my thoughts on Gary Gibbs

SaintFanInATLHELL · 02-04-2008, 11:32 AM

Originally Posted by dasaints26

Was just curious about how the DC affects our soft defense? Are there defensive coaches who tell their players go out and hit hard?

I'm not sure that's the definition of soft we're talking about. The Saints defense is soft in terms of allowing the offense to dictate what goes on the field instead of the other way around. Not a lot of QB pressure, not being physical with receivers and backs on the line of scrimmage, stuff like that.

So it's not necessarily that the players are soft, but that the scheme that they are playing in is soft.

Then if you have a bad defense it is the coaches fault for telling his players go out there and try not to get anybody hurt. Did he tell his players lets make some stops but I dont want anybody hitting to hard?

Again. I don't think that's what is meant by soft. The Saints needs to put players in positions so that they can be physical. And a lot of times, their scheme is the opposite of that.

SFIAH

FireVenturi · 02-04-2008, 05:12 PM

Originally Posted by saintsmissile

Yeah, yeah. I heard the EXACT same thing with Venturi. "Oh, he just doesn't have enough talent. Oh, he just hasn't got the tools to work with." Excuses are like a holes, everyone has one. Fact is, if it looks like poop and smells like poop, chances are it's POOP! I've seen enough of Gibbs' defenses to know we coach and play SOFT! Pure and simple.

AMEN Brother!!!!!!!

ScottBalot · 02-04-2008, 06:13 PM

Originally Posted by saintsmissile

Yeah, yeah. I heard the EXACT same thing with Venturi. "Oh, he just doesn't have enough talent. Oh, he just hasn't got the tools to work with." Excuses are like a holes, everyone has one. Fact is, if it looks like poop and smells like poop, chances are it's POOP! I've seen enough of Gibbs' defenses to know we coach and play SOFT! Pure and simple.

name the Saints' starters on defense that would start elsewhere in the league

ScottBalot · 02-04-2008, 07:08 PM

Originally Posted by saintsmissile

Uh, and who ultimately is responsible for that? Did you happen to see that pathetic draft we had last year? That not enough? Okay, how about Kaesvaharn ACTUALLY getting some playing time and producing. So what happens, you ask? Bullocks gets healthy and goes back to starting and low and behold, the same crappy results. That's just one instance. Come on guys. Fact be told, you have to eventually coach what you have and from what I see, he's underachieving. Matter of fact, you can say that about the offense as well. Where was Pierre Thomas (Who Pappy, the fans were screaming for all year since Deuce went down) most of the year? Who knows? Coaches are there to make decisions. Unfortunately, we made bad ones most of the year. At least when it came to personnel. Started with FA and ended with one of the worst drafts in Saints history. Yeah yeah, go ahead and say, "how can you say it's a bad draft after only one season". I can say it easily. THE NEW YORK GIANTS! Go check out their draft and look at the rookies that played MAJOR contributions. If I'm not mistaken, the Giants were a playoff team a year ago and YET still found some places for these young guys ala Ahmad Bradshaw, Ross, Steve Smith etc to make contributions. All signs point to...... one of the worst drafts in Saints history.

blah blah blah. When Gibbs starts having authority on who they draft, that will mean something. You haven't answered my question. It's simple: how many starters on last year's Saints' defense would be starting elsewhere?

ScottBalot · 02-04-2008, 10:36 PM

Originally Posted by saintsmissile

Okay, other than Will Smith, I would say, nah, that's about it. If you base it on Charles Grant's season last year, I would say Smith is the only sure thing.

OK, stop right there. According to you, the Saints have only one or two starters on defense that would start somewhere else. I think they have two more with McKenzie and Fujita, although Fujita could be argued. So, the Saints' starting defense consists of four starters and seven backups, and yet you can automatically pin the defensive problems on the coordinator and not personnel.

However, have you ever heard from a player, "hey, it was easy, the coaches put us in the position to make plays"? I sure have.

It's one thing for the coaches to put players in the position to make plays. It's another for the players to actually make the plays once in position. The coaches can't execute for the players as well, and there were MANY instances of the defensive players being in position and not executing.

Let me also ask you this, at the beginning of this season, would you say that other than Strahan and Usimoura (sp?) that the Giants were LOADED with players that would start for other teams? Yeah right, see what I mean. Corey Webster was nothing to write home about. Sam Madison was all but given up for dead. They have a pretty decent S, can't remember his name, but he's steady. Not Ronnie Lott or anything. The Giant LB's weren't anything to write home about. Just saying here, granted we aren't loaded with pro bowl talent, but it is my opinion that Gibbs does NOT get the most out of what he has.

Yes, I would say that the Giants had plenty of guys on defense that would have started for other teams at the beginning of the season. One team that most would have started for sure went to the NFC Championship game last year.

You stated that Smith and Grant were the only two legit starters on the Saints, and also stated that Gibbs does not get the most out of what he has. Gibbs took this same defense personnel-wise and made them the 11th best defensive team in the NFL in 2006. How is that not getting the most out of what he has. He takes nine backups and turns them into one of the better defenses in the league. He loses his starting DT, starts basically a rookie at Safety in Harper, and has one of his two legit starters slowed all year long by injury (Grant), and the second best CB on the team is (gulp) Jason David, and you blame the scheme? Come on.

You and I both know the Saints don't need "Ronnie Lott-type" players at every position in order to be successful, but you can't crucify a coach that doesn't control the personnel he has to work with, and expect him to have a top-5 defense with only two legit NFL starters.

Granted, I don't think we had too much, but when you have guys like Kaesvaharn on the bench and not playing, something is wrong. Hell, Kaesvaharn said it best, "If the Saints had told me they were bringing me in here to play nickle, I wouldn't have signed here". Nuff said.

I, like you, questioned why they didn't play Kaesvaharn as well, particularly after he showed effectiveness towards the end of the season. But the questions have to start at the top with Payton, not with Gibbs. Don't think for one second Payton is not calling any of the shots on defense personnel-wise just because he's an offensive-minded guy.

Look, I'm not ready to crown Gibbs the next Buddy Ryan, not by a long shot, and I'll be the first one to call for Gibbs' head if they upgrade the talent on defense, and they are still ranked in the high 20's on defense. But before we lump him in with Venturi, let's see if this franchise can figure out how to draft legit NFL defensive starters.

hagan714 · 02-05-2008, 07:07 AM

Originally Posted by ScottBalot

name the Saints' starters on defense that would start elsewhere in the league

Too be honest the question should be ranked. The Good, The Bad and The Ugly.

We have players that could play as Starters on teams ranked in an order such as this but that is not the point. Looking at the defense we have some really smart veterans that just do not have the legs to keep up with these younger guys. when the influx of youth starts, they will be worth thier weight in gold for the knowledge they have.
I look at the defense and see a team that has great depth but lacks true starters. Our bench is solid. I really like the moves at LB. The addition of Evens and McCoy were solid moves. They may develope into starters or they may not. It does not matter. They are great additions to the special teams. If called apon they will serve well as backups.
This all I can point out at this time. The team has made strides in the backup players. The old timers now need some younger guys that will push them for playing time.
Gibbs is up and it is up to him to keep his job. Bullocks was given the same chance and failedto what extent that is yet to be determined.
So Kevin will probably become the starter next year unless their is a big change in Bullocks play in camp. Right now he is trade bait. Way to many tall, ball hawking CB in this draft to pass up. Many are good in run support to. If a CB/S is drafted that is 6+ feet tall and a bit slow for CB, look for Bullocks to be moved. The money just does not add up for him to stay. Let us see what new secondary coach Dennis Allen does.

ScottBalot · 02-05-2008, 10:40 AM

Originally Posted by saintsmissile

Yes, Gibbs did pretty well his first year against one of the easiest schedules in the NFL. Case in point: Jim Haslett's first year here. Say what you will man. I complain that our draft was terrible and then get comments like, "what do you mean? Our draft wasn't that bad" and then I also comment that we were cheap in FA last year and get "we went out and signed some decent players". Yet, in your own arguement, you say we don't have the players! Something has to give. Either you blame the front office and ultimately Sean Payton for not bringing in the players we need OR you have to blame the coaching staff for not coaching up the talent we have. Take your pick. I think it's a combination of both. However, I say now and will continue to say that Gibbs runs a SOFT defense that doesn't put fear into anyone. The guy almost feels like he will get fined if he blitzes more than 3 times a game. You can blame it on players all your want, but anyone who watched our Philly game this year can't seriously sit there and say our defensive scheme is not flawed. Philly could never be considered an offensive powerhouse last year and watch them against us. A 97 yard drive for a td? Come on man. Gibbs has to take a big chunk of responsibility for the issues on defense. I take Detroit as an example. Martz first year as offensive coordinator was considered somewhat of a success considering past offensive woes. What happens? He stinks it up his second year and is consequently fired and rightfully so. I think the same should have happened with Gibbs. Don't care what you say.

Can't really comment on previous discussions you've had with other posters regarding FA or last year's draft other than to say that my "pick" is there is a serious deficiency of talent on the defensive side of the ball. I watched the Philly game, and watched Josh Bullocks two yards deep in the backfield with a clear shot at Westbrook on 3rd and short, and Bullocks flat out whiffed. Gibbs called the right defense, had his man in position to make a play, and his man didn't execute. I also watched Gibbs call plenty of blitzes, in which the Saints' defenders got to the quarterback one second too late, and watched the DB's get beat. I would be gun shy to blitz too if I didn't have the personnel to effectively blitz opposing QB's and got burned every time I did blitz due to no strength in personnel match ups. You give Martz as an example of what you would do in regards to firing. Based on your standards, you would have fired Jim Schwartz of Tennessee after 2006 for finishing with the 32nd ranked defense in the NFL. Tennessee's defense this year was ranked 5th this year. You would have also fired Steve Spagnola of the Giants, whose defense finished 25th in 2006. Giants defense ranked 7th this year and won the Super Bowl.

ScottBalot · 02-05-2008, 05:45 PM

Originally Posted by saintsmissile

Man oh man. Excuses, excuses. Okay, I'll bite. So, if we DO get some new players etc in and we STILL don't perform on D, what then? I guess Gibbs just had a cold or something. So, from watching film of last year and actually seeing the games live, it was apparent we couldn't blitz effectively and couldn't play straight up either. Wow, quite a combo. It's just like that old J.McKay comment from Tampa Bay when a reporter asked him, "what about your defense"? and he responded, "I'm all for it". Or something to that effect. Some of the best coaches around take the talent they have and make best use of it. Not every good defense is loaded with all star talent. Some are just very technically sound and well coached. So, I guess you're saying that if we don't have fantastic talent each and every year we can expect what we got this year? Funny how everyone was saying Grant, Smith, Fujita, McKenzie, Harper, Bullocks and H.Thomas were pretty darn good before last year. Now, apparently, we have basically ZERO good players and it's all their fault and none of the coordinators. Sounds like hogwash to me.

no one said the Saints need to get loaded with star talent, just better talent than what they have now. You are all over the place, and not making much sense. Bottom line, Giants run the basically the same defense scheme-wise. Difference is Giants front four get pressure, Saints front four don't. Same scheme, different talent. And like I stated in a previous post on this thread, if they do upgrade the talent, and the defense still stinks, I'll be the first to call for Gibbs' head. If you want to just throw out all of the facts and ignore the truth, then fine. Keep on railing against Gibbs if it makes you feel better, no matter how ridiculous you sound.

ScottBalot · 02-05-2008, 07:30 PM

Originally Posted by saintsmissile

However, I say now and will continue to say that Gibbs runs a SOFT defense that doesn't put fear into anyone. The guy almost feels like he will get fined if he blitzes more than 3 times a game. You can blame it on players all your want, but anyone who watched our Philly game this year can't seriously sit there and say our defensive scheme is not flawed. Philly could never be considered an offensive powerhouse last year and watch them against us. .

Once again, you blame the defensive scheme. The same scheme just held one of the best offenses in NFL history to 14 pts. What's the difference between the Giants and Saints? personnel, particularly the front seven. You claim that Philly could never be considered an offensive powerhouse last year. You are right, they were only the sixth best offense in the NFL.

What EXACTLY are all the FACTS? All over the place? I'm in the same place I was all along. Gibbs stinks. Okay, let's go this direction. Take yourself back to before the regular season. Now, if you were to analyze our defensive talent, I bet you would have said:

W.Smith-impact defensive player
C.Grant-better than avg DE with some playmaking ability
H.Thomas-big space eater who will help stop the run
A.Lake-Good rotation guy with some pass rush skills
K.Clancy-Decent rotational DT will add some depth
Fujita-Better than avg and an impact playmaker for our D
Shanle-Impressive first year with Saints, should only improve
Simineau-Suprised with his play, but better as a backup
Bullocks-Many say he's a great athete and budding FS star
Harper-good run stuffer and is a young, good SS
McKenzie-Our best DB by far
J.David-will solidify and improve over Fred Thomas
Kaesvaharn-will be the ballhawk nickle/backup FS we've been looking for
Brian Simmons-will almost cerainly start over Simineau

Sound familiar? Funny, how you are throwing these guys under the bus after so many thought they were so good before the year started? Yeah, guess the coaching is fine, it's all the players that suck. Weird thing is, a year ago almost all of us thought we UPGRADED our talent from the year before? Funny huh? Here's a novel idea, just like you can upgrade your player talent, "there is such a thing as upgrading the coaching talent"!

You obviously think the Saints didn't do anything to upgrade their talent last offseason, correct? You keep pointing out how the Saints missed on personnel, yet you are arguing that they were good enough personnel-wise and that it was coaching. Did the scheme change from 2006 to 2007? uhh, no. Did the Saints start basically a rookie with Harper, and decided to let him go through some growing pains? yes. Was Charles Grant healthy all season long? no Was Bryan Young healthy all season long? no Was Jason David healthy all season long? no You claim that they played a weak schedule in 2006. The Saints played 8 teams with offenses ranked in the top 15 in 2006. The Saints played 6 teams with offenses ranked in the top 15 in 2007. Oops. Go look at the Saints drafts since 2001, and tell me how many starters they've been able to draft on defense? Compare them to the offense. I think you'll find one of the big reasons the offense is better than the defense when you do. You can't make chicked salad out of chicken dump.

02-04-2008, 11:32 AM	#11
SaintFanInATLHELL The Professor Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Lithonia, GA Posts: 2,776	Re: my thoughts on Gary Gibbs Originally Posted by dasaints26 Was just curious about how the DC affects our soft defense? Are there defensive coaches who tell their players go out and hit hard? I'm not sure that's the definition of soft we're talking about. The Saints defense is soft in terms of allowing the offense to dictate what goes on the field instead of the other way around. Not a lot of QB pressure, not being physical with receivers and backs on the line of scrimmage, stuff like that. So it's not necessarily that the players are soft, but that the scheme that they are playing in is soft. Then if you have a bad defense it is the coaches fault for telling his players go out there and try not to get anybody hurt. Did he tell his players lets make some stops but I dont want anybody hitting to hard? Again. I don't think that's what is meant by soft. The Saints needs to put players in positions so that they can be physical. And a lot of times, their scheme is the opposite of that. 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.

02-04-2008, 05:12 PM	#12
FireVenturi Cold as Ice! Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Da Big Easy Posts: 2,978	Re: my thoughts on Gary Gibbs Originally Posted by saintsmissile Yeah, yeah. I heard the EXACT same thing with Venturi. "Oh, he just doesn't have enough talent. Oh, he just hasn't got the tools to work with." Excuses are like a holes, everyone has one. Fact is, if it looks like poop and smells like poop, chances are it's POOP! I've seen enough of Gibbs' defenses to know we coach and play SOFT! Pure and simple. AMEN Brother!!!!!!!

02-04-2008, 06:13 PM	#13
ScottBalot Registered Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 87	Re: my thoughts on Gary Gibbs Originally Posted by saintsmissile Yeah, yeah. I heard the EXACT same thing with Venturi. "Oh, he just doesn't have enough talent. Oh, he just hasn't got the tools to work with." Excuses are like a holes, everyone has one. Fact is, if it looks like poop and smells like poop, chances are it's POOP! I've seen enough of Gibbs' defenses to know we coach and play SOFT! Pure and simple. name the Saints' starters on defense that would start elsewhere in the league
ScottBalot Registered Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 87

02-04-2008, 07:08 PM	#14
ScottBalot Registered Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 87	Re: my thoughts on Gary Gibbs Originally Posted by saintsmissile Uh, and who ultimately is responsible for that? Did you happen to see that pathetic draft we had last year? That not enough? Okay, how about Kaesvaharn ACTUALLY getting some playing time and producing. So what happens, you ask? Bullocks gets healthy and goes back to starting and low and behold, the same crappy results. That's just one instance. Come on guys. Fact be told, you have to eventually coach what you have and from what I see, he's underachieving. Matter of fact, you can say that about the offense as well. Where was Pierre Thomas (Who Pappy, the fans were screaming for all year since Deuce went down) most of the year? Who knows? Coaches are there to make decisions. Unfortunately, we made bad ones most of the year. At least when it came to personnel. Started with FA and ended with one of the worst drafts in Saints history. Yeah yeah, go ahead and say, "how can you say it's a bad draft after only one season". I can say it easily. THE NEW YORK GIANTS! Go check out their draft and look at the rookies that played MAJOR contributions. If I'm not mistaken, the Giants were a playoff team a year ago and YET still found some places for these young guys ala Ahmad Bradshaw, Ross, Steve Smith etc to make contributions. All signs point to...... one of the worst drafts in Saints history. blah blah blah. When Gibbs starts having authority on who they draft, that will mean something. You haven't answered my question. It's simple: how many starters on last year's Saints' defense would be starting elsewhere?
ScottBalot Registered Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 87

02-04-2008, 10:36 PM	#15
ScottBalot Registered Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 87	Re: my thoughts on Gary Gibbs Originally Posted by saintsmissile Okay, other than Will Smith, I would say, nah, that's about it. If you base it on Charles Grant's season last year, I would say Smith is the only sure thing. OK, stop right there. According to you, the Saints have only one or two starters on defense that would start somewhere else. I think they have two more with McKenzie and Fujita, although Fujita could be argued. So, the Saints' starting defense consists of four starters and seven backups, and yet you can automatically pin the defensive problems on the coordinator and not personnel. However, have you ever heard from a player, "hey, it was easy, the coaches put us in the position to make plays"? I sure have. It's one thing for the coaches to put players in the position to make plays. It's another for the players to actually make the plays once in position. The coaches can't execute for the players as well, and there were MANY instances of the defensive players being in position and not executing. Let me also ask you this, at the beginning of this season, would you say that other than Strahan and Usimoura (sp?) that the Giants were LOADED with players that would start for other teams? Yeah right, see what I mean. Corey Webster was nothing to write home about. Sam Madison was all but given up for dead. They have a pretty decent S, can't remember his name, but he's steady. Not Ronnie Lott or anything. The Giant LB's weren't anything to write home about. Just saying here, granted we aren't loaded with pro bowl talent, but it is my opinion that Gibbs does NOT get the most out of what he has. Yes, I would say that the Giants had plenty of guys on defense that would have started for other teams at the beginning of the season. One team that most would have started for sure went to the NFC Championship game last year. You stated that Smith and Grant were the only two legit starters on the Saints, and also stated that Gibbs does not get the most out of what he has. Gibbs took this same defense personnel-wise and made them the 11th best defensive team in the NFL in 2006. How is that not getting the most out of what he has. He takes nine backups and turns them into one of the better defenses in the league. He loses his starting DT, starts basically a rookie at Safety in Harper, and has one of his two legit starters slowed all year long by injury (Grant), and the second best CB on the team is (gulp) Jason David, and you blame the scheme? Come on. You and I both know the Saints don't need "Ronnie Lott-type" players at every position in order to be successful, but you can't crucify a coach that doesn't control the personnel he has to work with, and expect him to have a top-5 defense with only two legit NFL starters. Granted, I don't think we had too much, but when you have guys like Kaesvaharn on the bench and not playing, something is wrong. Hell, Kaesvaharn said it best, "If the Saints had told me they were bringing me in here to play nickle, I wouldn't have signed here". Nuff said. I, like you, questioned why they didn't play Kaesvaharn as well, particularly after he showed effectiveness towards the end of the season. But the questions have to start at the top with Payton, not with Gibbs. Don't think for one second Payton is not calling any of the shots on defense personnel-wise just because he's an offensive-minded guy. Look, I'm not ready to crown Gibbs the next Buddy Ryan, not by a long shot, and I'll be the first one to call for Gibbs' head if they upgrade the talent on defense, and they are still ranked in the high 20's on defense. But before we lump him in with Venturi, let's see if this franchise can figure out how to draft legit NFL defensive starters.
ScottBalot Registered Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 87

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

02-05-2008, 07:07 AM	#16
hagan714 LB Mentallity Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 15,870 Blog Entries: 68	Re: my thoughts on Gary Gibbs Originally Posted by ScottBalot name the Saints' starters on defense that would start elsewhere in the league Too be honest the question should be ranked. The Good, The Bad and The Ugly. We have players that could play as Starters on teams ranked in an order such as this but that is not the point. Looking at the defense we have some really smart veterans that just do not have the legs to keep up with these younger guys. when the influx of youth starts, they will be worth thier weight in gold for the knowledge they have. I look at the defense and see a team that has great depth but lacks true starters. Our bench is solid. I really like the moves at LB. The addition of Evens and McCoy were solid moves. They may develope into starters or they may not. It does not matter. They are great additions to the special teams. If called apon they will serve well as backups. This all I can point out at this time. The team has made strides in the backup players. The old timers now need some younger guys that will push them for playing time. Gibbs is up and it is up to him to keep his job. Bullocks was given the same chance and failedto what extent that is yet to be determined. So Kevin will probably become the starter next year unless their is a big change in Bullocks play in camp. Right now he is trade bait. Way to many tall, ball hawking CB in this draft to pass up. Many are good in run support to. If a CB/S is drafted that is 6+ feet tall and a bit slow for CB, look for Bullocks to be moved. The money just does not add up for him to stay. Let us see what new secondary coach Dennis Allen does.
	"We may have lost the game, but you'll be hurting tomorrow." Doug Atkins Last edited by hagan714; 02-05-2008 at 07:14 AM..

02-05-2008, 10:40 AM	#17
ScottBalot Registered Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 87	Re: my thoughts on Gary Gibbs Originally Posted by saintsmissile Yes, Gibbs did pretty well his first year against one of the easiest schedules in the NFL. Case in point: Jim Haslett's first year here. Say what you will man. I complain that our draft was terrible and then get comments like, "what do you mean? Our draft wasn't that bad" and then I also comment that we were cheap in FA last year and get "we went out and signed some decent players". Yet, in your own arguement, you say we don't have the players! Something has to give. Either you blame the front office and ultimately Sean Payton for not bringing in the players we need OR you have to blame the coaching staff for not coaching up the talent we have. Take your pick. I think it's a combination of both. However, I say now and will continue to say that Gibbs runs a SOFT defense that doesn't put fear into anyone. The guy almost feels like he will get fined if he blitzes more than 3 times a game. You can blame it on players all your want, but anyone who watched our Philly game this year can't seriously sit there and say our defensive scheme is not flawed. Philly could never be considered an offensive powerhouse last year and watch them against us. A 97 yard drive for a td? Come on man. Gibbs has to take a big chunk of responsibility for the issues on defense. I take Detroit as an example. Martz first year as offensive coordinator was considered somewhat of a success considering past offensive woes. What happens? He stinks it up his second year and is consequently fired and rightfully so. I think the same should have happened with Gibbs. Don't care what you say. Can't really comment on previous discussions you've had with other posters regarding FA or last year's draft other than to say that my "pick" is there is a serious deficiency of talent on the defensive side of the ball. I watched the Philly game, and watched Josh Bullocks two yards deep in the backfield with a clear shot at Westbrook on 3rd and short, and Bullocks flat out whiffed. Gibbs called the right defense, had his man in position to make a play, and his man didn't execute. I also watched Gibbs call plenty of blitzes, in which the Saints' defenders got to the quarterback one second too late, and watched the DB's get beat. I would be gun shy to blitz too if I didn't have the personnel to effectively blitz opposing QB's and got burned every time I did blitz due to no strength in personnel match ups. You give Martz as an example of what you would do in regards to firing. Based on your standards, you would have fired Jim Schwartz of Tennessee after 2006 for finishing with the 32nd ranked defense in the NFL. Tennessee's defense this year was ranked 5th this year. You would have also fired Steve Spagnola of the Giants, whose defense finished 25th in 2006. Giants defense ranked 7th this year and won the Super Bowl.
ScottBalot Registered Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 87

02-05-2008, 05:45 PM	#18
ScottBalot Registered Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 87	Re: my thoughts on Gary Gibbs Originally Posted by saintsmissile Man oh man. Excuses, excuses. Okay, I'll bite. So, if we DO get some new players etc in and we STILL don't perform on D, what then? I guess Gibbs just had a cold or something. So, from watching film of last year and actually seeing the games live, it was apparent we couldn't blitz effectively and couldn't play straight up either. Wow, quite a combo. It's just like that old J.McKay comment from Tampa Bay when a reporter asked him, "what about your defense"? and he responded, "I'm all for it". Or something to that effect. Some of the best coaches around take the talent they have and make best use of it. Not every good defense is loaded with all star talent. Some are just very technically sound and well coached. So, I guess you're saying that if we don't have fantastic talent each and every year we can expect what we got this year? Funny how everyone was saying Grant, Smith, Fujita, McKenzie, Harper, Bullocks and H.Thomas were pretty darn good before last year. Now, apparently, we have basically ZERO good players and it's all their fault and none of the coordinators. Sounds like hogwash to me. no one said the Saints need to get loaded with star talent, just better talent than what they have now. You are all over the place, and not making much sense. Bottom line, Giants run the basically the same defense scheme-wise. Difference is Giants front four get pressure, Saints front four don't. Same scheme, different talent. And like I stated in a previous post on this thread, if they do upgrade the talent, and the defense still stinks, I'll be the first to call for Gibbs' head. If you want to just throw out all of the facts and ignore the truth, then fine. Keep on railing against Gibbs if it makes you feel better, no matter how ridiculous you sound.
ScottBalot Registered Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 87

02-05-2008, 07:30 PM	#19
ScottBalot Registered Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 87	Re: my thoughts on Gary Gibbs Originally Posted by saintsmissile However, I say now and will continue to say that Gibbs runs a SOFT defense that doesn't put fear into anyone. The guy almost feels like he will get fined if he blitzes more than 3 times a game. You can blame it on players all your want, but anyone who watched our Philly game this year can't seriously sit there and say our defensive scheme is not flawed. Philly could never be considered an offensive powerhouse last year and watch them against us. . Once again, you blame the defensive scheme. The same scheme just held one of the best offenses in NFL history to 14 pts. What's the difference between the Giants and Saints? personnel, particularly the front seven. You claim that Philly could never be considered an offensive powerhouse last year. You are right, they were only the sixth best offense in the NFL. What EXACTLY are all the FACTS? All over the place? I'm in the same place I was all along. Gibbs stinks. Okay, let's go this direction. Take yourself back to before the regular season. Now, if you were to analyze our defensive talent, I bet you would have said: W.Smith-impact defensive player C.Grant-better than avg DE with some playmaking ability H.Thomas-big space eater who will help stop the run A.Lake-Good rotation guy with some pass rush skills K.Clancy-Decent rotational DT will add some depth Fujita-Better than avg and an impact playmaker for our D Shanle-Impressive first year with Saints, should only improve Simineau-Suprised with his play, but better as a backup Bullocks-Many say he's a great athete and budding FS star Harper-good run stuffer and is a young, good SS McKenzie-Our best DB by far J.David-will solidify and improve over Fred Thomas Kaesvaharn-will be the ballhawk nickle/backup FS we've been looking for Brian Simmons-will almost cerainly start over Simineau Sound familiar? Funny, how you are throwing these guys under the bus after so many thought they were so good before the year started? Yeah, guess the coaching is fine, it's all the players that suck. Weird thing is, a year ago almost all of us thought we UPGRADED our talent from the year before? Funny huh? Here's a novel idea, just like you can upgrade your player talent, "there is such a thing as upgrading the coaching talent"! You obviously think the Saints didn't do anything to upgrade their talent last offseason, correct? You keep pointing out how the Saints missed on personnel, yet you are arguing that they were good enough personnel-wise and that it was coaching. Did the scheme change from 2006 to 2007? uhh, no. Did the Saints start basically a rookie with Harper, and decided to let him go through some growing pains? yes. Was Charles Grant healthy all season long? no Was Bryan Young healthy all season long? no Was Jason David healthy all season long? no You claim that they played a weak schedule in 2006. The Saints played 8 teams with offenses ranked in the top 15 in 2006. The Saints played 6 teams with offenses ranked in the top 15 in 2007. Oops. Go look at the Saints drafts since 2001, and tell me how many starters they've been able to draft on defense? Compare them to the offense. I think you'll find one of the big reasons the offense is better than the defense when you do. You can't make chicked salad out of chicken dump.
ScottBalot Registered Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 87