TPankey

Hey what's up guys. Just registering here and all that jazz. Just had to get this off my chest. Why in the world the coaches decided to try and play the colts offense using a 4-3 defense most of the time is beyond me. You can't play anybody, much less the Colts, with a 4-3 defense when the oppposing offense is ligning up with three wide-outs and one runner in the backfield. That's why the Saints lost the game. Their defensive game plan relied too heavily on their linebackers. Yes, the Saints have six linebackers that could start anywhere in the league. And they are going to prove to be a real assett against run-oriented teams. However, the coaches just got a wake up call-the linebackers shouldn't have been relied on to try and contain the pass-oriented Colts. Had they stayed more in a nickel package the entire time, after all there were really three wideouts lining up on the Colts offense almost the entire time, but had they matched the Colts offense with a nickle package rather than being too in love with the three linebackers in there most of the time, than the game would have stayed close at least. Heck, if they really wanted to use their linebackers as much as they did, then they should have gone all the way with it and put four linebackers out there, and done to the Colts and Peyton what the Steelers did to them in their 3-4 with multiple blitz packages coming from every direction. On another note, the Saints lost because they got away from the running game too soon. The way to to beat the Colts would have been to mostly power-run downhill with Deuce against the lighter Colts defense and essentially just run over them over the course of the game, with some play-action mixed in at the right times. Had they done that, like I was expecting, (now I'm not so sure this coaching staff is as good as they've been made out to be), then they'd be 1-0, rather than looking as embarrassed as they are now.

LongTimeFan

I can't question why they played the way they played, I'm sure Sean did everything he could to do better during the game, he made some adjustments but none of them made a difference, the Saints were simply out matched Thursday night..
Hopefully the Saints will take out their frustration on the Bucs this coming Sunday and get back to where they left off last season.

JKool

Welcome aboard!

(1) I agree, there was certainly an early abandonment of the run.

(2) I think our weakness isn't our base defense. The 4-3 isn't a bad base defense at all, especially with our personnel. Also, I think that, sadly, Simoneau and Shanle on the field can't be much worse (and is probably better) that putting Craft out there. How good are our nickle and dime backs, really? Of course, that said, I'm all on board that our blitz packages are pretty sorry - but I think that is a personnel issue.

(3) The problem was our inability to stop the run, due to the weak middle of our defense - DTs and MLB. This seems to me a problem, but not an insurmountable one.

(4) Nickle packages, especially with Craft aren't going to be able to stop the run as well as our base D. This, again IMO, is the reason we saw a lot of 4-3 and not nickle. They were able to use those zone runs on our base D pretty easily, putting in an extra DB would make that worse.

(5) I think, overall, their pass worked well because (A) David was playing a bit... ahem... poorly, and (B) their running game kept our safeties honest and our CBs guessing.

(6) I also agree that it would have been nice to see some more blitzes (that weren't completely telegraphed)! However, I think they were being conservative because of Peyton's good eye and ability to get rid of the ball.

(7) I also totally agree that it would have been good to see more smashmouth style plays with Duece rather than these "dancy" "could be a pass" plays with Bush. Especially against a team, who on paper, appears to me better against the pass than the run. Good job sniffing out that coaching error!

"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks