SEEMS LIKE A "MANAGEMENT" ISSUE

K Major · 11-26-2021, 05:50 PM

Injuries galore.

Side note, I see Tredavious White season is over for the Bills. Torn ACL.

Football is a grind.

SaintGnome · 11-26-2021, 07:24 PM

I love it when our offense scores almost nothing and the the defense is attacked after a loss. I got it when our GOAT QB was in town and not producing (as he did at times). Sentiment, I get it. I just don't get it now when our O scores at total of 6. 6 pts! Loses 3 (or was it 4?) 4th down attempts, gives up an INT....really, do I need to go on? Sure the D wasn't perfect, but should they have to be?

neugey · 11-26-2021, 07:32 PM

Originally Posted by SaintGnome

I love it when our offense scores almost nothing and the the defense is attacked after a loss. I got it when our GOAT QB was in town and not producing (as he did at times), sentiment. I just don't get it now when our O scores at total of 6. 6 pts! Loses 3 (or was it 4?) 4th down attempts, gives up an INT....really, do I need to go on? Sure the D wasn't perfect, but should they have to be?

We were lucky to get the 6 points we did. That was basically a gentlemen's shutout.

The Dude · 11-26-2021, 07:44 PM

Originally Posted by SaintGnome

I'm sorry but this was a Super Bowl quality team who just won the division 4 in a years row, The team that's lost #1 WR, #1 #2 RB, #1 and #2 QB and how many other important injuries? Everyone knows (or should know) that we went all in the last three years to try and win another with Drew. Did you think that kind of spending could last? So we took some losses Sanders, the big defensive lineman I forget his name at the moment, and Jack rabbit.
Fact is whether or not Mickey is a "football guy", which I give him a little more credit than you obviously do. Mickey has been playing the CAP like a virtuoso for years making moves when there didn't look like there was any money to be found. So what if we're having a bad year? You don't throw the baby out with the bathwater.

Would you rather have them pinching pennies while we were in a win now scenario with a Qb who could take us to the Super Bowl? Had he not gone all in it likely we don’t win the division 4 years running. We had a legitimate shot up until last year to win it all, it just didn’t work out. It happens, Super Bowls are hard to win but I would rather be in the position to win one and Loomis was a huge part of that. At some point you are going to have some down years, it was bound to happen. The Pats went through it last year and now it’s our turn.
To think this was gonna be a seamless transition is short sighted.

SaintGnome · 11-26-2021, 07:49 PM

Originally Posted by The Dude

Would you rather have them pinching pennies while we were in a win now scenario with a Qb who could take us to the Super Bowl? Had he not gone all in it likely we don’t win the division 4 years running. We had a legitimate shot up until last year to win it all, it just didn’t work out. It happens, Super Bowls are hard to win but I would rather be in the position to win one and Loomis was a huge part of that. At some point you are going to have some down years, it was bound to happen. The Pats went through it last year and now it’s our turn.
To think this was gonna be a seamless transition is short sighted.

Are you sure you read my points dude?

BakoSaint · 11-26-2021, 08:10 PM

Certain players are more susceptible to injury due to past history, style of play, body type, age, or outsized role on the offense. We have an affinity for drafting, acquiring, and committing to such players. Peat and Armstead are two. Hill with his age, college injury history, and style of play was also a high risk. Kamara is at an inherently high risk due to his position and style of play and it is a known risk to commit big dollars to one player at RB position. Thomas and Ramcyzk are bad luck though Thomas’ attitude is an issue. With Thomas my issue is that most elite WRs have been unable to win championship, and it could be that investing heavily in that position actually inhibits QBs learning to spread the ball, though Mike Evans last year was an exception perhaps due to Bradys 20yr experience spreading the ball. Another factor I think is that although its great we find value in the draft from small school and underutilized players, sometimes you know less about those players durability, so you get Davenports and Armsteads who are very talented but didnt prove they could stay health against opponents their own size in college and have not proven it in the pros. Overall I think we are partly to blame for our injury issues by taking a lot of risk in the roster we assembled and going with upside or loyalty over durability and high dollar stars at questionable positions over depth.

BakoSaint · 11-26-2021, 08:16 PM

I was fine with the win now philsophy when we had brees, though its questionable how spending big on a raw prospect in Davenport and expensive backup qbs fit with winning now under brees. But now brees is gone and we cant stay in win now mode or eventually 100% of our cap will be dead money and we will need 53 players on minimum contracts. We need to clear the cap. Giving $23 million guaranteed to a 31 year old qb coming off a foot injury and concussion with limited qb skills hoping he can run us out of our no WR issue is not a good way to clear the cap, its a desperate hopeless attempt to continue the win now philosophy until ever last dollar is spent even if we have to stay in cap hell for a decade. We need to face reality and not double down on desperate risks. Locking up Hill leaves us no cash to bite the bullet and cut Peat or Thomas. Its a domino of impending cap hell. And even if everything goes right, we cant win now with no WRs, so we should not be mortgaging the future to do so.

AsylumGuido · 11-26-2021, 08:29 PM

Originally Posted by BakoSaint

I was fine with the win now philsophy when we had brees, though its questionable how spending big on a raw prospect in Davenport and expensive backup qbs fit with winning now under brees. But now brees is gone and we cant stay in win now mode or eventually 100% of our cap will be dead money and we will need 53 players on minimum contracts. We need to clear the cap. Giving $23 million guaranteed to a 31 year old qb coming off a foot injury and concussion with limited qb skills hoping he can run us out of our no WR issue is not a good way to clear the cap, its a desperate hopeless attempt to continue the win now philosophy until ever last dollar is spent even if we have to stay in cap hell for a decade. We need to face reality and not double down on desperate risks. Locking up Hill leaves us no cash to bite the bullet and cut Peat or Thomas. Its a domino of impending cap hell. And even if everything goes right, we cant win now with no WRs, so we should not be mortgaging the future to do so.

Take a look at Hill's contract after details are released. Numbers mean nothing. It's all in the structure and the incentives.

Boston Saint · 11-26-2021, 10:09 PM

Originally Posted by SaintGnome

I love it when our offense scores almost nothing and the the defense is attacked after a loss. I got it when our GOAT QB was in town and not producing (as he did at times). Sentiment, I get it. I just don't get it now when our O scores at total of 6. 6 pts! Loses 3 (or was it 4?) 4th down attempts, gives up an INT....really, do I need to go on? Sure the D wasn't perfect, but should they have to be?

I don’t think anyone is saying they have to be perfect, at least not me. I was just making observations on the game. They showed up far more so than the O did. If the O had matched the D’s play it’s a close game they likely pull out. They are not a dominant defense however. I don’t think that’s an attack. They have been very good at times this season. But they had letdowns in the Atl and Giants games. Just my 2 cents worth.

BakoSaint · 11-26-2021, 11:14 PM

Originally Posted by AsylumGuido

Take a look at Hill's contract after details are released. Numbers mean nothing. It's all in the structure and the incentives.

It has been reported to be $23 million guaranteed. So lets say Hill is concussed, hurt, or ineffective this season, which I think is likely, the cost is a minimum of $23 million for as little as one game. Except really i think that is low, because our team could not take a $23 million cap hit. So if Hill is concussed next game and medically retired we likely keep him on roster a year or two to stretch out the cap hit, which many will praise as Loomis’ smart cap wizardry, and pay $30-35 million for that one game. Its always smart for us to keep players because we always backload tons of guaranteed money on inconsistent injury prone players so we cant cut them when they underperform so we dont have to admit they underperformed and can call retaining them smart.

11-26-2021, 05:50 PM	#21
K Major Site Donor 2019 Join Date: Jan 2013 Location: Bedford, TX Posts: 24,622 Blog Entries: 3	Re: SEEMS LIKE A "MANAGEMENT" ISSUE Injuries galore. Side note, I see Tredavious White season is over for the Bills. Torn ACL. Football is a grind.

11-26-2021, 07:24 PM	#22
SaintGnome 500th Post Join Date: Jul 2017 Location: Bradenton,FL Posts: 642	Re: SEEMS LIKE A "MANAGEMENT" ISSUE I love it when our offense scores almost nothing and the the defense is attacked after a loss. I got it when our GOAT QB was in town and not producing (as he did at times). Sentiment, I get it. I just don't get it now when our O scores at total of 6. 6 pts! Loses 3 (or was it 4?) 4th down attempts, gives up an INT....really, do I need to go on? Sure the D wasn't perfect, but should they have to be?

11-26-2021, 07:32 PM	#23
neugey Hu Dat! Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 6,715 Blog Entries: 13	Re: SEEMS LIKE A "MANAGEMENT" ISSUE Originally Posted by SaintGnome I love it when our offense scores almost nothing and the the defense is attacked after a loss. I got it when our GOAT QB was in town and not producing (as he did at times), sentiment. I just don't get it now when our O scores at total of 6. 6 pts! Loses 3 (or was it 4?) 4th down attempts, gives up an INT....really, do I need to go on? Sure the D wasn't perfect, but should they have to be? We were lucky to get the 6 points we did. That was basically a gentlemen's shutout. SaintGnome likes this.

11-26-2021, 07:44 PM	#24
The Dude 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Jul 2011 Posts: 9,050	Re: SEEMS LIKE A "MANAGEMENT" ISSUE Originally Posted by SaintGnome I'm sorry but this was a Super Bowl quality team who just won the division 4 in a years row, The team that's lost #1 WR, #1 #2 RB, #1 and #2 QB and how many other important injuries? Everyone knows (or should know) that we went all in the last three years to try and win another with Drew. Did you think that kind of spending could last? So we took some losses Sanders, the big defensive lineman I forget his name at the moment, and Jack rabbit. Fact is whether or not Mickey is a "football guy", which I give him a little more credit than you obviously do. Mickey has been playing the CAP like a virtuoso for years making moves when there didn't look like there was any money to be found. So what if we're having a bad year? You don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. Would you rather have them pinching pennies while we were in a win now scenario with a Qb who could take us to the Super Bowl? Had he not gone all in it likely we don’t win the division 4 years running. We had a legitimate shot up until last year to win it all, it just didn’t work out. It happens, Super Bowls are hard to win but I would rather be in the position to win one and Loomis was a huge part of that. At some point you are going to have some down years, it was bound to happen. The Pats went through it last year and now it’s our turn. To think this was gonna be a seamless transition is short sighted.
The Dude 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Jul 2011 Posts: 9,050	"Where life had no value, death, sometimes, had its price. That is why the bounty killers appeared."

11-26-2021, 07:49 PM	#25
SaintGnome 500th Post Join Date: Jul 2017 Location: Bradenton,FL Posts: 642	Re: SEEMS LIKE A "MANAGEMENT" ISSUE Originally Posted by The Dude Would you rather have them pinching pennies while we were in a win now scenario with a Qb who could take us to the Super Bowl? Had he not gone all in it likely we don’t win the division 4 years running. We had a legitimate shot up until last year to win it all, it just didn’t work out. It happens, Super Bowls are hard to win but I would rather be in the position to win one and Loomis was a huge part of that. At some point you are going to have some down years, it was bound to happen. The Pats went through it last year and now it’s our turn. To think this was gonna be a seamless transition is short sighted. Are you sure you read my points dude?

Latest Blogs
2023 New Orleans Saints: Training Camp Last Blog: 08-01-2023 By: MarchingOn Puck the Fro Browl! Last Blog: 02-05-2023 By: neugey CFP: "Just Keep Doing What You're Doing" Last Blog: 12-08-2022 By: neugey

11-26-2021, 08:10 PM	#26
BakoSaint 1000 Posts + Join Date: Dec 2018 Posts: 2,173	Re: SEEMS LIKE A "MANAGEMENT" ISSUE Certain players are more susceptible to injury due to past history, style of play, body type, age, or outsized role on the offense. We have an affinity for drafting, acquiring, and committing to such players. Peat and Armstead are two. Hill with his age, college injury history, and style of play was also a high risk. Kamara is at an inherently high risk due to his position and style of play and it is a known risk to commit big dollars to one player at RB position. Thomas and Ramcyzk are bad luck though Thomas’ attitude is an issue. With Thomas my issue is that most elite WRs have been unable to win championship, and it could be that investing heavily in that position actually inhibits QBs learning to spread the ball, though Mike Evans last year was an exception perhaps due to Bradys 20yr experience spreading the ball. Another factor I think is that although its great we find value in the draft from small school and underutilized players, sometimes you know less about those players durability, so you get Davenports and Armsteads who are very talented but didnt prove they could stay health against opponents their own size in college and have not proven it in the pros. Overall I think we are partly to blame for our injury issues by taking a lot of risk in the roster we assembled and going with upside or loyalty over durability and high dollar stars at questionable positions over depth. neugey and Sinner like this.
BakoSaint 1000 Posts + Join Date: Dec 2018 Posts: 2,173

11-26-2021, 08:16 PM	#27
BakoSaint 1000 Posts + Join Date: Dec 2018 Posts: 2,173	Re: SEEMS LIKE A "MANAGEMENT" ISSUE I was fine with the win now philsophy when we had brees, though its questionable how spending big on a raw prospect in Davenport and expensive backup qbs fit with winning now under brees. But now brees is gone and we cant stay in win now mode or eventually 100% of our cap will be dead money and we will need 53 players on minimum contracts. We need to clear the cap. Giving $23 million guaranteed to a 31 year old qb coming off a foot injury and concussion with limited qb skills hoping he can run us out of our no WR issue is not a good way to clear the cap, its a desperate hopeless attempt to continue the win now philosophy until ever last dollar is spent even if we have to stay in cap hell for a decade. We need to face reality and not double down on desperate risks. Locking up Hill leaves us no cash to bite the bullet and cut Peat or Thomas. Its a domino of impending cap hell. And even if everything goes right, we cant win now with no WRs, so we should not be mortgaging the future to do so.
BakoSaint 1000 Posts + Join Date: Dec 2018 Posts: 2,173

11-26-2021, 08:29 PM	#28
AsylumGuido 10000 POST CLUB Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Bossier City, LA Posts: 26,274	Re: SEEMS LIKE A "MANAGEMENT" ISSUE Originally Posted by BakoSaint I was fine with the win now philsophy when we had brees, though its questionable how spending big on a raw prospect in Davenport and expensive backup qbs fit with winning now under brees. But now brees is gone and we cant stay in win now mode or eventually 100% of our cap will be dead money and we will need 53 players on minimum contracts. We need to clear the cap. Giving $23 million guaranteed to a 31 year old qb coming off a foot injury and concussion with limited qb skills hoping he can run us out of our no WR issue is not a good way to clear the cap, its a desperate hopeless attempt to continue the win now philosophy until ever last dollar is spent even if we have to stay in cap hell for a decade. We need to face reality and not double down on desperate risks. Locking up Hill leaves us no cash to bite the bullet and cut Peat or Thomas. Its a domino of impending cap hell. And even if everything goes right, we cant win now with no WRs, so we should not be mortgaging the future to do so. Take a look at Hill's contract after details are released. Numbers mean nothing. It's all in the structure and the incentives.

11-26-2021, 10:09 PM	#29
Boston Saint 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Nov 2020 Location: Massachusetts Posts: 5,137	Re: SEEMS LIKE A "MANAGEMENT" ISSUE Originally Posted by SaintGnome I love it when our offense scores almost nothing and the the defense is attacked after a loss. I got it when our GOAT QB was in town and not producing (as he did at times). Sentiment, I get it. I just don't get it now when our O scores at total of 6. 6 pts! Loses 3 (or was it 4?) 4th down attempts, gives up an INT....really, do I need to go on? Sure the D wasn't perfect, but should they have to be? I don’t think anyone is saying they have to be perfect, at least not me. I was just making observations on the game. They showed up far more so than the O did. If the O had matched the D’s play it’s a close game they likely pull out. They are not a dominant defense however. I don’t think that’s an attack. They have been very good at times this season. But they had letdowns in the Atl and Giants games. Just my 2 cents worth.

11-26-2021, 11:14 PM	#30
BakoSaint 1000 Posts + Join Date: Dec 2018 Posts: 2,173	Re: SEEMS LIKE A "MANAGEMENT" ISSUE Originally Posted by AsylumGuido Take a look at Hill's contract after details are released. Numbers mean nothing. It's all in the structure and the incentives. It has been reported to be $23 million guaranteed. So lets say Hill is concussed, hurt, or ineffective this season, which I think is likely, the cost is a minimum of $23 million for as little as one game. Except really i think that is low, because our team could not take a $23 million cap hit. So if Hill is concussed next game and medically retired we likely keep him on roster a year or two to stretch out the cap hit, which many will praise as Loomis’ smart cap wizardry, and pay $30-35 million for that one game. Its always smart for us to keep players because we always backload tons of guaranteed money on inconsistent injury prone players so we cant cut them when they underperform so we dont have to admit they underperformed and can call retaining them smart.
BakoSaint 1000 Posts + Join Date: Dec 2018 Posts: 2,173