Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

Maybe the team should announce Penning and Udoh as co-starters and have Penning take a field sobriety test and blow for BAC immediately before the game. If he fails, don't let him anywhere near a Carr.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

*groan*

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

As much as I hate to say it, maybe Penning needs to be removed on obvious passing downs. The downside of course it could possibly telegraph plays. If I am a defender, early in the game I am calling Penning's mom a bad name, knowing it would likely set him off and throw him off his game.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

The more I think about it I can see us making a move for a veteran tackle AFTER week one. Picking up a vet prior to week one guarantees their salary for the entire 17 weeks. After week one the contracts can be week to week. We should be able to field what we have at home against Carolina.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

If we can upgrade the position we do it. No more sitting on our hands while Penning et al let defenders run unabated to the QB.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

Et al?!? You fancy. 😂

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

Right there is the key conundrum. IF we can upgrade. Half the teams in the league are hoping and praying to find a tackle, or two. There are reasons why every player out there still available are indeed still available. And there are reasons why nobody would be in the market to trade away perhaps the rarest commodity in the NFL today, the competent tackle. I would, of course, love to find an upgrade at every o-line position as would, I imagine, the Saints front office and coaching staff. This is much, much easier said than done it appears. I doubt they are "sitting on their hands" when the probable fact is that their hands are tied for one reason or another.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

Having said that, it did not help that they let Cam Erving walk for $1.2 million when he started over Penning last year. I then suggested taking oline every pick of the draft, yet the Saints had 6 picks in the 1st 6 rounds and only took one oline in those rounds. Nobody is talking about how bub means, jaylan ford, or khristian boyd is a vital player who will make up for our oline issues. There is a shortage of oline but in a shortage the team that stockpiles prospers. You miss every shot you dont take at finding a diamond in the rough at a vital position, yet we shot those shots at other positions of lesser need. In the end our front office made conscious choices to make their bed with Penning and now they have got to sleep in it. They could add a vet, maybe they should, but then again many of those guys are glass.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

Money talks. They've refused to spend and now the need is a glaring bulbous, throbbing sore that can no longer be ignored.

There WILL be players available and they WILL be expensive, but I'd rather overpay to shore up the position.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

I hope they will be available. Fingers crossed that there will be some out there when the cuts occur that are truly upgrades.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

In my opinion if the coaching staff feels that they need to bring in a veteran to take Pennings spot then you cut him. It’s year 3 and he’s still not making the grade. Move on now and let another young guy handle the backup roll, if you do indeed find a suitable starter.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

Pennings salary this year is fully guaranteed so in theory you would not cut him unless he was so bad he couldnt even be your last backup. Maybe he is that bad. Or maybe you could trade him, but doubtful. The other side to it is maybe if he gets benched you cut him anyway if you feel the situation is toxic and just forget about the money. Also I believe Jamal Williams and Foster Moreau also have guaranteed salaries this year.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

What would ever lead you to believe that anything would be toxic? That would never have even occurred to me.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

I'm hoping a team is willing to trade a 6th or 7th ahead of releasing to waivers.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

So I will explain this. The Saints front office invested a 1st round pick in Trevor Penning, which came at great expense due to the trade with Philly. At this point if we put Penning up for trade, we can speculate, but I think its questionable whether the Saints could get a 6th or 7th rounder for Penning, or nothing. You can be optimistic and dream Pennings present value could be a 4th or 5th around pick but even then, it is like a 90% or more loss in present value. So team is family, sure, but Penning is like a family member who borrowed money to start a business that has now lost most of that money and left those who believed in him struggling. Such situations are frequently toxic. Maybe some believe Penning will 100% turn it around and be a star, but most recognize that is not where we are now, so there are going to be feelings of disappointment, guilt, blame, resentment, etc. Penning is likely disappointed too. Likely some in Pennings circles are whispering in his ear that he has not been developed properly, and some in the circles of the Saints front office are whispering that Penning is difficult to coach and wasn't who they thought he was. That people blame other people when things go wrong is human nature. And just because it is kept behind closed doors does not mean its not reasonable to speculate that human beings are doing human nature. It is like speculating that celebrities who have been dating for a 2.5 years have probably had sex. They may not have done it public. They may not have discussed it publicly, but its human nature. Likewise, the more Penning disappoints, the more it is human nature that the disappointment results in tensions where the Saints blame Penning and Penning blames the Saints. Small inklings of this can be seen in the narrative where Penning tried to spin a comeback story around seeking advice from former Saint Terron Armstead and not discussing coaches and shrugging off questions about advice from present teammates like Ram. Or the end of last season where the Saints refused to use Penning even as a fill in when injuries mounted. Meanwhile the front office fired all their offensive coaches who had anything to do with Penning last year, in hopes a new staff could fix Penning, but for the most part we have seen the same old inconsistent Penning, raving about offhand conversations with former Saints not the new staff. While everyone would prefer that Penning suddenly develop as a star, I expect that behind closed doors tensions are building, and if the Saints feel that Penning will never become a good starter, they might rather just move on than keep him around as a project backup surrounded by disappointments and resentment that could negatively impact the locker room. Sometimes a fresh start is best when expectations are not met.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

All for that if there's anyone out there that could truly be an upgrade. I don't see a shot in hell of a true starter quality player being available at tackle at either waivers or late round trade fodder. Other positions, yes. I can see it. But if we can at least improve depth at tackle it would be a plus and worth a late pick, I suppose.

Like I have mentioned before, there's probably not a team out there that wouldn't want to improve their o-line depth. It seems like it's more of a seller's market than a buyer's market for the position. Perhaps if the trade was sweet enough a team might let a decent backup go for a mid round pick like a 4th, or maybe even a 3rd. I think that would probably be our best bet of picking up someone that could actually contribute at the position.

:(

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

Sorry, not going to waste my time reading that. Why do you always feel you have to write novellas? :D

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

Realistically there are Michael Thomas's and Jarvis Landry's out there at tackle, players who would be a significant upgrade IF HEALTHY. But their age and injury history are major red flags, and due to their past earnings, they probably aren't taking calls for minimum salary. So the question is, do you make those calls?

If one of these limping vets pan out, you may get a bargain, win a couple extra games, and maybe prevent a catastrophic injury to Carr, but you don't solve anything long term and you end up in the same dilemma next year, with a hit to the salary cap as well.

But if they don't pan out you potentially lose MORE games, put Carr at MORE risk, etc because you have to shuffle the oline mid-season and throw in someone who has not been practicing with the ones and has lost confidence from being benched, and maybe you had to cut your next best option and they are with another team, plus you still get the salary cap hit. Or maybe the limping vet is in and out of the lineup with nagging injuries all year and the position never stabilizes.

In the end, I think gambling on the limping vet is not worth it unless you are so close to a ring that the upside could push you over the edge. I don't think we are a David Back-to-IR away from a ring. Then again, I will acknowledge that the argument could be made to 'protect Carr at all costs' due to the devastation an injury (which could guarantee his 2025 salary) or inability to evaluate his play could cause for the franchises future.

Beyond the limping vets, the sort of players we could bring in for a 6th or 7th or cheap contract are the kind of players who would provide competition, not a sure thing. But if our depth is not impressing, competition is the way to go. So I favor bringing in competition for cheap. Even if the players we bring in have exactly the same skill level as the players we cut, just the statement it will make could light a fire under someone to step up their game.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

That's comes back around to not doing anything on those vets until AFTER week one. The last thing you want is to pick up a vet prior to week one and be committed to their salary for the full 17 weeks if they break down again.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

I'm sure there are teams with a surplus of O lineman who also have deficiencies at other spots in the roster.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

Not as many as you might think. Especially at tackle. They had a whole segment on Moving the Chains a couple of weeks ago talking about the shortage of decent tackles in the league today and the reasons why. They included the elimination of development in college due to limitations put in place by the NCAA and the recent trend of athletic big guys moving from o-line in high school and college to the more glamorous d-line. They did their usual 20 point scale of grading all teams' tackle corps and they said that scores were coming in lower than ever.

There were a small handful of teams in decent shape, but the vast majority were in, to differing degrees, the same dilemma we're facing. Some depth IS available, but the supply is greatly exceeded by the demand. A couple of teams may be willing to move some depth, but it ain't going to be cheap. We're going to have to outbid half the league. I hope we can, but I'm simply not counting on it. I hope I'm wrong. More accurately, I hope that all the guys on NFL Radio were wrong.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

I am not totally sure how this works. I know if they are signed after week 1 their salary is not guaranteed but I am not sure if they can be outright cut if injured without an injury settlement. I wonder what the Saints actually ended up paying Dez Bryan for example. It might be that in some cases a player could be cut for poor performance, or cut if they are injured and recover but there is no longer a spot for them, or perhaps if they have a setback with an existing injury. But I am not sure if a veteran signed after week 1 can be cut if they suffer a new injury or reinjure something that had healed, until they are cleared to take the field again.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

You've basically restated what I've been saying - someone will become available, possibly an upgrade, it will be above market price...

However!!

We cannot afford to sit on our hands and leave this glaring issue unresolved especially with our early schedule.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

I think part of the problem is that if an oline is surplus, its hard to tell if they would be much of an upgrade. If they are a young surplus oline they probably played with the backups in preseason games that may not have been at full speed. If they performed well in limited game action the previous season, its hard to say if that limited game action was what prevented the flaws in their technique and the limits to their durability from becoming clear, which might be part of why they were not slated to take over long term for their current team. If they were drafted in a high round, the team probably would have drafted them to start and played them with the ones and be moving on from a veteran not their top draft pick, so a young surplus oline is likely to have been drafted in later rounds or be an undrafted free agent, coming with all the questions that caused them to not be a top draft pick, limited on-field NFL experience to answer those questions, and one of the only data points being their current team being willing to let them walk.

If the surplus oline is a veteran, you do have lots of game tape, but likely the recent tape is not great, and their current team is likely letting them go for a younger player. There is a great chance they are breaking down with injuries, have lost a step, or were a system players whose deficiencies their team has had to cover for over the years.

With other positions on offense and defense there are more situational rotations from goal line packages to 3rds and long and 4 receiver sets to 4th down and short with 2 TE where there is a lot of opportunity for backups to get game time and stand out as the positions on the field. Yet there are pretty much only 5 oline on the field at a time. With backup oline they almost never see the field unless someone is hurt or on weird special teams and situational packages. When someone is hurt and a backup oline fills in, you get a limited number of matchups and it can be hard to tell if the team is having to give them a lot of help or if they just handled an impressive assignment one week well because Bosa was nursing a sore back or because the game plan quickly shifted to their strength.

In the end, I think its smarter to look at surplus oline as 'competition' than a definite upgrade. But we do need competition.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

I'm betting on familiarity with a player who they recently scouted but couldn't bring in.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

Yeah. That's basically the way I see it.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

I can't believe I'm agreeing with Bako on this, but I'm not sure I'd want to give up what it would take to get an actual upgrade if it's too costly. For example, a 2025 3rd rounder for a player that's a backup upgrade and would only play significant snaps due to injury.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

Who makes that trade? Seriously.

I'm reading day 3 pick is most common.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

Good hell. Y’all need to make your posts smaller. I’m just too lazy to read those. Lol

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

For most other positions, yes. For a roster worthy tackle, the single most in demand position in the league today? Over half the teams in the league are in the market. The Steelers, for example, now have both starting tackles (Jones - elbow, Fautanu - MCL) injured and are likely to be in the market. We at least have one.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

I know what you mean. :D

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

However, the opposite could be said for quality head coaches. There is a shortage across the league and they at least have one. Many candidates with the traits of understanding the game, leadership skills, and charisma often choose the glamor of broadcasting and being able to put head coaches on their toes with tough questions over the thankless job of working their way up from the rank of assistant and fending off scrutiny from broadcasters. We are not the only team to be trotting out damaged goods retreads or failed projects at tackle or head coach.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

And what does that have to do with the price of tea in China?

:D

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

Everything.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

Well stated and clearly articulated. It’s very important to continue to drive the point home (for those who fail to see beyond the rosey lenses) that our damaged goods and retreads happen to occupy KEY POSITIONS, and until that gets squarely and bluntly addressed and corrected, this team will remain barely competitive, if not entirely irrelevant, indefinitely.

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?
 

Re: Time To Move On At Tackle?