Whodi....

I don't see why you aren't at least a little concerned about Leinart's possible future in N.O. I think people somewhat doubt his physical abilities, but mostly people doubt how he will adapt to life on our team. He'll be going quite literally from riches to rags(regardless of the contract he will get). I know he said he will go wherever he is drafted but that doesn't alleviate any of my concerns in the least. What is he supposed to say at this point? I think he doesn't want to come off as a complete jerk by saying "I would rather not go here, but i will go wherever i'm drafted". There is no precedent for this situation, being that no team's home city has been ravaged by a hurricane to this degree, plus the lack of stability in the franchise overall. I think it would be a little naive to think that everything will be hunky dory. Honestly if i was in his situation I would hold out and force a trade. Coming from where he's coming from, would u want to buy a house and live in N.O.?? Come on now.

Besides addressing another critical need, i don't think that the dropoff in lifestyle is as significant to a player like A.J. Hawk. And all of this stuff definitely matters to these guys. It's not all about the football to them.

I just don't see it. The guy will be playing football, and will be a millionaire 40 times over. I am sure the league will also throw in some concessions to players who come here as FAs, or are drafted here. He doesn't have to live in New Olreans, most of the players don't. During the season all he has to worry about is football, after that, he can do whatever the hell he wants. Go back to LA in the offseason if he so chooses. Hell, all the Univ of Miami players hang out in Miami after the season. And like I said, if he does, AT THAT POINT, we trade him for a pirate's booty of picks and or players. This really is not a concern to me at all. Also, for the guy to say he would play wherever he is drafted, and still have people question him, just shows a bias to me. Until he says something different, I am gonna operate under the knowledge he will stand by that. When/if he changes his mind, then other choices will need to be made. Until then, I am not gonna pretend I know the man better than he knows himself.

Perhaps the truest thing I have heard in awhile. Thank you Whodi for your unbiased opinion.

I don't understand why people doubt either one. His physical skills are pretty damn good. He's 6'4". Great poise. Here's Scouts, Inc. scouting report on Leinart:
OK so he has some MINOR injury issues, he's not Michael Vick, and he doesn't have ELITE arm strength. But this guy is still rated a 98 (the same as Reggie Bush). That's pretty freakin good. Give this guy the credit he deserves instead of holding biased grudges for no reason. This guy is a total stud. SUPER ACCURATE. Good arm-strength. GREAT ON-FIELD INTELLIGENCE. How can we not want this guy?

It really isn't about not wanting him. It's about not wanting him at #2 overall.

http://www.gatorzone.com/insidefootb...page=greats#qb

http://usctrojans.collegesports.com/...rt_matt00.html

Comparing Leinart to Peyton doesn't seem to fit since Peyton does have elite arm strength and is the model of the dropback passer.

Comparing Leinart to Brady is certainly complimentary, but if you had suggested that the Redskins take Tom Brady at #2 in the 2000 draft, they'd have laughed you out of town. Every team in the league passed on him at least 6 times. New England took him at pick #33 in the 6th round. I'm also pretty sure that Mel Kiper didn't grade Brady out higher than anyone else ever drafted either.

But when you get right down to it, what makes Leinart a better choice than Wuerffel? They've both won at every level of competition they've ever been involved in. They're numbers are similar, but if you're honest, Wuerffel is the better candidate. Winning the SEC 4 straight times is a pretty impressive feat.

My problem with Leinart is that he is either going to be good or going to be a total bust. I'd rather trade down and take the best defensive player in this class and pick up a quality QB in round 2 or even manage a later round 1. I'd have no problems at all with Leinart at #16 or later, it's just #2 that I think we're asking for trouble with.

And in case anybody's wondering how Vince Young's scouting report looks:

He graded at a 93.

OK so you'd trade the 2nd best offensive player for the best defensive player because you're afraid Leinart could be a bust? What stops AJ Hawk from being a bust? NOthing, and you know it. He has more injury concerns that Leinart. Also, adding a "quality" QB isn't the same as adding a stud QB. Like I said earlier, just having a bunch of mediocre QBs doesn't mean the quarterback position will be good. It means they'll be mediocre. Look at the COlts. THey have Peyton and then.... Jim Sorgi. You don't need an Omar Jacobs, AMAC and a washed up veteran, you need a franchise QB, which is exactly what Leinart is.

with all these LBs declaring... i actually think we need to trade down and try to acquire another high 2nd round pick and pick 2 LBs with both of them

My own humble opinion is that Cutler will end up being the better pro.

Is that the only road left to take to discredit Leinart, compare him to busts? I am gonna make this real simple and easy: Weurffel was not called the best college QB of all time, by anyone. Ever, at any point. No comparison. But since that's the way the game has turned, let's look at some first round defensive players to see how they shake out. Hell, i'll just stick to the ones taking one overall:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aundray_Bruce

http://www.collegefootballnews.com/T...e%20Emtman.htm

I could go to Dan Wilkinson, and Courtney Brown and play this game all day. That's silly IMO. There is no other college QB to compare Leinart too, but if we are gonan compare him too busts, here are a few bust defensive players who won all the honors in college as well. :roll:

Also forgot that Weurffel played in a pass happy fun n gun offense that rarely used the run under Spurrier, while Leinart played in a balanced pro style system at USC. Anyone think a guy playing ain a pro style offens ewill have an easier time adjusting to the NFL than a guy who threw 80% of the time out of the shotgun? Wait, that sounds familiar too.

A man with vision, a Pakman if you will. Damn, P I don't know how anyone else is missing this. If we have an average QB and a great defense we will win more games than with a superstar rookie QB and a average defense.

I don't think I can explain that any better and we are not talking about the future. The Saints have to win now because if we don't THERE WON'T BE A FUTURE.

Is anyone reading this the same way I am writing it. The seats will be full next year no matter who the QB is!!!!!!!

RE: Defense !!1
 

GO DDDDDDDDDDDDD

Ok, heres my opinion, if I have said something different, sorry, but this is it now.
Trade down, pick up 2nd and draft Hawk (MLB over)
First second rounder- Max Gean Gilles
Second Second Rounder- BA DT or OLB

Also, two players I have noticed, and have wondered about. Ahmad Brooks and AJ Nicholson, how late do you think each will fall? Should we get them?

TheDeuce
Posted: Jan 09, 2006 - 10:02 AM

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:
My problem with Leinart is that he is either going to be good or going to be a total bust. I'd rather trade down and take the best defensive player in this class and pick up a quality QB in round 2 or even manage a later round 1.


OK so you'd trade the 2nd best offensive player for the best defensive player because you're afraid Leinart could be a bust? What stops AJ Hawk from being a bust? NOthing, and you know it. He has more injury concerns that Leinart. Also, adding a "quality" QB isn't the same as adding a stud QB. Like I said earlier, just having a bunch of mediocre QBs doesn't mean the quarterback position will be good. It means they'll be mediocre. Look at the COlts. THey have Peyton and then.... Jim Sorgi. You don't need an Omar Jacobs, AMAC and a washed up veteran, you need a franchise QB, which is exactly what Leinart is.


Ok, but I have a question. Which would you rather have, a stud QB or a stud MLB? A person to man the offense, or to man the defense? If Trent Dilfer and Brad Johnson can lead teams to Super Bowls, why can't we rent a QB and have them play decent for a respectable record?

Good call Zach but I would take Nicholson, I think Brooks had some knee surgery and we don't want another Cie Grant

gino toretta=matt lienart.

winwin=blackonblack. So, always wrong.

where they hell do u guys get those at? and arent these a lil old?

im talkin about the scouting reports on the qbs....

the saints need to put butts in the seats next year and go 8-8. if they don't do both start printing new jerseys with the los angeles saints on it.

defense is important to win, but some forget that we actually had a decent defense this year. considering we had the worst turnover margin in the league this year and still had a defense ranked 14th overall says to me that a good defensive coordinator(get rid of venturi)a qb with a brain(leinhart) and a healthy deuce would make the saints a heads on favorite for 2006's worst to first team.

look what pitsburgh did with rothesburger(how ever spell his name) his rookie year. solid defense with a heavy dose of the running game. i agree with charmy and others that we need to pick up a solid young lb in the draft, but i think there will be plenty available when we pick early in the 2nd round.

I know this is slightly off-topic, but BMG, have you given any consideration to a new name, if the team puts us out of our misery and actually does let Brooks go? How about BrooksIsDone?

Good post.

I largely agree with this post.
However, I think there are couple of problems with it.

The first thing is, I doubt Deuce will be 100% coming back from the injury next year. We might have the 2 year recovery window similar to Edgerrin James did. I hope I'm wrong at this point.

Second, I'm really concerned that the offensive line we have won't be as effective in a run first attack. Gandy is more of a liability for us.

If we could manage to get another pick in the first 40, I would feel pretty good about being able to address LT, LB and QB.

Maybe the answer is a 2 year rebuild? Suffer through another year of Brooks and don't let Leinart confuse the real needs of this team? I can't believe I'm even considering this.

I have been giving some thought to this. Once it happens I'll need to decide if I'm going to have a more permanent handle. I'm leaning towards "BensonMustGo" at this point.

BrooksMustGo, just in case you missed the post:
I know this is slightly off-topic, but BMG, have you given any consideration to a new name, if the team puts us out of our misery and actually does let Brooks go? How about BrooksIsDone? Anyone else have a suggestion?

I think we need D, simple as that. Playmakers, and younger guys. Its sad when your DT leds in Tackles. Plus, Deuce IS coming back, maybe not 100%, but he still is.

Actually, if we're hopeful, "BensonMustGo" would not be a more permanent handle. In a perfect world, he would sell the team and that handle would be obsolete, too. But I like the way you think.

I would rather have a stud QB, hands down. Look at the Bears over the last few years. They have had Brian Urlacher, one of the best MLBs in the game, but no quarterback; and god almighty they were awful. When he was healthy and playing, there defense was pretty good, but their offense was absolutley horrid. That's exactly like what the Saints are. Our defense is mediocre, and last year with Captain Turnover at the helm, our offense was pitiful. The addition of one LB to our team isn't going to make us the Monsters of the Midway all of a sudden.
I'm sure when you wrote this you were probably thinking about that catchy little cliche "defense wins championships." And hey, maybe you're right. But that's exactly what it means, DEFENSES, entire defenses win championships, not just one player. Urlacher was top 3 best linebackers the last 5 years, but the rest of his defense sucked arse.
So applied to the Saints, the addition of a quarterback to this team would far outweigh the impact of a LB. This is because the rest of our defense isn't that good. We're no 2000 Ravens squad. Just imagine how many games we could have won with a turnover margin in the middle of the NFL teams. Think of how many games we could have won with a good QB. Tons. Probably 7 or 8 more. Now look at how many more games we could have won wiht a good LB. Maybe a couple because our defense wasn't the one choking the game away (usually). The point I'm making again, that I've made countless times over the last few days, but that nobody seems to understand, is that our offense is worse than our defense. YOu address your biggest needs first (offense) with Matt Leinart, and then address your second biggest need with the 34th (one of the standout LBs that are so deep in this draft). This will create balance on the team. Very rarely do you see championship teams that are all defense and no offense (2000 Ravens); just like you see very few championship teams that are all offense and no defense (late 90's Rams). What you do see in the good Super Bowl teams (Patriots, 90's Cowboys), is BALANCE. Sure our defense needs help. But our offense needs more. But you still wanna ignore the offensive problems in hopes that we can build a 2000 Ravens-esque defense? Won't happen. Give me Leinart.

O.K., I've read in all these threads how we have to draft defense in the 1st round. Haven't we done that the past 3 years? Did it pay off? Oh heck, let me answer that. Yes, we drafted defense in the 1st 3 years in a row. Other than Will Smith, HELL NO it didn't pay off. Draft Leinart in the 1st, get Bobby Carpenter in the 2nd & start acting like a franchise that wants to win more than 50% of its games.

*saintswhodi starts a slow clap*

The Deuce, wow.
I am really beginning to wonder is it that hard to see?

I think everybody else is just disillusioned by the prospect of AJ Hawk. They don't understand that defensive players can bust just as easily as offensive players. They also don't understand fixing your biggest problem, which is in this case, our offense. I think people are just so used to wanting a better defense (because of the last five years), that they are just programmed that way now and its just routine to them. They're like robots walking around saying, "Give me defense or give me death, give me defense...." without realizing the current needs of our team.
:monkey: :monkey: :monkey: :help:

Hey G, didn't we draft Brown in the first round last year and when did we switch him to defense?

True, True. You got me on that one. But, we did draft defense in the 1st the previous 3 years.