Poor Patyon

LSUJeremy · 04-25-2006, 12:19 PM

I don't want Loomis making the picks. Let him stick to contracts.

JimBone · 04-25-2006, 01:45 PM

So do you think taking a backup to your 60 million dollar QB value? I think Ferguson is value because you have a starter for a long time at tackle...and i think Hawk is value because you add a playmaking LB to your team that you havent had in years...so what if it is higher than he is "supposed" to go...he adds the most to our team at this time.

FanNJ · 04-25-2006, 04:18 PM

So do you think taking a backup to your 60 million dollar QB value

10 Million...Could be gone next year.

JimBone · 04-25-2006, 04:53 PM

Originally Posted by FanNJ

So do you think taking a backup to your 60 million dollar QB value

10 Million...Could be gone next year.

What if he plays up to expectations? then what? What if he is just average and then you just threw away $10 million for one season? I have to think that the Brees signing is a long term thing no matter how you look at it.

saintswhodi · 04-25-2006, 04:58 PM

I don't think so. Signing Brees has served it's purpose 1) It excited the fans. 2) Excited fans bought up gobs of season tickets. It has already paid for itself, AND we had the money, AND we aren't pigeon-holed in the draft. I look at it as an investment they made. By the season ticket sales, it was obviously a good investment. So if Brees never takes a snap, pockets his $10 mil and is not back next year, he still served an important purpose, he brought fans back to the Saints, and brought new fans with him when we signed him. IMO, that was worth the $10 mil we gave him this year. If he plays, great. But I wouldn't consider the money a waste if he didn;t. It's not like it cash strapped us, we are still 14 mil plus under the cap.

JimBone · 04-25-2006, 05:02 PM

I undrestand that it generated excitement...and thats great...but my question is this...do you really take a Qb with the second pick in the draft after paying him what you paid him? That would be like signing him with expectations that he is going to fail. Then, when he doesnt fail, like in San Diego, and you have him with all his money, and then Leinart with all his money, what do you do then? I dont think taking a QB is a logical choice unless you are convinced that he wont do well.

xan · 04-25-2006, 05:02 PM

I view the Brees signing as what it is: a very expensive one year gamble, and currently there's absolutely no insurance. None of the quarterbacks on the roster nor the quarterbacks in FA are viable within the parameters of the next two years. Most would agree that it takes at least that long to get a rookie qb up to NFL speed no matter how great they were in college (system dependent, admittedly, and could be faster). SD actually did the right thing for their franchise - they had a competition with the incumbent and a very high profile qb, which the incumbent surprisingly won. Two years later, the incumbent goes down with a career threatening injury, and guess what - they've got a superlative replacement. Why can't the Saints be that smart - or do you think this franchise is immune to misfortune?

JimBone · 04-25-2006, 05:08 PM

Because San Diego was a better team at the time...they had a solid defense with some veterans and some young DB's that all put it together...the Saints dont have that. The needs here are for players that can make an impact now...not be some sort of contingency plan just in case he gets hurt again.

FanNJ · 04-25-2006, 05:09 PM

Whoodi,

Could not have answered better myself. The main purpose for the signing was to excite the fan base and sell tickets which it did as well as allow the team to take the necessary step to relieve Brooks from duty further exiting a portion of the fan base and open up the draft.

While I do hope he plays this season I will not be surprised if he can't, or can not live up to the expectations placed upon him. For the prior mentioned reasons that is not money wasted, it's actually money well spent.

Along the same liness Plan B can not be Bouman, it could be Amac, or it could be quaterback X in the draft. Well know better this time next week. As such a drafted QB X may not be a backup but rather our future starter. And may fall under the tutilage of Payton and Brees which would not be a bad combination to learn from.

In any event, I'm just trying to point out he's only a 10 Mil investment. The FO has options, so until he plays a down without further injury he was a 10 mil advertising campain in my mind.

Savant · 04-25-2006, 05:56 PM

Well he is selling tickets. Though I like to think that he's much more than that. My father always said the Saints should have never gotten rid of Delhomme. Though he wasn't as physically gifted as Brooks, he was competitve and more importantly a leader. Put someone else's brain and drive into Brook's body and he'd be visiting Hawaii almost every year. But the guy almost seems content with his own mediority. I'm not saying everything was his fault, but if the guys around you are dragging you've gotta step up and snap em out of it. I think Brees gives us that finally.

04-25-2006, 12:19 PM	#11
LSUJeremy 100th Post Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 472	I don't want Loomis making the picks. Let him stick to contracts.
LSUJeremy 100th Post Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 472

04-25-2006, 04:18 PM	#13
FanNJ 100th Post Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 324	So do you think taking a backup to your 60 million dollar QB value 10 Million...Could be gone next year.
FanNJ 100th Post Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 324

04-25-2006, 04:53 PM	#14
JimBone 500th Post Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Thibodaux, La Posts: 614	Originally Posted by FanNJ So do you think taking a backup to your 60 million dollar QB value 10 Million...Could be gone next year. What if he plays up to expectations? then what? What if he is just average and then you just threw away $10 million for one season? I have to think that the Brees signing is a long term thing no matter how you look at it.

04-25-2006, 05:02 PM	#17
xan Professor Crab and Site Donor 2014 Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Princeton Posts: 3,371 Blog Entries: 34	I view the Brees signing as what it is: a very expensive one year gamble, and currently there's absolutely no insurance. None of the quarterbacks on the roster nor the quarterbacks in FA are viable within the parameters of the next two years. Most would agree that it takes at least that long to get a rookie qb up to NFL speed no matter how great they were in college (system dependent, admittedly, and could be faster). SD actually did the right thing for their franchise - they had a competition with the incumbent and a very high profile qb, which the incumbent surprisingly won. Two years later, the incumbent goes down with a career threatening injury, and guess what - they've got a superlative replacement. Why can't the Saints be that smart - or do you think this franchise is immune to misfortune?
	Calvin: "I wish I was a Tiger." Hobbes: "Common lament."

04-25-2006, 05:09 PM	#19
FanNJ 100th Post Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 324	Whoodi, Could not have answered better myself. The main purpose for the signing was to excite the fan base and sell tickets which it did as well as allow the team to take the necessary step to relieve Brooks from duty further exiting a portion of the fan base and open up the draft. While I do hope he plays this season I will not be surprised if he can't, or can not live up to the expectations placed upon him. For the prior mentioned reasons that is not money wasted, it's actually money well spent. Along the same liness Plan B can not be Bouman, it could be Amac, or it could be quaterback X in the draft. Well know better this time next week. As such a drafted QB X may not be a backup but rather our future starter. And may fall under the tutilage of Payton and Brees which would not be a bad combination to learn from. In any event, I'm just trying to point out he's only a 10 Mil investment. The FO has options, so until he plays a down without further injury he was a 10 mil advertising campain in my mind.
FanNJ 100th Post Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 324

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

04-25-2006, 01:45 PM	#12
JimBone 500th Post Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Thibodaux, La Posts: 614	So do you think taking a backup to your 60 million dollar QB value? I think Ferguson is value because you have a starter for a long time at tackle...and i think Hawk is value because you add a playmaking LB to your team that you havent had in years...so what if it is higher than he is "supposed" to go...he adds the most to our team at this time.

04-25-2006, 04:58 PM	#15
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	I don't think so. Signing Brees has served it's purpose 1) It excited the fans. 2) Excited fans bought up gobs of season tickets. It has already paid for itself, AND we had the money, AND we aren't pigeon-holed in the draft. I look at it as an investment they made. By the season ticket sales, it was obviously a good investment. So if Brees never takes a snap, pockets his $10 mil and is not back next year, he still served an important purpose, he brought fans back to the Saints, and brought new fans with him when we signed him. IMO, that was worth the $10 mil we gave him this year. If he plays, great. But I wouldn't consider the money a waste if he didn;t. It's not like it cash strapped us, we are still 14 mil plus under the cap.

04-25-2006, 05:08 PM	#18
JimBone 500th Post Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Thibodaux, La Posts: 614	Because San Diego was a better team at the time...they had a solid defense with some veterans and some young DB's that all put it together...the Saints dont have that. The needs here are for players that can make an impact now...not be some sort of contingency plan just in case he gets hurt again.

04-25-2006, 05:56 PM	#20
Savant 100th Post Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 275	Well he is selling tickets. Though I like to think that he's much more than that. My father always said the Saints should have never gotten rid of Delhomme. Though he wasn't as physically gifted as Brooks, he was competitve and more importantly a leader. Put someone else's brain and drive into Brook's body and he'd be visiting Hawaii almost every year. But the guy almost seems content with his own mediority. I'm not saying everything was his fault, but if the guys around you are dragging you've gotta step up and snap em out of it. I think Brees gives us that finally.
Savant 100th Post Join Date: Mar 2005 Posts: 275