks is their guy, but he\'s coming off of a shaky second-half of the season and now shoulder surgery.\"

Define shaky second-half. Now I\'ll agree that the injury obviously materialized in watching Brooks throw the ball, and he did make some poor passes after the injury, but he threw ONE INT in the month of December, and that was a deflected ball. He threw the game winning (and season saving) TD pass to Reed. Jake Reed dropped that ball after it hit him chest high in the hands. Just makin sure we\'re more factual here than vague.

You also typed the following in the opening post of this thread:

\"Either Brooks steps up and proves himself... and hopefully plays motivated all year... or he cracks under the pressure, which is not what you want in a QB anyway. \"

Are you saying Brooks isn\'t motivated? Are you saying he cracks under pressure? Man, like I said, I see these little things. You\'re trying to make your point in a very subtle way...clever I admit, but again, I\'m onto ya!

You say you, \" don\'t know why Saintfan came in here with that Brooks noise, b/c I certainly don\'t want to hear it.\" Well now you know why don\'t you? If you wanna talk about Jake\'s potential I\'m pretty sure I do more agreeing with you than disagreeing, but if you\'re gonna try and drag Brooks down as a means to an end to make your argument for Jake I\'m gonna bust you on it everytime.

Why not Delhomme?
 

Jesus Saintfan, talk about something or someone other than Aaron Brooks. Please. For the love of God. You haven\'t changed my mind in the slightest about Aaron. I doubt you\'ve done much to change anyone else\'s opinion. We know what you think about the guy, congratulations. At this point I\'m worried that you\'re so obsessed that you\'re stalking the guy. Leave it alone, nobody wants to talk about Aaron Brooks anymore and we\'ve all certainly heard your opinion. I\'m trying to talk about something else. I started two new threads today to do that and still it comes back to Brooks. I wonder if you can speak intelligently about any other topic... I haven\'t seen it so far which puts your credibility on the line when it comes to Brooks as well. Seriously man, enough. Talk about something else.

Why not Delhomme?
 

Gator

To answer you\'re question - yes and no. I have no idea who will be the better quarterback in the long run. I started this particular thread to talk about the Saints off-season dealings with Delhomme. I just don\'t know who they think they\'re going to sign to replace him if he goes and I wonder why they aren\'t trying harder to resign him.

As for the entire Brooks/Delhomme argument, I won\'t rehash that. Overall, I think both are quarterbacks of a higher caliber than the New Orleans Saints are used to. I fear that, as you put it, too much time, money, and energy has been invested in Brooks and now the organization is sticking with him b/c reputations are on the line. Maybe not... regardless it\'s a gamble that will either pay off big or blow up huge for Haslett.

My bottom line is this: Delhomme is young, talented, and smart. He has a lot of intangibles that make quarterbacks good, sometimes great, in this league. The type of system the Saints are running is more catered to his specific abilities than Brooks\'. That\'s it. Now, can we please move on from the Brooks/Delhomme talk once and for all?

Why not Delhomme?
 

I\'ll move on when you get off it WhoDat. I\'m not trying to change your mind...thats pointless. Honestly I get a kick out of pointing things out to you. I don\'t think you\'re aware of some of the stuff you type. I did NOT bring Brooks into this thread...YOU did! As long as you attempt to compare one by attacking the other I\'m gonna be here to point it out to you.

Why not Delhomme?
 

Dude, I didn\'t take a pot-shot at your lover in any way... the things I said are true and I was using them as a hypothetical argument that the Saints could make to Jake to convince him he\'ll have a shot in New Orleans. I suggest that you print that avitar and carry it in your wallet, wall paper your house with life size Aaron Brooks pictures, and go down to the court house and change your name... I\'ll tell you what Saintfan, I\'ll meet you in the bushes outside of Brooks\' house tomorrow night... then you can show me your club house, where you and the other \"members\" pray to the Aaron Brooks shrine.

Why not Delhomme?
 

Gator - thanks for trying man. I knew what you were doing, I just wanted to clarify. Even when you tell this guy his golden boy is a good quarterback he complains. Thanks anyway man.

Why not Delhomme?
 

Delhomme as a starter is a risk Haslett will not take , not after he backed Brooks .

That would be like Ditka saying Ricky Williams is not really a starting runningback .

Haslett can come up with a thousand excuses if Delhomme lights up his defense in a Cowboys uniform, but not too many if he becomes the starter in New Orleans . If Jake turned out to be better then Brooks , Benson would run Haslett out of the NFL .
Mueller signed where ??????

Why not Delhomme?
 

Now now WhoDat, no reason to go there my friend. I have stated before and I\'ll state it again since your memory is so poor. I\'m not gonna sit back and watch you insinuate, assume, guess, hint, or otherwise indicate all the crap you post about Brooks is factual. You\'ll need to know I have no desire to reduce myself to to the level in which you\'re now attempting to take this debate.

Ya know, quoting coaches and players and posting stats don\'t do any more good than showing you your very own quotes. You can accuse me of bringing Brooks into this debate when it\'s there in the first post is this thread, made by YOU. I know you\'re not ignorant, you just play that way when it suits you.

Now if you wanna reduce the debate to grade-school level I\'m sorry to tell you you\'ll be there alone...well, maybe Saintz08 will ride the bus with you, but I won\'t be going there. Need I also remind you that it was only after I changed my avitar that you changed yours? hehe...you know what they say about imitation, or have they taught you that yet?

Why not Delhomme?
 

Gatorman --
Doesn\'t look like the Broncos are looking at Delhomme. Word is they have their eye on another Jake...Plummer. Personally, I think Delhomme would be a better move, but I\'m guessing they haven\'t seen enough of him.

Why not Delhomme?
 

I\'d like to see Jake stay. I just don\'t think we have anything beyond he and Aaron, but if/when he goes...go ANYWHERE out of the NFC and I\'m happy. I hear the niners are talking to the bucs D coordinator about their head coaching position. I also hear that a Deal for Mooch is all but done in Detroit too.

Why not Delhomme?
 

The one good thing we have going for us is that the free agent market and the draft are saturated with quarterbacks. I mean, some of the ones that I know about include:

Tony Banks, Charlie Batch, Jeff Blake, Marc Bulger, Koy Detmer, Gus Ferotte, Jeff George, Kent Graham, Jarious Jackson, Doug Johnson, Shaun King, Shane Mathews, Rick Mirer, Doug Peterson, Rodney Peete, Jake Plummer, Tim Rattay, Chris Redman, and Danny Wuerffel.

There are also at least as many QBs who I have never heard of... these could very well be nobodies, or they could be other teams\' Jake Delhommes. You add in the draft, and that\'s a LOT of QBs.

I would think that if you want a proven starter you\'re going with Blake or Plummer. If you want a vet. you\'re going with a guy like Gus Ferotte or Jeff George, Finally, there are a LOT of QBs out there like Delhomme. Guys who are still relatively young with little playing time who want to prove themselves and compete for starting jobs - Bulger, Detmer, Johnson, King, Redman, etc... Not to mention the rookies in the draft.

Maybe this way Delhomme gets a lower offer from other teams than he might in other years b/c there are so many QBs out there. If so, the Saints should be able to match it. And regardless of what Saintfan wants to say, the Saints are using the fact that Brooks is hurt to give quarterbacks hope about competing. They did it with Finlen, so they could do it with Delhomme. They can say, look Jake, who knows how long it will take Aaron to get back to full form. Who knows if he\'ll ever be the same again. Stay here and the best man in camp will start in week 1. I don\'t think any other team will promise him more than that.

Why not Delhomme?
 

WhoDat says:
\"And regardless of what Saintfan wants to say, the Saints are using the fact that Brooks is hurt to give quarterbacks hope about competing.\"

Now that insinuated that I (A) actually said that, which I didn\'t (yet) and (B) that WhoDat has some sort of inside info on the Saints that the rest of us don\'t have. How else would he be able to state that as a fact? All the info coming out of the Saints organization is indicating that the team thinks Aaron will be just fine. If what you say is true, WhoDat, and the Saints were really trying to mis-represent the situation in an effort to lure some guy in like Finlen don\'t you think they\'d have press releases indicating their doubt about his recovery?

You just couldn\'t resist could ya WhoDat? You had to take another shot huh? Does it make you feel any better to know that I\'m smiling while I type this. To make the statememnt you\'re making means that you believe that the Saints gave Brooks the starting position without considering anyone else. You can keep goin with your conspiracy theory if it keeps you warm at night.

Why not Delhomme?
 

Seriously Saintfan, what is wrong with you? Go read the article about Finlen that was posted in the other thread. I\'m in Illinois, this kid is from Illinois, I\'ve seen three articles about this guy so far and in ALL of them both the writer and Finlen mention that Brooks is hurt and the SAINTS made sure to point this out. I don\'t have any inside information, I can read.

I am not talking about Aaron Brooks. OK?! DO YOU F-CKING GET IT YET?! I DON\'T CARE ABOUT AARON BROOKS. I AM TRYING TO TALK ABOUT SOMETHING ELSE.

You\'re pathetic Saintfan. You say things like, \"Need I also remind you that it was only after I changed my avitar that you changed yours?\" So you really think I hurried in to change my avitar b/c you changed yours? Ego much? You keep talking about Aaron Brooks as if anyone wants to hear it. I don\'t. Why don\'t you ask everyone in this forum if they give a sh-t what you think about Aaron Brooks. I bet they don\'t, and I bet they\'re all tired of hearing about him. Trust me buddy, you\'ve convinced us all that he is the best thing since sliced bread. Frankly, I think the Saints should just put him out on the field by himself. Ridiculous. Here\'s what you need to understand. I am the one trying to get past this debate b/c no one cares anymore. I\'m trying to talk about other players... but you\'re too immature and childish to let it go. I\'m being sneeky huh? Dude, you\'ve got too much time on your hands. Seriously, D-R-O-P I-T! Does that get through to you?

You know what, let\'s take a poll.... Who wants to hear Saintfan talk about Aaron Brooks? Just shout out if you\'re interested in the slightest in this discussion anymore.

Why not Delhomme?
 

My boy, everyone in here has dropped it \'cept for you and me. Know why? Cause you keep posting negativity about Brooks and I keep callin you on it. If you don\'t want me to respond then stop posting that crap. As I\'ve said before, even re-posting your own comments doesn\'t seem to help you see the light. Do you honestly think I\'m gonna sit back and watch you make a sly remark directed at me without responding? I\'ll ask YOU to get over it. I have been for weeks now. If you wanna talk about Jake, then talk about Jake. Leave Brooks out of it. Can you do that? Well, not so far, but I have faith in you. Eventually you\'ll figure it out.

There\'s no need to get nasty or lose your cool WhoDat. My posts aren\'t a personal attack on you. My posts are typically built around a response to something you\'ve typed that I disagree with. Man, what time of the month is it? You\'re AWEFULLY sensitive today eh?

Now then, are you calm yet? Need a pill? Just relax and reply with something intelligent rather than takin it to the playground there guy. If you\'re really not dissing AB then stop including his name next to negative statements in your posts ok? Then I won\'t have anything to respond to. It\'s rediculous for you to say you\'re not talkin about Brooks when we can all scroll up and see that you are.

Now, about Mr. Finlen. This is a quote, not from an ESPN expert, a sports radio talk show host, a sportswriter, or even Hokie Gajan (who\'s opinion you seem to hold so dearly)...YOU CAN READ? OK, READ THIS:

\"Right now, from what they told my agent, they expect me to battle for the third quarterback position and give a good fight for it. I’m getting good responses from their front office.�

Now thats comes from Finlen, and no one else. Now you know what you know because you\'re from Illinois, and you can read right? The whole freakin world knows Brooks was injured WhoDat. I don\'t see where you come up with all this conspiracy crap you keep on a-postin\'. Don\'t hate me cause I call you on it baby. Just stop postin it.

Now I\'ll finish by voting in your little poll: I vote No, lets not talk about Brooks anymore. I would have stopped a long time ago if you would have just shut up about it, but you wouldn\'t, and so I have persisted. Evey time you post your opinion as if it\'s fact I\'ve been here to call you on it. You say everyone is tired of the Brooks debate, and I\'d agree; however, you\'re the one who started a thread dedicated to it. So, make your case without accusing Haz of not give Jake a chance. Make your case without your little side shots at Brooks (or me for that matter). Stop forcing me to copy and paste your very own posts indicating that you HAVE included Brooks in your latest ploy ok? Everytime you catch yourself about to type \"Aaron Brooks\" STOP! Don\'t do it! Then you won\'t have to deal with me forcing you to deal in the truth.

Why not Delhomme?
 

Interesting analysis for next year :

The question of why will follow the Saints til kick off next season .

Glad to see others have taken notes on that pathetic media event .

QUARTERBACK

Starter: Aaron Brooks; backups: Jake Delhomme, J.T. O\'Sullivan.

Brooks started out like gangbusters, but faded down the stretch.

That makes it two seasons in a row with similar patterns, although there was the matter of his injured throwing shoulder that certainly affected him down the stretch this go around.

The coaching staff went to extraordinary lengths to show that the injury didn\'t keep him from being a capable quarterback down the stretch, breaking out game film for a media skull session.

Delhomme proved capable of stepping into the breech when Brooks needed relief in a pair of games. He has the perfect backup mentality with an apparent absence of ego that has kept him firmly in Brooks\' corner.

However, the coaching staff doesn\'t feel he\'s mobile enough to make up for some protection problems the offense had late in the season and worry that in a 10-play drive, he\'ll be great on nine snaps and make a really bad decision on a tenth.

It would be a stretch to consider J.T. O\'Sullivan a viable replacement, meaning the bottom line for the Saints to keep Delhomme\'s services goes up with the arthroscopic surgery on Brooks\' shoulder, even with a hometown discount.

Why not Delhomme?
 

You\'re right about that Gator... which is part of the reason that I am impatient when it comes to this team and its development. Its young guys need to step up and play well next year, and we HAVE to go out and get some vets on D to make us better right now. We can\'t expect to pick up players in the draft and look to be good a few years from now. That will make us a perpetual 9-7 team, one game out of the playoffs. It\'s starting to feel like put up or shut up time to me.

Why not Delhomme?
 

Can\'t we just get along? Somehow we always seem to get back to the same old thing. It seems to me that both of you are saying the same thing from time to time, you just say it in different ways. I\'d love to keep Jake here and who knows maybe he will be here next year. They don\'t leave it to us who\'s here and who\'s not. We can voice our opinions till the cows come home and I don\'t even have any cows. PLEASE, just agree to disagree on this subject and let\'s move on to something else. We have free agency and the draft coming up, if we can\'t find something to talk about there, then we\'re in trouble.
GO SAINTS!
P.S. Thank you both for your co-operation. :)

Why not Delhomme?
 

9-7
Pretty optimistic Who Dat

Look at what is going on :

Loomis is going into his first draft and who knows how that will turn out .
The defense is almost a complete rebuild .
The front line has it\'s issues on offense .
The wide receiver core is going to see new faces .
Brooks is coming off a surgery .
Could lose the back up Qb.

Those points added to a make shift coaching staff , who seems to lose control in the last 4 games repeatedly .
Better division play from opponets with less free agent loses .

The excuses for the first 4 games will be \" They have not gelled as a team \" and then the now infamous 4 game December losing streak . 6-10 might be a rather conservative figure .

This looks like a rebuilding season for the Saints in 2003.

Why not Delhomme?
 

At the risk of agreeing with WhoDat, I too am eternally optomistic. I don\'t think 9-7 is such a stretch. Remember with ANY kind of defense the Saints would have been much more successful. A rebuilding season? I don\'t think so. I agree the defense will have a completely different look, but the offense should do well. It seems to be in vogue to blame the coaching staff, and I am on the bandwagon when it comes to Venturi, but I don\'t think you can blame Haz for the \"Willie Roaf and his wife and Joe Johnson\" soap opera that clearly divided the team two years ago. To say he\'s \"responsible\" for this year\'s collapse is accurate in my opinion only if you realize that at some point you have to have players who are willing and capable of motivating themselves...to a degree anyway.

Why not Delhomme?
 

Well, how this team does in December of next year may just determine if Jim Haslett is the head coach of the New Orleans Saints in 2004. Any way you look at it December is huge. If they\'re in contention again, they better have a good last month and make the playoffs... three collapses will HAVE to cost the man his job. If not, if it turns out to be a rebuilding year, then they better be showing progress by the end of the season. A late season slide to a losing record would also probably cost Haz his job.

That being said, I think a miracle has occurred! Saintfan and I agree twice in one day. This year should not be a \"rebuilding\" year. It\'s Haslett\'s fourth year. I don\'t care what\'s happened, a guy in his fourth year that took over a 3-13 team should bring that team to the playoffs or get outta Dodge. Our offense is stacked. Horn and Stallworth are coming back. Pathon will still be here, so will Sloan. Our receiving corp won\'t be that different. If anything, they may add a big possesion guy to go across the middle and give Brooks more targets. If Deuce stays healthy all season, the Saints are in every single game they play... period. Our offense is that good, regardless of how wonderfully or how poorly our coordinators call plays.

Our D can\'t be any worse, right? They add speed and coverage to the secondary and reshuffle the linebackers and D-line... hopefully the D becomes at least decent. I doubt that they can be good with Venturi at the helm, but average D with our offense and special teams puts this team in contention. Remeber what the Rams did two years ago. Their defense was terrible the year that we beat them in the Playoffs (smile). They loaded up in the off-season and got to another Super Bowl. We\'ve got plenty of cap room and that number will grow if we dump guys like Hand (5 mill against the cap) and Knight. We\'ll have to see what free agents they go after, but I have to think next year should be at least a playoff year for the Saints... even with the improved competition in our division.

Why not Delhomme?
 

Ok, seriously guys...this offense needs someone who doesn\'t screw up at QB. Sure every now and then he\'ll have to be better than the rest of the team. But for the most part it needs a decent QB who is fairly efficient and doesn\'t turn the ball over a whole lot. This offense is much much like the Rams. The QB doesn\'t have to be all-world. He just needs to be OK. It\'s basically pitch it short and let\'em haul a$$. Pretty much the way the running game is based too. I don\'t care who it is. Just make it be a decent QB and this offense could be put on cruise control most of the time. I know most you might think I\'m over-simplifying things here. But c\'mon the coaches HAVE to see this. I mean...if I can see it......???

Why not Delhomme?
 

While I would not like to say it is a rebuilding year it certainly looks like it . This area has the potential to see 3 new faces .

Front line :

The interior of the OL was superb. We revamped it for our hybrid West Coast/Run and Shoot offense and the changes were both masterful and cost effective. It wouldn\'t have been very surprising to see the entire interior of our OL in the Pro-Bowl. The OT\'s, on the other hand, were just adequate and never allowed us to dominate the trenches.


KEEPERS

1. OC Jerry Fontenot 6\'3\" 290- The captain dropped some weight and gained the confidence of his new linemates within one game. He performed at an All-Pro level the entire year and called some great adjustments in the trenches. He is the total package, but he is getting old and is contemplating retirement. Fontenot voided the final two years of his deal, possibly posturing to see how his best friend Kyle Turley\'s situation will play out. If we treat the Turley right then Fontenot will definetly be back for at least one more season.

2. RG LeCharles Bentley 6\'3\" 305- In one word- WOW! The guy came in and dominated from day one. He is a top 5 OG right now and within two years could be the best in the league. Bentley was brought in to be a center, but the old adage \"If it ain\'t broke, don\'t fix it\" comes into play here. Leave him at RG for the next decade and everything will be okay.

3. LG Kendall Jacox 6\'2\" 330- He tried to hold out for a big pay day, but it back fired on him and was a home run for the Saints. He has great size, power, and is surprisingly agile for a man his size. His versatility could also prove to be very useful. Because Jacox insists center is his best position, but I would hate to see him moved after the great year he had.

4. RT Victor Riley 6\'5\" 335- Huge former first rounder was another great value pickup that the Saints extended for two more years. Has some off the field troubles, but on it he has the ability to dominate. Tremendous power and good footwork make him a perfect fit for this offense. With a full offseason with the Saints he should take over the starting RT job for the next two years.

5. OT Spencer Folau 6\'5\" 300- He is a hard worker, versatile, and has decent footwork. All of these attributes will keep him on board for at least one more year. Folau did a decent job at RT riding the DE\'s out of the play, but he is not strong enough to manhandle a player and that will cost him his starting job. He is a good RT and a good backup LT, but if the Saints go into the season with him as their starting LT then we might as well pack it up and mail it in because Brooks will be eaten alive.


GONE

1. OT Kyle Turley 6\'5\" 295- His WWF antics have alienated him from the local media and even some teammates. With only one year left on his deal and the fact that he has given the Saints no indication that he wants to continue blocking for a \"QB that can\'t do his job.\" A trade appears to be the best option for the Saints. Here are the most likely situations for a trade...

Chargers- He has stated numerous times that he would love to play in front of his hometown crowd and with Damion McIntosh, a RFA who is still learning the position, returning at LT. They definitely need to upgrade if they want to win now. Turley and Vaughn Parker would be a good set of bookends for a mere first rounder.

Texans- The number #3 overall pick is too much for Turley, but if they trade down with a team like Denver then the #20 pick would be worth it. The Texans have Tony Boselli, who hasn\'t played in two years, and Ryan Tucker, an UFA that wants a big money deal, manning the OT spots. A swingman like Turley would be a perfect fit for their situation.

Broncos- They want a long term solution at LT and are unhappy with Emphraim Salaam. Turley would fit their offense like a glove and could be a great addition for them.


2. OG/OC Wally Williams 6\'2\" 340- Norman Hand\'s cousin has neck problems and a gut the size of a Toyota. Couple that with a huge cap figure and you have one released player. Washington or Baltimore seem to be likely landing spot for the Big Man.

3. OT Scott Sanderson 6\'6\" 300- He is an UFA that might want to try for more money. If he wants to play for the minimum we could bring him back. Good depth at OT.


FREE AGENTS

OT\'s

1. LT Blake Brockermeyer 6\'4\" 300 Broncos- The former first rounder is a legit starting LT. He is getting a bit old, but he is still the most viable option for the Saints. His aggressive style fits the offense like a glove and with Denver looking to get younger on the OL, Brockermeyer could slide right out the door and start heading south. Who wouldn\'t want to block for the leading NFC rusher, a top gun at QB, and a trio of good WR\'s... No Turley doesn\'t count.

2. LT John Fina 6\'5\" 300 Cardinals- The Bills were having trouble with the salary cap and Fina was one of their first victims. He landed in Arizona and hasn\'t been heard from since. He has the talent, but are the legs still able to go 16 games or more. I really don\'t believe he has enough left in the tank, but I would definitely grab him if I couldn\'t land Brockermeyer.

OC/OG

1. OC/OG Bill Conaty Bills 6\'2\" 300- Being an undrafted free agent he has had to earn every bit of playing time he has gotten. He is a heady player, but limited athletically. In some ways he reminds me of a young Fontenot, but no where near as good. A decent value player in free agency if he doesn\'t get a big money deal.

2. OC/OG Grey Ruegamer Patriots 6\'5\" 300- At one time the Dolphins thought he could be a sensational player, but those days passed and his attitude remained the same. Reality didn\'t set in until the former #1 center in the draft was given his walking papers. New England picked him up and since that he has become a valued contributor. He would be a good value in free agency and will give us some insurance in case Fontenot decides to retire.


DRAFT

1. OT Derrick Brantley 6\'4\" 305 Clemson- Has never been a full time starter, but the JUCO transfer was in line to be a star this season, but a torn ACL cut that dream short. Has the skills to be a solid player if he can come back at 100%. A late round gem that will have to be cleared medically.

2. OT Damian Lavergne 6\'5\" 330 Louisiana Tech- Has first round ability. Is a bit lazy and just seems indifferent at times, but when he is playing to his potential- Look Out! He is a late round gamble that could pay off big time.


OVERALL

Turley is the toughest situation to deal with and we are already sending out feelers. The asking price is a 1 and 3, but if we can secure a first rounder we should definitely pull the trigger. As long as we don\'t turn this into a mud slinging trade Fontenot should come back and lead our way to the playoffs.

In the midst of this turmoil we could see up to 3 new starters on the OL again this offseason, but if we are creative and remain on top of free agent market then we can easily overcome this. This is what my ideal OL would look like...

LT- Blake Brockermeyer
--Spencer Folau- backs up both LT and RT.
LG- Kendall Jacox
C- Jerry Fontenot
RG- LeCharles Bentley
--Bill Conaty- top back up at both OG and OC.
RT- Victor Riley

Why not Delhomme?
 

Billy - Amen. I\'ve been screaming that for months, but nobody likes to hear it from me.

08 - Why do new faces equated to \"rebuilding?\" To me rebuilding is a term that applies to teams who don\'t have a lot of talent and are in bad cap situations. They have to start over from the ground up and look to new players and even new systems.

The Saints don\'t need that. Let\'s say they go after a new tackle and a receiver. That\'s nine of the same faces on offense. Defensively, Howard and Grant are staying and Carter will stick around. Jackson could start again as could Clemons, Hodge, and Bellamy. Not likely that they all will, but who knows? In any case, the talent on defense should improve significantly and our team should be very talented and able to compete next year... that\'s not rebuilding to me.

Why not Delhomme?
 

You don\'t replace a successful QB with an unknown. I\'ve done my level best to steer ya\'ll away from this \"kill the QB\" mantra but the shortsightedness continues. Even WhoDat can only come up with a couple of games where Brooks\' performance was the featured reason for the loss.

I also wanna side with WhoDat on the topic of next year being a re-building year. The Saints, as Gatorman and others have said so well, need to get better up the middle, and I think thats exactly what they\'ll do. Enough players will remain so that we\'ll recognize a few of \'em. I look at it more as retooling as opposed to rebuilding.

Why not Delhomme?
 

This is looking like an across the board names change .
OL
DL
LB
DB
WR
RB
QB
Is Carney locked ??

These are new faces in starting and key back up positions . Players want out and some are not wanted . Could be as high as 50% of the starting team . This is not changing 2 or 3 starters and some backups .

Why not Delhomme?
 

Some changes are needed and/or required on both the OL and the DL. Linebacker needs work as well as DB, but teams change kickers far too often for that to be considered in my opinion. Who wants out besides Turley? Nothing can be done if Sammy tries to hold the team ransom for more $? He played like crap anyway.

After all is said and done, lets look at the other teams who have new faces in starting and key backup positions. This is today\'s NFL. This, is the salary cap as it was intended whether we like it or not.

Why not Delhomme?
 

Whoa, 08 I think you\'re a bit over the top here. First, with free agency like it is today, seeing 5 or more new starters on a team shouldn\'t come as a surprise. Second, most of the positions you\'re talking about are backups. Be realistic here. Go through each position:

QB - starter will be Brooks, backup may change... hope not.
RB - starter will be Deuce, backup may be added.
FB - likey to change if the reports about the Saints feelings on Smith are true.
WR - starters Horn and Stallworth, Pathon will probably still be around. May bring in one new guy to compete ar a number 3 receiver.
TE - Sloan will continue to start, they will probably draft someone to play in two TE sets.
OL - There will probably be a new left Tackle. Fontenot may retire which would reshuffle the line, but that would probably be done with existing players.

So, we\'re talking about one or two new starters on D with as many as five or so new faces making an impact... what team isn\'t in the situtation?

DT - There\'s no way that the Saints will get rid of both Grady and Norman, so probably count Jackson in. Add a new DT in free agency and/or the draft.
DE - Howard and Grant... anchors of the defense.
LB - they\'re talking about playing Hodge and Clemons outside, they\'ll probably sign a MLB in free agency. Maybe they sign an OLB too, so we\'ll say 2 LBs.
CB - Dale Carter is starting on one side. They\'re likely to draft another. Maybe they sign a FA, but I don\'t see them spending the money to get a prime timer. So it will be a competition for the number 2 spot between whoever they bring in, Thomas, and Craver.
S - Let\'s pray they pick someone up if Knight goes. Then you\'re likely to see Mel Mitchell, they love this kid, who at least was on the team last year. Bellamy may stay may go, who knows.

So you\'re talking about at most, a new starting DT, 2 LBs, a CB, and a safety. 5 new starters is a lot for one side of the ball, but it is very possible that a couple of those new starters could be existing Saints.

I just don\'t see it as building from the ground up. I think you\'ll see five or six guys who weren\'t Saints last year starting in spots this year... didn\'t we have about that many this past year? 3 new OL, 1 new WR, 1 new DT, 1 new DE, 1 new CB = 7 new starters.

Why not Delhomme?
 

Don\'t be too surprised if the Saints go to a name corner back and middle linebacker. If you remember, last year before Carter came back they were looking into signing an experienced corner from the Eagles. We have the money, so don\'t be surprised.

[Edited on 30/1/2003 by JOESAM2002]

Why not Delhomme?
 

Not too long ago everyone was saying the Patriots got it right. Now I haven\'t gone over their roster from two years ago with a fine tooth comb, but there were a lot of new additions to that team the year they won it all weren\'t there? Now everyone is saying we\'re going to be forced to add too much to have a chance at winning next year. Everyone is saying or insinuating the Saints won\'t have the continuity they\'ll need.

They\'ll rebuild the D allright, but they won\'t do it with Rookies. There will be a few changes on offense, but nothing that to me indicates anything close to rebuilding. In my opinion, re-building is what the Cowboys have been trying to do, and I don\'t see the Saints in that mode at all.

Why not Delhomme?
 

Maybe I\'m being a little picky on words Gator. I\'m all for a \"rebuilt\" defense, but I don\'t think the team is rebuilding. Maybe it\'s just a language thing.

Either way, I agree that new faces won\'t necessarilly solve the Saints defensive problems, but we can\'t do much worse than we did last year on that side of the ball, so I\'m excited and as positive as I\'ll allow myself to be about \"rebuilding\" the defense.

Why not Delhomme?
 

Saintfan, I am 100% in agreement with you. I don\'t want to replace a successful QB. I just want a successful QB. That\'s all. Give me one. That\'s all I\'m asking. I don\'t think that\'s too much to ask is it?

Seems to me that one of those \'couple of games\' you\'re talking about were pretty huge. I don\'t have any paticular one of them in mind either. So, feel free to pick one of the ones you\'re talking about. Any one of them....doesn\'t matter to me...you pick. If memory serves me right....one less of those losses would\'ve put us in the playoffs.

If a team (any team from Pop Warner to the NFL) has a QB who\'s performance is the \'featured reason\' for 1 loss...not such a big deal. But when the word loss turns plural for that reason, then there\'s a serious QB problem that needs to be addressed.

This offense can carry a decent QB most of the time...he doesn\'t have to carry it but every now and then. Enough of AB\'s decisions on the field leave a lot to be desired. Even a layman can see some of the things that he needs to do, but AB can\'t. Makes a person wonder.......

Agreed on the retooling part....then again, we\'ve been building since 1966......

And just my 2 cents on the Defense here...I think a new D Coordinator every year has a decent amount to do with the D not having so much D in it....

Why not Delhomme?
 

Billy - while I agree completely with you on the QB issue, I\'ll give you a little advice: speaking poorly of Aaron Brooks is not met warmly by Saintfan... take it from someone who knows a little about that. ;)

I think Venturi is a HUGE part of the problem with the D, not necessarily the fact that the coordinator changes. Zook was around for a while before last year... the fact that they haven\'t done anything about Venturi makes me more nervous than anything else.

Finally, we must be in the twilight zone b/c again Saintfan and I are in total agreement. The word \"rebuilt\" is looked at so negatively, but really is it that bad. Saintfan talked about the Patties... what about the Rams, who had something like 8 new starters on defense two years ago when they played those Patriots in the Super Bowl. What about Tampa Bay and it\'s \"rebuilt\" offense this year? Look at how well our offense came together this year... there were a lot of changes. Continuity on defense is even easier. As long as they pick up some good vets, they\'ll get better... if not, it\'s one person\'s fault... Venturi\'s. It doesn\'t matter how great your players are if your coordinator is calling blitzes at the wrong times, has you team in the wrong coverage against an offense, or just overall plans poorly for a game.

Why not Delhomme?
 

Saints need :

Defensively

1 Corner - and one up and comer in reserve
2 Safeties - Bellamy is a iffy - Knight will option out
1 MLB - Clemmons is a joke
1 OLB - that if Allen is moved into the starting position
2 DT - The lunch bunch experiment is over

Offensively

2 Tackles - one wants out and one is iffy
1 Center - he optioned and might retire
1 Receiver and could be 2 if Horn trys to hold the team hostage

Back ups that might run are Whitehead , Delhomme and Cox . Off the top of my head .

That is 11 players on a 22 man starting team , not considering a nickelback .

50 % potential loses or cuts on the starting team .

Why not Delhomme?
 

I got two words for ya. Ray Rhodes. I think he\'d be great as the defensive co-ordinator. :casstet:

Why not Delhomme?
 

How about Jim Mora jr.

Rumor has it that San Francisco is going to look past him for the Head Coach spot .

Why not Delhomme?
 

I have a question. Actually, a request. When things are copied and pasted here that are entire articles or most of an article, etc, etc, can the poster please provide the link or at least give the author credit so we don\'t mistake it for original thoughts. I for one would appreciate it.

WhoDat....I could care less what other people think about what I post. If they agree good. If they don\'t their loss. I can\'t help it if they\'re wrong. I can only show\'em the train....I can\'t push\'em off the tracks. :-)

I don\'t think Venturi\'s cut out to be a D Coordinator myself. Some stability, even in coaches, is needed tho.

HOLY CHRIST 08!! DO NOT DO THAT TO MY HEART! PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE DON\'T MENTION J.M. JR!!! I think he\'s a horrible D Coordinator......reminds me of hot Old Milwaukee. What we need to do is petition S.F. to keep him. Hell, I\'ll start a fund if need be!!

[Edited on 31/1/2003 by billyh1026]