Archuleta and Harper?

JKool · 05-07-2008, 02:38 PM

Bullocks has been about the same (statistically) his whole stay here.

. G GS Tkl Solo Ast Sck PDef Int
2007 New Orleans Saints 14 14 77 65 12 1.0 8 2
2006 New Orleans Saints 16 16 71 56 15 0.0 5 2
2005 New Orleans Saints 16 13 67 53 14 0.0 5 1

Josh Bullocks

If he was good enough to play in a secondary that made it to the conference final (and he was), then he's good enough to play in a secondary that can take us to a conference final.

I agree that he isn't a play maker. I just think "he sucks" is way too strong. He may not be good, and he is certainly not great, but "sucks", really?

I am certainly pro getting an upgrade at Safety, but I don't think that is as simple as replacing Bullocks with "whoever".

pakowitz · 05-07-2008, 04:58 PM

Originally Posted by JKool

If he was good enough to play in a secondary that made it to the conference final (and he was), then he's good enough to play in a secondary that can take us to a conference final.

I agree that he isn't a play maker. I just think "he sucks" is way too strong. He may not be good, and he is certainly not great, but "sucks", really?

he was playin in the sec. when we went to the conf. finals but he was also part of the reason we didnt win that game.. we got burn deep plenty of times that game and bullocks was always out of position.. frankly im tired of seeing him blow coverages.. he sucks..

05-07-2008, 02:38 PM	#1
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	Re: Archuleta and Harper? Bullocks has been about the same (statistically) his whole stay here. . G GS Tkl Solo Ast Sck PDef Int 2007 New Orleans Saints 14 14 77 65 12 1.0 8 2 2006 New Orleans Saints 16 16 71 56 15 0.0 5 2 2005 New Orleans Saints 16 13 67 53 14 0.0 5 1 Josh Bullocks If he was good enough to play in a secondary that made it to the conference final (and he was), then he's good enough to play in a secondary that can take us to a conference final. I agree that he isn't a play maker. I just think "he sucks" is way too strong. He may not be good, and he is certainly not great, but "sucks", really? I am certainly pro getting an upgrade at Safety, but I don't think that is as simple as replacing Bullocks with "whoever".
	"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks

05-07-2008, 04:58 PM	#2
pakowitz The Dark Overlord Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: dirty south Posts: 3,450	Re: Archuleta and Harper? Originally Posted by JKool If he was good enough to play in a secondary that made it to the conference final (and he was), then he's good enough to play in a secondary that can take us to a conference final. I agree that he isn't a play maker. I just think "he sucks" is way too strong. He may not be good, and he is certainly not great, but "sucks", really? he was playin in the sec. when we went to the conf. finals but he was also part of the reason we didnt win that game.. we got burn deep plenty of times that game and bullocks was always out of position.. frankly im tired of seeing him blow coverages.. he sucks..