FO? WTF?

FatiusJeebs · 03-20-2006, 01:02 PM

The characters on this board huh? Hmmmm......

FanNJ · 03-20-2006, 01:17 PM

Whodi,

I'll agree with ya, that a great scheme and good coaching is a necessity. More so the latter in recognising players that fit the scheme vs. the force fitting the prior staff accomplicshed.

pakowitz · 03-20-2006, 02:50 PM

Quote:
i wouldnt say archie played great when he played for us...

Yeah, all he did was winone of those little trophies, damn, what are they called, oh that's right, THE LEAGUE MVP on one of the worst teams in NFL history. How may Saints players after Archie have that honor?

Secondly, you don't need a great offensive line to win it all, you need a great scheme, which comes with great coaching. San Diego has nowhere near a great O-line, yet they have been a playoff team, and a very good team the last two years. Miami went 9-7 with that crap offensive line. NE's offensive lines were nothing anyone is putting into the hall of fame. Hell, Tampa Bay's offensive line when they won the Superbowl was trash. Tom Brady is a great QB who does not have a great offensive line. They had Logan freaking Mankins starting for them last year. But those guys have been together, and have great coaching. If you have a smart QB, and a great offensive line scheme, you can win in the NFL. Hopefully this year, we should have both.

i still wouldnt say he played great... his best year was in 1980 when he had 3700 yards 23 TDs and 20 INTs for an 81.8 QB rating

compare brooks best year stat wise... in 2003 brooks had 3500 yards 24 Tds an 8 INTs for an 88.8 QB rating.... but he also had 14 fumbles that year as well.... but either way i wouldnt say brooks was that great and archie really didnt have that great of a season either in his best year...

an i never said you need a great O line to win it all i said you need a good Oline to have a Great QB

yes SD has been a good team...wouldnt say very good... but they have been solid and i wouldnt say brees has been GREAT... i would say he has been good... better then the trash we had and hopefully he can be as good or better then he was in SD... im just saying that i would like to see him play great an for that we will need a better Oline... better then what we have now b/c we just lost our best lineman to the browns an he will be sorely missed...

saintswhodi · 03-20-2006, 03:28 PM

still wouldnt say he played great... his best year was in 1980 when he had 3700 yards 23 TDs and 20 INTs for an 81.8 QB rating

compare brooks best year stat wise... in 2003 brooks had 3500 yards 24 Tds an 8 INTs for an 88.8 QB rating.... but he also had 14 fumbles that year as well.... but either way i wouldnt say brooks was that great and archie really didnt have that great of a season either in his best year...

Why would you compare Archie to Brooks? First, Brooks played on the most talented offensive teams the Saints have ever known. Second, it was different eras. There are so many rules made just to open up the passing game these days it's not even funny. In Archie's days, a receiver coming across the middle got knocked on his ass. Today, if a LB sneezes on them, it's 5-15 yards and a first down. But Archie STILL has a league MVP, meaning on his crap team, he was the best player int he NFL for that season. Archie was a great QB. If he played for the Steelers, he would have made Bradshaw look ordinary.

an i never said you need a great O line to win it all i said you need a good Oline to have a Great QB

Actually, I don't believe that's true either. Would you say Denver has one of the best o-lines in football consistently? Since Elway, how many great QBs have they had? And would you say Peyton is a great QB? The Colts do not have a good O-line, or better put, you can't tell if they do or don't cause of the offense they run. Cause of Manning's understnding of the game, and their offensive philosophy, they run no huddle, quick timing routes most times, that keeps a defense guessing and on its heels. The o-linemen do not have to block long at all. The only time you get to Peyton, is when you interrupt the timing of their plays, like the Steelers did in last year's playoffs, and the Pats did in the years prior. Not every team has the defense and players to play them like that though. But because of Peyton, you would think that the Colts' O-line is very good. Really it isn't. They generally can't grind out plays at the end of games, cause their offensive line isn't built like that. They are built for finesse. That's not a good O-line. BUT, even with that said, I agree 100% we need a better O-line. There is no doubt whatsoever about that. I don't think we have to try and assemble the best O-line in the league, but if we can get a solid group of guys who can play together and watch each other's backs, and who have the proper scheme for their talent level, I bet we will see a stark contrast in the play of our entire offense.

BJSim · 03-20-2006, 03:40 PM

A good OL makes even a bad QB look good. Because of the time he gets to survey the feild and make the right decision.

A good QB can make an OL look good. By having a quick release and fast decision making skills a QB can keep himself from geting sacked.

Both are true, but it really takes the combo of the two for a team to get to the next level. A good OL that gives a good QB even more time to make decisions and complete the long passes is the best.

BlackandBlue · 03-20-2006, 03:48 PM

Originally Posted by papz

After reading all that, why do I get the feeling that fatz is another BlackonBlack? Sigh...

another endangered species?

good to see you back, JKool, you're still a law enforcer, should you ever decide to come out of retirement. If not, the crew we have in place currently is top notch.

LongTimeFan · 03-20-2006, 03:50 PM

Don't disrespect A. Manning with saying his name in the same breath as saying Brooks' name, we have been talking about Manning for a long long time since he left the game, Brooks on the other hand is a loser and we will soon forget who Brooks was. Period

JOESAM2002 · 03-20-2006, 05:18 PM

Damn, I'm not even missed?

BlackandBlue · 03-20-2006, 05:19 PM

you're always here

JOESAM2002 · 03-20-2006, 05:22 PM

and a good thing I am!!!!! Hell I miss me!

03-20-2006, 01:02 PM	#71
FatiusJeebs 500th Post Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 973	The characters on this board huh? Hmmmm......
FatiusJeebs 500th Post Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 973

03-20-2006, 01:17 PM	#72
FanNJ 100th Post Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 324	Whodi, I'll agree with ya, that a great scheme and good coaching is a necessity. More so the latter in recognising players that fit the scheme vs. the force fitting the prior staff accomplicshed.
FanNJ 100th Post Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 324

03-20-2006, 02:50 PM	#73
pakowitz The Dark Overlord Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: dirty south Posts: 3,450	Quote: i wouldnt say archie played great when he played for us... Yeah, all he did was winone of those little trophies, damn, what are they called, oh that's right, THE LEAGUE MVP on one of the worst teams in NFL history. How may Saints players after Archie have that honor? Secondly, you don't need a great offensive line to win it all, you need a great scheme, which comes with great coaching. San Diego has nowhere near a great O-line, yet they have been a playoff team, and a very good team the last two years. Miami went 9-7 with that crap offensive line. NE's offensive lines were nothing anyone is putting into the hall of fame. Hell, Tampa Bay's offensive line when they won the Superbowl was trash. Tom Brady is a great QB who does not have a great offensive line. They had Logan freaking Mankins starting for them last year. But those guys have been together, and have great coaching. If you have a smart QB, and a great offensive line scheme, you can win in the NFL. Hopefully this year, we should have both. i still wouldnt say he played great... his best year was in 1980 when he had 3700 yards 23 TDs and 20 INTs for an 81.8 QB rating compare brooks best year stat wise... in 2003 brooks had 3500 yards 24 Tds an 8 INTs for an 88.8 QB rating.... but he also had 14 fumbles that year as well.... but either way i wouldnt say brooks was that great and archie really didnt have that great of a season either in his best year... an i never said you need a great O line to win it all i said you need a good Oline to have a Great QB yes SD has been a good team...wouldnt say very good... but they have been solid and i wouldnt say brees has been GREAT... i would say he has been good... better then the trash we had and hopefully he can be as good or better then he was in SD... im just saying that i would like to see him play great an for that we will need a better Oline... better then what we have now b/c we just lost our best lineman to the browns an he will be sorely missed...
	I Live In Beastmode!

03-20-2006, 03:28 PM	#74
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	still wouldnt say he played great... his best year was in 1980 when he had 3700 yards 23 TDs and 20 INTs for an 81.8 QB rating compare brooks best year stat wise... in 2003 brooks had 3500 yards 24 Tds an 8 INTs for an 88.8 QB rating.... but he also had 14 fumbles that year as well.... but either way i wouldnt say brooks was that great and archie really didnt have that great of a season either in his best year... Why would you compare Archie to Brooks? First, Brooks played on the most talented offensive teams the Saints have ever known. Second, it was different eras. There are so many rules made just to open up the passing game these days it's not even funny. In Archie's days, a receiver coming across the middle got knocked on his ass. Today, if a LB sneezes on them, it's 5-15 yards and a first down. But Archie STILL has a league MVP, meaning on his crap team, he was the best player int he NFL for that season. Archie was a great QB. If he played for the Steelers, he would have made Bradshaw look ordinary. an i never said you need a great O line to win it all i said you need a good Oline to have a Great QB Actually, I don't believe that's true either. Would you say Denver has one of the best o-lines in football consistently? Since Elway, how many great QBs have they had? And would you say Peyton is a great QB? The Colts do not have a good O-line, or better put, you can't tell if they do or don't cause of the offense they run. Cause of Manning's understnding of the game, and their offensive philosophy, they run no huddle, quick timing routes most times, that keeps a defense guessing and on its heels. The o-linemen do not have to block long at all. The only time you get to Peyton, is when you interrupt the timing of their plays, like the Steelers did in last year's playoffs, and the Pats did in the years prior. Not every team has the defense and players to play them like that though. But because of Peyton, you would think that the Colts' O-line is very good. Really it isn't. They generally can't grind out plays at the end of games, cause their offensive line isn't built like that. They are built for finesse. That's not a good O-line. BUT, even with that said, I agree 100% we need a better O-line. There is no doubt whatsoever about that. I don't think we have to try and assemble the best O-line in the league, but if we can get a solid group of guys who can play together and watch each other's backs, and who have the proper scheme for their talent level, I bet we will see a stark contrast in the play of our entire offense.

03-20-2006, 03:48 PM	#76
BlackandBlue Kinder, gentler Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: dirty south Posts: 3,889	Re: RE: Re: RE: Re: RE: FO? WTF? Originally Posted by papz After reading all that, why do I get the feeling that fatz is another BlackonBlack? Sigh... another endangered species? good to see you back, JKool, you're still a law enforcer, should you ever decide to come out of retirement. If not, the crew we have in place currently is top notch.

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

03-20-2006, 03:40 PM	#75
BJSim 500+ posts Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Centreville, VA Posts: 577	A good OL makes even a bad QB look good. Because of the time he gets to survey the feild and make the right decision. A good QB can make an OL look good. By having a quick release and fast decision making skills a QB can keep himself from geting sacked. Both are true, but it really takes the combo of the two for a team to get to the next level. A good OL that gives a good QB even more time to make decisions and complete the long passes is the best.

03-20-2006, 03:50 PM	#77
LongTimeFan Moderator Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Louisiana Posts: 2,403	Don't disrespect A. Manning with saying his name in the same breath as saying Brooks' name, we have been talking about Manning for a long long time since he left the game, Brooks on the other hand is a loser and we will soon forget who Brooks was. Period

03-20-2006, 05:18 PM	#78
JOESAM2002 1000 Posts + Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: CRYSTAL BEACH TEXAS Posts: 4,100	Damn, I'm not even missed?

03-20-2006, 05:19 PM	#79
BlackandBlue Kinder, gentler Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: dirty south Posts: 3,889	you're always here

03-20-2006, 05:22 PM	#80
JOESAM2002 1000 Posts + Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: CRYSTAL BEACH TEXAS Posts: 4,100	and a good thing I am!!!!! Hell I miss me!