New Orleans Saints Forums - blackandgold.com
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

New Orleans Saints Forums - blackandgold.com (https://blackandgold.com/community/)
-   Saints (https://blackandgold.com/saints/)
-   -   Saints' Staff are Gamblers (https://blackandgold.com/saints/21286-saints-staff-gamblers.html)

SmashMouth 05-23-2008 11:09 AM
Re: Saints' Staff are Gamblers
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by foreverfan (Post 167053)
Ocean? I take great offense to football being compared to an ocean.

Have any of you ever been left at sea? You get sunburned, thirsty, tired and eventually eaten by sharks. How does this compare to football?

Sorry, I couldn't resist.

Other than Vilma if healthy, our LB's play like they are left in an ocean!

:handguns:

papz 05-23-2008 11:53 AM
Re: Saints' Staff are Gamblers
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 504Highlander (Post 167051)
Saints needed to add speed and more talent at LB. They added Vilma and Morgan, both seriously injured.

Morgan has retired and on WWL radio yesterday, Vilma was discussing not be able to participate fully as he is still rehabbing.

Last year they brought in LB Simmons who was coming off a serious injury and was never really productive. He was cut too.

This year the Saints will likely have to start without McAllister and therefore begin a tough season at a competitive disadvantage.

We are not discussing a player, we are looking at a FO philosophy, that goes thinks 'bargain hunting' is a legit way to improve the team.
And what did these moves cost us? Practically nothing. I don't see anything wrong whatsoever on the moves we've made. I can't see why anyone would complain about a low risk low investment high reward signing/trade.

Once again, so were you opposed to us acquiring Vilma?

Did Brees not work out?

What did Morgan cost us in the end?

You act like we haven't made any inquiries all offseason about "healthy" players. They just haven't been in our price range. Why overpay if you don't think that player will get you over that hump? Obviously we felt comfortable enough in Vilma to obtain him... it'll be okay. Even if he didn't start the season 100%, he's still better than what we've got at 80.

One may forget that the '06 team didn't exactly look good on paper... especially at LB.

504Highlander 05-23-2008 12:18 PM
Re: Saints' Staff are Gamblers
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papz (Post 167058)
And what did these moves cost us? Practically nothing. I don't see anything wrong whatsoever on the moves we've made. I can't see why anyone would complain about a low risk low investment high reward signing/trade.

Once again, so were you opposed to us acquiring Vilma?

Did Brees not work out?

What did Morgan cost us in the end?

You act like we haven't made any inquiries all offseason about "healthy" players. They just haven't been in our price range. Why overpay if you don't think that player will get you over that hump? Obviously we felt comfortable enough in Vilma to obtain him... it'll be okay. Even if he didn't start the season 100%, he's still better than what we've got at 80.

One may forget that the '06 team didn't exactly look good on paper... especially at LB.
The cost is much more than dollars. Let's compare the history of the Saints franchise to say; The Carolina Panthers and the Jacksonville Jaguars and lately, the Houston Texans.

The common denominator is time. The Saints and the fans and the city have 'endured' the lack of success for a very long time.

Panthers, Jags and Texans are relatively new teams which have done well in a short time.

Much of their success has to do with acquiring talent that can get on the field and contribute right away. In general. they have done a better job of getting talent and production through the draft and free agency.

That is the core of my beef with the philosophy of this FO.

papz 05-23-2008 01:54 PM
Re: Saints' Staff are Gamblers
 
Risk, cost, now time... everytime there's a response then you change it and make it about something else. If you have a problem with how we acquire talent, then you obviously have a problem with Brees and Vilma being here.

What do the Jags, Panthers, Texans, and Saints all have in common? No Super Bowl ring. They can be 10 times more talented, have earlier success winning meaningless football games, and it still leads to no ring. We're all in the same boat. I couldn't give a diddly squat about what happened 10 or 20 years ago... we live in the now. This is a different era and regime of Saints football... have a little faith. It got us pretty far a couple of years ago... and we should rebound nicely this season.

iceshack149 05-23-2008 02:17 PM
Re: Saints' Staff are Gamblers
 
Quote:
Panthers, Jags and Texans are relatively new teams which have done well in a short time.
Panthers and Jags sure. But Texans? :bs:

Welcome 504. You've played a good devils advocate and it makes it interesting. Unless you're serious about the sky is falling stuff?

Quote:
Much of their success has to do with acquiring talent that can get on the field and contribute right away. In general. they have done a better job of getting talent and production through the draft and free agency.
The Saints went to the NFC Championship game in 2006. It's 2008 and most of the talented players that were on the team then are on the team now.
You're concerned about the RB, TE, and LB positions and I agree that RB and LB are indeed weaknesses. However, I assert that those two positions are stronger in 2008 than they were in 2006. Stronger because of two guys: Pierre Thomas and Jonathon Vilma.

I understand that you are concerned with the health of two players that have been great in their own right in McAllister and Vilma. I have no argument for that. I can't say that they will be 100% by game one so all I can do assume that behind the scenes, the Saints coaching staff knows what they are doing.

The big weakness for the Saints to address after the 2007 season was defense. McCray, Ellis, Vilma, Porter are all defensive players that are sure to be on the field a lot this year so to be disappointed the FO after these moves is befuddling to me. Were you expecting the team to be like the Raiders or the Redskins and break the bank on every free agent they could get their hands on? That doesn't work unless the team is rebuilding and have no where to go but up.

On offense, if Deuce isn't healthy enough to begin the season then I'm pretty confident in Pierre Thomas. His game in Chicago was phenomenal and the spot duty before that game showed much also. He was in the voting for Rookie of the Week after that 24 yard TD run.

I think that many people, even non-Saints fans, would agree that the Saints are favored to be on top of the NFC South come seasons end.

Every team has weaknesses. The Saints have done pretty well this off-season in my book.

RockyMountainSaint 05-23-2008 02:31 PM
Re: Saints' Staff are Gamblers
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by foreverfan (Post 167053)
Ocean? I take great offense to football being compared to an ocean.

Have any of you ever been left at sea? You get sunburned, thirsty, tired and eventually eaten by sharks. How does this compare to football?

Sorry, I couldn't resist.
"Man goes into cage.
Cage goes into water.
Shark is in the water.
"Our" shark."

"We're gonna need a bigger boat."

504Highlander 05-23-2008 08:54 PM
Re: Saints' Staff are Gamblers
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by papz (Post 167060)
Risk, cost, now time... everytime there's a response then you change it and make it about something else. If you have a problem with how we acquire talent, then you obviously have a problem with Brees and Vilma being here.

What do the Jags, Panthers, Texans, and Saints all have in common? No Super Bowl ring. They can be 10 times more talented, have earlier success winning meaningless football games, and it still leads to no ring. We're all in the same boat. I couldn't give a diddly squat about what happened 10 or 20 years ago... we live in the now. This is a different era and regime of Saints football... have a little faith. It got us pretty far a couple of years ago... and we should rebound nicely this season.
Why don't you read the post from page one. You will get the gist, including my comment about Brees.

By the way, you are the one that keeps talking money. It is not my money, so I am not focused on that.

Risks that become let downs, which turn into wasted hopes, and the familiar refrain, 'maybe next year'.

Why not this year! With some bada$$ players! Right out the gate Game One, both barrels blazing !!

Let's get this thing going.

504Highlander 05-23-2008 09:21 PM
Re: Saints' Staff are Gamblers
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by iceshack149 (Post 167062)
Panthers and Jags sure. But Texans? :bs:

Welcome 504. You've played a good devils advocate and it makes it interesting. Unless you're serious about the sky is falling stuff?



The Saints went to the NFC Championship game in 2006. It's 2008 and most of the talented players that were on the team then are on the team now.
You're concerned about the RB, TE, and LB positions and I agree that RB and LB are indeed weaknesses. However, I assert that those two positions are stronger in 2008 than they were in 2006. Stronger because of two guys: Pierre Thomas and Jonathon Vilma.

I understand that you are concerned with the health of two players that have been great in their own right in McAllister and Vilma. I have no argument for that. I can't say that they will be 100% by game one so all I can do assume that behind the scenes, the Saints coaching staff knows what they are doing.

The big weakness for the Saints to address after the 2007 season was defense. McCray, Ellis, Vilma, Porter are all defensive players that are sure to be on the field a lot this year so to be disappointed the FO after these moves is befuddling to me. Were you expecting the team to be like the Raiders or the Redskins and break the bank on every free agent they could get their hands on? That doesn't work unless the team is rebuilding and have no where to go but up.

On offense, if Deuce isn't healthy enough to begin the season then I'm pretty confident in Pierre Thomas. His game in Chicago was phenomenal and the spot duty before that game showed much also. He was in the voting for Rookie of the Week after that 24 yard TD run.

I think that many people, even non-Saints fans, would agree that the Saints are favored to be on top of the NFC South come seasons end.

Every team has weaknesses. The Saints have done pretty well this off-season in my book.
I was hoping for 2008 upgrades at the weak positions.

IMO weak positions are :

RB, TE on O

DL, LB and DB on D. All three defensive tiers.

I like PT, and the game he played in Chicago was terrific.
Can he replace Deuce for the whole season and be the featured back? At this point, all I can say is that I hope so.

TE is the same as 07.

I have stated earlier on that I liked the D Line moves. I believe that at D Line we have an upgrade.

They brought in 2 seriously injured LB's. One retired, one still rehabbing.
No upgrade yet.

I was not sold on the CB draft pick, or the free agents they brought in.
No upgrade yet.

Also, on the Texans - They kicked our a$$ in 07 and beat the Bucs and have beaten the Colts.

We didn't do that last year. So, yeah - the Texans !

Memnoch_TP 05-23-2008 10:36 PM
Re: Saints' Staff are Gamblers
 
Brees wasn't a gamble. I heard QB's saying his injury was no big deal, I heard doctors say it was no big deal, the only people who called Brees' shoulder injury "career threatening" was the media.

As for Vilma, medical science is getting better and better. I'm sure the Saints medical staff was quite familiar with Vilma's knee before he was signed. It is much less a gamble and more a calculated risk. They aren't exactly flipping a coin for it.

You just want big name players at your highlight positions. I understand that, but move on, cause the arguments that you use to defend your wants are getting dull.

504Highlander 05-23-2008 11:19 PM
Re: Saints' Staff are Gamblers
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Memnoch_TP (Post 167095)
Brees wasn't a gamble. I heard QB's saying his injury was no big deal, I heard doctors say it was no big deal, the only people who called Brees' shoulder injury "career threatening" was the media.

As for Vilma, medical science is getting better and better. I'm sure the Saints medical staff was quite familiar with Vilma's knee before he was signed. It is much less a gamble and more a calculated risk. They aren't exactly flipping a coin for it.

You just want big name players at your highlight positions. I understand that, but move on, cause the arguments that you use to defend your wants are getting dull.
I started this thread with a look at the FO's approach to improving the team.
I have an opinion about it, I shared it and have responded politely to other points of view.

As to your comment about 'big name players', I could care less who these players are or their history.

Whether by draft or free agency, this team needs talent, impact and production, and sooner rather than later.

There are justifiable circumstances when bringing in injured players is ok. But when those players are injured and they play at a position of weakness on the team, then I believe it is questionable judgment.

If this is too dull for you, then it's you who should move on.:):):)

hagan714 05-24-2008 05:23 AM
Re: Saints' Staff are Gamblers
 
We all hoped for WLB upgrade but so far it has not happened. there is still time. I am fine with Shanle for another year.
Dull? LOL not at all. I am liking this thread.
504 you make some good points but there are only so many players you can draft in 3 years and sign as FA. Plus keep your FAs. Time is what it takes. I still have problems seeing any other real gambles outside of vilma. who without a doubt is worth it.
Yes I have read this from page 1.

papz 05-24-2008 09:38 AM
Re: Saints' Staff are Gamblers
 
Edit.

I've read the whole thing. I know your stance and how it's changed. It's pointless for me to continue... we've made our points. I understand what you say that's our problem... but the results have proven not to be a problem. But you can feel however you want... it's your opinion.

CantonLegend 05-24-2008 09:48 AM
Re: Saints' Staff are Gamblers
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 504Highlander (Post 167094)
IMO weak positions are :

RB, TE on O
i know this really wasnt ur point but u did say it.....why wasnt ne of the line positions one of the weak ones?...seeing as how we lost one of the better centers in the league and now have a very underrated center stepping in but at the same time has little experience and might not be able to carry the center position the whole year....or what about RT....can streif and stinch really hold down the right side next to jahri....everybody knows hes doin his job...now its the tackles turn...and he better be able to if drew gets hurt cuz our next 2 QBs are left handed and gotta know that their blind side is protected....what about LG....is nesbit really a quality starter?....he has been starting for our team for awhile but he really hasnt done ne thing to impress being that he was sandwiched between a good LT and a good C....maybe thats a weak position.....and TE?....do u really think we need an upgrade at TE?...we have had a top 5 offense for the past 2 seasons with those TEs....just for arguments sake...Y do u think we need an upgrade?..was it because one was available over the offseason or was it because the media got to u and now ur being persuaded by the likes of Mel Kiper and chris berman?

SaintFanInATLHELL 05-24-2008 03:45 PM
Re: Saints' Staff are Gamblers
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 504Highlander (Post 167094)
I was hoping for 2008 upgrades at the weak positions.

IMO weak positions are :

RB, TE on O

DL, LB and DB on D. All three defensive tiers.
We of course disagree on the offensive positions. I totally agree on defense.

Quote:
I like PT, and the game he played in Chicago was terrific.
Can he replace Deuce for the whole season and be the featured back? At this point, all I can say is that I hope so.
The Saints will not have a feature back this year. The Saints haven't had a feature back the last 2 years. An NFL feature back is going to have numbers like 300+ carries, 1500+ yards. No Saints back in the last 2 years has even come close. It's the nature of the offense.

I keep talking about productivity in the Saints running game for a reason. Saints backs simple are not going to get a ton of carries. So it's much more important for each carry to count than the number of carries or the total yards.

Can PT23 be a 300+ carry , 1500+ yard back? Nope.

Can PT23 be a 200 carry, 900 yard back? Definitely.

Watch the yards per carry. For the Saints in the last 2 years, the rishing game has averaged 3.7 YPC. If we can get that up to 4.5 then we're looking at production even if the total yards are limited.

PT23 isn't a featured back. And he isn't going to need to be one either.

Quote:
TE is the same as 07.
74 catches, 709 yards, 4 TDs between Miller and Johnson. While not spectacular, certainly solid.

Quote:
I have stated earlier on that I liked the D Line moves. I believe that at D Line we have an upgrade.
Agreed.

Quote:
They brought in 2 seriously injured LB's. One retired, one still rehabbing.
No upgrade yet.
The rehabbing one was Pro Bowl caliber the last time he played MLB. #53 isn't fit to be wiped off someone's shoes.

We certainly could have drafted Rivers or Mayo into the MLB slot. But then we would have lost that significant upgrade in the D-Line.

I think the Saints made the right move. Time will tell.

Quote:
I was not sold on the CB draft pick, or the free agents they brought in.
No upgrade yet.
Well you can argue that until anyone hits the field for real there's no real upgrade at any position. All we know is that the secondary played awful last year. We have absolutely no true idea how the changes at the line or in the LB core is going affect the secondary play. Past performance of other teams have shown that DLines that can bring pressure, and a MLB that can stuff the run makes all levels of the defense better.

SFIAH

Saint_LB 09-26-2009 06:06 AM
Re: Saints' Staff are Gamblers
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by foreverfan (Post 167053)
Ocean? I take great offense to football being compared to an ocean.

Have any of you ever been left at sea? You get sunburned, thirsty, tired and eventually eaten by sharks. How does this compare to football?

Sorry, I couldn't resist.
bad boy


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:55 AM.
Page 2 of 2 1 2
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page


Copyright 1997 - 2020 - BlackandGold.com