Saints talked to Booty

SaintFanInATLHELL · 01-26-2008, 02:42 PM

Originally Posted by cgctobe

Great point Papz! Can you imagine if Drew went down with injury?

No rookie nor veteran backup could do anything about that. We'd instantly be the Carolina Panthers from last year.

Anyone QB who has anything close to Brees' talent and leadership is a starting QB in this league. The days of Montana starting with Young as his backup are over. Both examples of this last year (Carr in Carolina, Harrington in Atlanta) were terrible failures.

Anyway even if that were the case, no rookie could come in and do better than the two backup QBs we already have on staff.

With the exception of Brady, all current successful QBs in the league are top draft picks.

This year isn't the year to try to figure out who Brees replacement is going to be. Do that next year.

SFIAH

QBREES9 · 01-26-2008, 03:31 PM

Delaware quarterback Joe Flacco has been looking good.

SapperSaint · 01-26-2008, 03:36 PM

Flacco, reminds me of the "Replacements" movie. Shane Falco.

But seriously, I too have heard some good talk about Flacco.

papz · 01-26-2008, 03:40 PM

Originally Posted by SaintFanInATLHELL

Didn't we already do this with Palko? Doesn't the guy already have a year in the Saints' system under his belt?

Palko was an undrafted free agent that spent the bulk of the year on our practice squad. So really, we didn't do that last year... but Palko does have a year under his belt understanding our system.

Why draft yet another low round QB to develop when we have one already?

Up top.

But you have to analyze why the offense would take two steps back. That answer is pretty simple: injuries, specifically to Brees. If that unfortunate event were to happen, how would a low drafted rookie help the situation? Like I said in my previous post, Martin is going into his 3rd year here in our system, and has over a dozen years in the league under his belt. The last time he had true backup duty for the Rams, he did fine. We already have Palko, who may be ready to step up.

Colston was a low round drafted rookie as was Jahari Evans. Jamie Martin is also a free agent.

The offense only dropped off a slight bit last year (500 yards, 4 TDs, 34 points, same number of turnovers). And that was in the face of injuries large and small in both the backs and receivers.

And to insure we can maintain that level of success... we need to continue to add weapons. Standing still and expecting it to stay the same wouldn't be smart. Should the offense not be effective as it has been the last couple of years, all you are going to hear is "I can't believe we didn't draft or sign any more weapons for Brees last offseason".

We haven't even seend the offensive redshirt class of the 2007 Draft. The reload personnel is already on staff.

We don't really know that do we...

Resign our own free agents. That's the key.

Which would be wise considering the lack of depth we have with all the free agents.

We have 3 or 4 potential starters on the offensive line sitting on the bench (Strief, Allenman, Goodwin, Bushrod). Same with the #2 receiver. The team carried 5 TE last year. Our #4 RB torched the Bears for over 200 total yards.

And if they're all flops?

On offense we have weapons, protection, and backups. Look at how well the offense did with little substantive changes from 2006.

We didn't win the Superbowl... there's room for improvement everywhere on our team.... not just our defense.

Honestly, how many new offensive starters do we need? On the defense most would say that at most we have 5 starters (Smith, Grant, Thomas, Fujita, Harper)

Probably 2 or 3... #2 WR, OG, and TE. Plenty on defense which is pretty obvious.

Defense needs 6 starters and decent backups. Offense needs none. I wonder where the focus should be.

Which is incorrect.

I wouldn't even bother with churn on the offensive side of the ball. Even if the offense dropped to the middle of the pack in terms of scoring (unlikely) with a top 10 scoring defense, the team would still go far into the playoffs.

Defense wins championships. Offense entertains fans.

Which do you want: entertainment or a championship?

SFIAH

Agreed... and whoever scores the most points wins too. We're both going to keep on saying the same thing.

We have 7 draft picks... it wouldn't kill anyone to select one or two offensive players I wouldn't think. You're setting yourself up for disappointment if you think we're going to go defense with all 7 picks.

SapperSaint · 01-26-2008, 04:30 PM

Going with all 7 defensive picks would be a moronic mistake. Offensive guys will be picked up at least by the 3rd. We will pick up a WR/RB, you can bank on that. there are too many good "O" guys out there to just pass up on.

I do hope they make the first two guys "D" players.

papz · 01-26-2008, 04:39 PM

As I would also. I'm watching the Senior Bowl and Keith Rivers looks very very good. Also that Cromartie kid some were talking about has outstanding recovery speed.

Supersaint19 · 01-26-2008, 04:52 PM

Booty would be great in our system

saintsfan1976 · 01-26-2008, 05:04 PM

Originally Posted by papz

As I would also. I'm watching the Senior Bowl and Keith Rivers looks very very good. Also that Cromartie kid some were talking about has outstanding recovery speed.

I've talked up Cromartie coming into the Senior Bowl. Like his athleticism and skills.

papz · 01-26-2008, 05:35 PM

Mayock is all over Cromartie also. If we land Rivers and Cromartie with our first two picks, I'd be pretty darn happy.

SaintFanInATLHELL · 01-26-2008, 06:52 PM

Does anyone know how to get the board to keep all the quotes in a thread instead of just the last set of quotes?

I'm copying and pasting into the Quick reply box. But I then have to requote everything.

Didn't we already do this with Palko? Doesn't the guy already have a year in the Saints' system under his belt?

Why draft yet another low round QB to develop when we have one already?

Palko was an undrafted free agent that spent the bulk of the year on our practice squad. So really, we didn't do that last year... but Palko does have a year under his belt understanding our system.

Do you really expect to carry a rookie QB on the squad? Or to bump Martin for one?

At the very least let's see if there's actually a reliable veteran backup QB out there if that's the goal.

But you have to analyze why the offense would take two steps back. That answer is pretty simple: injuries, specifically to Brees. If that unfortunate event were to happen, how would a low drafted rookie help the situation? Like I said in my previous post, Martin is going into his 3rd year here in our system, and has over a dozen years in the league under his belt. The last time he had true backup duty for the Rams, he did fine. We already have Palko, who may be ready to step up.

Colston was a low round drafted rookie as was Jahari Evans. Jamie Martin is also a free agent.

We're talking about the QB position here. Even top first round picks struggle.

I know we're talking about a clipboard holder. However, the point of the backup QB is to be able to effectively hold the fort should the general go down.

I just can't see how a rookie can accomplish that.

But maybe I'm wrong. Look at Trent Edwards for the Bills.

The offense only dropped off a slight bit last year (500 yards, 4 TDs, 34 points, same number of turnovers). And that was in the face of injuries large and small in both the backs and receivers.

And to insure we can maintain that level of success... we need to continue to add weapons. Standing still and expecting it to stay the same wouldn't be smart. Should the offense not be effective as it has been the last couple of years, all you are going to hear is "I can't believe we didn't draft or sign any more weapons for Brees last offseason".

But where do the weapons fit. You have a back rotation with Bush, Stecker, PT, and presumably Deuce if he recovers in time. You have a receiver corps with Colston, Meachum, Moore, hopefully Patton, and maybe Copper. I figure someone's going to pay Henderson and hopes that he breaks out. You have tight ends out the ying yang.

So again where do the weapons fit. Yet another #1 TE? Sit Meachum for another year? Cut Patton's playing time?

Why restock what is already well stocked?

We haven't even seen the offensive redshirt class of the 2007 Draft. The reload personnel is already on staff.

We don't really know that do we...

We don't know about free agents or new draft picks either. Remember that Jason David was supposed to be the perfect #2 CB to pair up with MacKenzie.

You never know. You need to scout and draft outstanding players then put them in positions to win. If we doubt the redshirt class of 2007, then why did we draft them?

Resign our own free agents. That's the key.

Which would be wise considering the lack of depth we have with all the free agents.

Now of course if we lose a key free agent, there needs to be a replacement plan. Here's the list of our current free agents and my expectation of their eventual status:

STARTERS

WR David Patten: RESIGN

TE Eric Johnson: RESIGN

C Jeff Faine: RESIGN or replace with Goodwin

G Jamar Nesbit: Let go and replaced by Allenman

DT Brian Young: Let go. Area of need to be filled in FA or draft

LB Mark Simoneau: Good riddance!

RESERVES

QB Jamie Martin: Resigned

RB Aaron Stecker: Resigned

WR Devery Henderson: Released and replaced by Meachum

WR Terrance Copper: Resigned I hope.

TE Billy Miller: Resigned.

C Jonathan Goodwin: Resigned.

DE Josh Cooper: resign

DE Renaldo Wynn: unsure

LB Matt McCoy: Who?

CB Fred Thomas: Released. Replaced by Young

S Jay Bellamy: Resigned I hope.

S Steve Gleason: Released unfortunately

K Martin Gramatica: Resigned. Mare is cut.

Now again obviously if we lose a major number of free agents on the offensive side of the ball we'll have to look to replace them.

We have 3 or 4 potential starters on the offensive line sitting on the bench (Strief, Allenman, Goodwin, Bushrod). Same with the #2 receiver. The team carried 5 TE last year. Our #4 RB torched the Bears for over 200 total yards.

And if they're all flops?

Then we get what we deserve. Championship teams are built in the draft. If a players that you draft don't make the cut, then the organization is doomed to fail anyway.

Everything I have read or heard points to the draft class of 2007 being really good. Young has shown promise. The offensive linemen have been reported as solid. Meachum's status all hinges on the health of his knee. But the Saints knew that when they drafted him.

If you can trust your draft picks, then you've got bigger problems.

On offense we have weapons, protection, and backups. Look at how well the offense did with little substantive changes from 2006.

We didn't win the Superbowl... there's room for improvement everywhere on our team.... not just our defense.

We didn't win the superbowl because we don't have a championship defense. So of course it gets back to my point: Solidify the defense. Spend as little resources as possible on the offensive side of the ball to maintain. Sign our own free agents on offense then leave it alone.

This pattern isn't forever. Next year you can restock the offense if you like as long as the defense rises to the top 10 in scoring defense. It'll be harder then because then you'll be back to picking late in the rounds.

[Quote]

Honestly, how many new offensive starters do we need? On the defense most would say that at most we have 5 starters (Smith, Grant, Thomas, Fujita, Harper)

Probably 2 or 3... #2 WR, OG, and TE. Plenty on defense which is pretty obvious.[quote]

#2 WR: Meachum
OG: Allenman
TE: Johnson/Miller just like last year.

Hmmm. Seems to me that you play your current draft picks and resign your free agents, then offense will be quite fine.

Defense needs 6 starters and decent backups. Offense needs none. I wonder where the focus should be?

Which is incorrect.

Of course we agree to disagree here. I believe that each of the offensive positions you think we need filled already have folks who were on our staff last year. I don't think we currently have on our staff the DT, 2 LBs, 2 CBs, and the safety (well maybe the safety, maybe) that we need to field a competitive defense.

I wouldn't even bother with churn on the offensive side of the ball. Even if the offense dropped to the middle of the pack in terms of scoring (unlikely) with a top 10 scoring defense, the team would still go far into the playoffs.

Defense wins championships. Offense entertains fans.

Which do you want: entertainment or a championship?

SFIAH

Agreed... and whoever scores the most points wins too. We're both going to keep on saying the same thing.

See my signature. Some of the most prolific offenses in the NFL never got a sniff of the superbowl.

I know we'll both keep saying the same thing. But I think it's fine because everyone on the board will hear and understand both sides of the argument

We have 7 draft picks... it wouldn't kill anyone to select one or two offensive players I wouldn't think. You're setting yourself up for disappointment if you think we're going to go defense with all 7 picks.

I know it won't happen. By the time the draft comes around there may be a BPA situation that fills an offensive need. But it shouldn't occur until the 4th round or later.

But you are going to continue to be disappointed if you think that we can get to a consistent championship level of play by improving the offense. Offenses falter in the face of good defenses. See our own Saints over the last two years as a perfect example.

You need a solid defense to complement your offense. The defense can't be in the high 20s in scoring and giving up a ton of TDs and long pass plays. Your defense cannot have terrible efficiency on third down. It damages your offense because it flips the field position or yields points.

I'm fine with whatever is necessary to keep the offense stable. But nothing more than that. The positions you want filled we already have the personnel to do. Do you really think we'll lose both Johnson and Miller to FA?

Focus on the defense. And that means don't waste time talking to a clipboard holder.

SFIAH

01-26-2008, 02:42 PM	#11
SaintFanInATLHELL The Professor Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Lithonia, GA Posts: 2,776	Re: Saints talked to Booty Originally Posted by cgctobe Great point Papz! Can you imagine if Drew went down with injury? No rookie nor veteran backup could do anything about that. We'd instantly be the Carolina Panthers from last year. Anyone QB who has anything close to Brees' talent and leadership is a starting QB in this league. The days of Montana starting with Young as his backup are over. Both examples of this last year (Carr in Carolina, Harrington in Atlanta) were terrible failures. Anyway even if that were the case, no rookie could come in and do better than the two backup QBs we already have on staff. With the exception of Brady, all current successful QBs in the league are top draft picks. This year isn't the year to try to figure out who Brees replacement is going to be. Do that next year. SFIAH
	Super Bowl Championships: New Orleans Saints:1, Carolina:0, Atlanta Chokers: STILL ZERO Only Atlanta choked in an unchokable situation... Life is definitely good.

01-26-2008, 03:31 PM	#12
QBREES9 Moderator Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: New Haven Ct Posts: 23,985	Re: Saints talked to Booty Delaware quarterback Joe Flacco has been looking good.

01-26-2008, 03:36 PM	#13
SapperSaint Pink Nightmare Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Mississippi Posts: 3,028 Blog Entries: 7	Re: Saints talked to Booty Flacco, reminds me of the "Replacements" movie. Shane Falco. But seriously, I too have heard some good talk about Flacco.

01-26-2008, 03:40 PM	#14
papz Problem? Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: New Orleans Posts: 11,754	Re: Saints talked to Booty Originally Posted by SaintFanInATLHELL Didn't we already do this with Palko? Doesn't the guy already have a year in the Saints' system under his belt? Palko was an undrafted free agent that spent the bulk of the year on our practice squad. So really, we didn't do that last year... but Palko does have a year under his belt understanding our system. Why draft yet another low round QB to develop when we have one already? Up top. But you have to analyze why the offense would take two steps back. That answer is pretty simple: injuries, specifically to Brees. If that unfortunate event were to happen, how would a low drafted rookie help the situation? Like I said in my previous post, Martin is going into his 3rd year here in our system, and has over a dozen years in the league under his belt. The last time he had true backup duty for the Rams, he did fine. We already have Palko, who may be ready to step up. Colston was a low round drafted rookie as was Jahari Evans. Jamie Martin is also a free agent. The offense only dropped off a slight bit last year (500 yards, 4 TDs, 34 points, same number of turnovers). And that was in the face of injuries large and small in both the backs and receivers. And to insure we can maintain that level of success... we need to continue to add weapons. Standing still and expecting it to stay the same wouldn't be smart. Should the offense not be effective as it has been the last couple of years, all you are going to hear is "I can't believe we didn't draft or sign any more weapons for Brees last offseason". We haven't even seend the offensive redshirt class of the 2007 Draft. The reload personnel is already on staff. We don't really know that do we... Resign our own free agents. That's the key. Which would be wise considering the lack of depth we have with all the free agents. We have 3 or 4 potential starters on the offensive line sitting on the bench (Strief, Allenman, Goodwin, Bushrod). Same with the #2 receiver. The team carried 5 TE last year. Our #4 RB torched the Bears for over 200 total yards. And if they're all flops? On offense we have weapons, protection, and backups. Look at how well the offense did with little substantive changes from 2006. We didn't win the Superbowl... there's room for improvement everywhere on our team.... not just our defense. Honestly, how many new offensive starters do we need? On the defense most would say that at most we have 5 starters (Smith, Grant, Thomas, Fujita, Harper) Probably 2 or 3... #2 WR, OG, and TE. Plenty on defense which is pretty obvious. Defense needs 6 starters and decent backups. Offense needs none. I wonder where the focus should be. Which is incorrect. I wouldn't even bother with churn on the offensive side of the ball. Even if the offense dropped to the middle of the pack in terms of scoring (unlikely) with a top 10 scoring defense, the team would still go far into the playoffs. Defense wins championships. Offense entertains fans. Which do you want: entertainment or a championship? SFIAH Agreed... and whoever scores the most points wins too. We're both going to keep on saying the same thing. We have 7 draft picks... it wouldn't kill anyone to select one or two offensive players I wouldn't think. You're setting yourself up for disappointment if you think we're going to go defense with all 7 picks.
	Everyone is entitled to be stupid, but some abuse the privilege. All little common sense goes a long way. Last edited by papz; 01-26-2008 at 03:43 PM..

01-26-2008, 04:30 PM	#15
SapperSaint Pink Nightmare Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Mississippi Posts: 3,028 Blog Entries: 7	Re: Saints talked to Booty Going with all 7 defensive picks would be a moronic mistake. Offensive guys will be picked up at least by the 3rd. We will pick up a WR/RB, you can bank on that. there are too many good "O" guys out there to just pass up on. I do hope they make the first two guys "D" players.

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

01-26-2008, 04:39 PM	#16
papz Problem? Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: New Orleans Posts: 11,754	Re: Saints talked to Booty As I would also. I'm watching the Senior Bowl and Keith Rivers looks very very good. Also that Cromartie kid some were talking about has outstanding recovery speed.

01-26-2008, 04:52 PM	#17
Supersaint19 Registered Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 59	Re: Saints talked to Booty Booty would be great in our system
Supersaint19 Registered Join Date: Jan 2008 Posts: 59

01-26-2008, 05:04 PM	#18
saintsfan1976 10000 POST CLUB Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Atlanta Posts: 10,846 Blog Entries: 3	Re: Saints talked to Booty Originally Posted by papz As I would also. I'm watching the Senior Bowl and Keith Rivers looks very very good. Also that Cromartie kid some were talking about has outstanding recovery speed. I've talked up Cromartie coming into the Senior Bowl. Like his athleticism and skills.

01-26-2008, 05:35 PM	#19
papz Problem? Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: New Orleans Posts: 11,754	Re: Saints talked to Booty Mayock is all over Cromartie also. If we land Rivers and Cromartie with our first two picks, I'd be pretty darn happy.

01-26-2008, 06:52 PM	#20
SaintFanInATLHELL The Professor Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Lithonia, GA Posts: 2,776	Re: Saints talked to Booty Does anyone know how to get the board to keep all the quotes in a thread instead of just the last set of quotes? I'm copying and pasting into the Quick reply box. But I then have to requote everything. Didn't we already do this with Palko? Doesn't the guy already have a year in the Saints' system under his belt? Why draft yet another low round QB to develop when we have one already? Palko was an undrafted free agent that spent the bulk of the year on our practice squad. So really, we didn't do that last year... but Palko does have a year under his belt understanding our system. Do you really expect to carry a rookie QB on the squad? Or to bump Martin for one? At the very least let's see if there's actually a reliable veteran backup QB out there if that's the goal. But you have to analyze why the offense would take two steps back. That answer is pretty simple: injuries, specifically to Brees. If that unfortunate event were to happen, how would a low drafted rookie help the situation? Like I said in my previous post, Martin is going into his 3rd year here in our system, and has over a dozen years in the league under his belt. The last time he had true backup duty for the Rams, he did fine. We already have Palko, who may be ready to step up. Colston was a low round drafted rookie as was Jahari Evans. Jamie Martin is also a free agent. We're talking about the QB position here. Even top first round picks struggle. I know we're talking about a clipboard holder. However, the point of the backup QB is to be able to effectively hold the fort should the general go down. I just can't see how a rookie can accomplish that. But maybe I'm wrong. Look at Trent Edwards for the Bills. The offense only dropped off a slight bit last year (500 yards, 4 TDs, 34 points, same number of turnovers). And that was in the face of injuries large and small in both the backs and receivers. And to insure we can maintain that level of success... we need to continue to add weapons. Standing still and expecting it to stay the same wouldn't be smart. Should the offense not be effective as it has been the last couple of years, all you are going to hear is "I can't believe we didn't draft or sign any more weapons for Brees last offseason". But where do the weapons fit. You have a back rotation with Bush, Stecker, PT, and presumably Deuce if he recovers in time. You have a receiver corps with Colston, Meachum, Moore, hopefully Patton, and maybe Copper. I figure someone's going to pay Henderson and hopes that he breaks out. You have tight ends out the ying yang. So again where do the weapons fit. Yet another #1 TE? Sit Meachum for another year? Cut Patton's playing time? Why restock what is already well stocked? We haven't even seen the offensive redshirt class of the 2007 Draft. The reload personnel is already on staff. We don't really know that do we... We don't know about free agents or new draft picks either. Remember that Jason David was supposed to be the perfect #2 CB to pair up with MacKenzie. You never know. You need to scout and draft outstanding players then put them in positions to win. If we doubt the redshirt class of 2007, then why did we draft them? Resign our own free agents. That's the key. Which would be wise considering the lack of depth we have with all the free agents. Now of course if we lose a key free agent, there needs to be a replacement plan. Here's the list of our current free agents and my expectation of their eventual status: STARTERS WR David Patten: RESIGN TE Eric Johnson: RESIGN C Jeff Faine: RESIGN or replace with Goodwin G Jamar Nesbit: Let go and replaced by Allenman DT Brian Young: Let go. Area of need to be filled in FA or draft LB Mark Simoneau: Good riddance! RESERVES QB Jamie Martin: Resigned RB Aaron Stecker: Resigned WR Devery Henderson: Released and replaced by Meachum WR Terrance Copper: Resigned I hope. TE Billy Miller: Resigned. C Jonathan Goodwin: Resigned. DE Josh Cooper: resign DE Renaldo Wynn: unsure LB Matt McCoy: Who? CB Fred Thomas: Released. Replaced by Young S Jay Bellamy: Resigned I hope. S Steve Gleason: Released unfortunately K Martin Gramatica: Resigned. Mare is cut. Now again obviously if we lose a major number of free agents on the offensive side of the ball we'll have to look to replace them. We have 3 or 4 potential starters on the offensive line sitting on the bench (Strief, Allenman, Goodwin, Bushrod). Same with the #2 receiver. The team carried 5 TE last year. Our #4 RB torched the Bears for over 200 total yards. And if they're all flops? Then we get what we deserve. Championship teams are built in the draft. If a players that you draft don't make the cut, then the organization is doomed to fail anyway. Everything I have read or heard points to the draft class of 2007 being really good. Young has shown promise. The offensive linemen have been reported as solid. Meachum's status all hinges on the health of his knee. But the Saints knew that when they drafted him. If you can trust your draft picks, then you've got bigger problems. On offense we have weapons, protection, and backups. Look at how well the offense did with little substantive changes from 2006. We didn't win the Superbowl... there's room for improvement everywhere on our team.... not just our defense. We didn't win the superbowl because we don't have a championship defense. So of course it gets back to my point: Solidify the defense. Spend as little resources as possible on the offensive side of the ball to maintain. Sign our own free agents on offense then leave it alone. This pattern isn't forever. Next year you can restock the offense if you like as long as the defense rises to the top 10 in scoring defense. It'll be harder then because then you'll be back to picking late in the rounds. [Quote] Honestly, how many new offensive starters do we need? On the defense most would say that at most we have 5 starters (Smith, Grant, Thomas, Fujita, Harper) Probably 2 or 3... #2 WR, OG, and TE. Plenty on defense which is pretty obvious.[quote] #2 WR: Meachum OG: Allenman TE: Johnson/Miller just like last year. Hmmm. Seems to me that you play your current draft picks and resign your free agents, then offense will be quite fine. Defense needs 6 starters and decent backups. Offense needs none. I wonder where the focus should be? Which is incorrect. Of course we agree to disagree here. I believe that each of the offensive positions you think we need filled already have folks who were on our staff last year. I don't think we currently have on our staff the DT, 2 LBs, 2 CBs, and the safety (well maybe the safety, maybe) that we need to field a competitive defense. I wouldn't even bother with churn on the offensive side of the ball. Even if the offense dropped to the middle of the pack in terms of scoring (unlikely) with a top 10 scoring defense, the team would still go far into the playoffs. Defense wins championships. Offense entertains fans. Which do you want: entertainment or a championship? SFIAH Agreed... and whoever scores the most points wins too. We're both going to keep on saying the same thing. See my signature. Some of the most prolific offenses in the NFL never got a sniff of the superbowl. I know we'll both keep saying the same thing. But I think it's fine because everyone on the board will hear and understand both sides of the argument We have 7 draft picks... it wouldn't kill anyone to select one or two offensive players I wouldn't think. You're setting yourself up for disappointment if you think we're going to go defense with all 7 picks. I know it won't happen. By the time the draft comes around there may be a BPA situation that fills an offensive need. But it shouldn't occur until the 4th round or later. But you are going to continue to be disappointed if you think that we can get to a consistent championship level of play by improving the offense. Offenses falter in the face of good defenses. See our own Saints over the last two years as a perfect example. You need a solid defense to complement your offense. The defense can't be in the high 20s in scoring and giving up a ton of TDs and long pass plays. Your defense cannot have terrible efficiency on third down. It damages your offense because it flips the field position or yields points. I'm fine with whatever is necessary to keep the offense stable. But nothing more than that. The positions you want filled we already have the personnel to do. Do you really think we'll lose both Johnson and Miller to FA? Focus on the defense. And that means don't waste time talking to a clipboard holder. SFIAH
	Super Bowl Championships: New Orleans Saints:1, Carolina:0, Atlanta Chokers: STILL ZERO Only Atlanta choked in an unchokable situation... Life is definitely good.