Losing

WhoDat · 12-22-2003, 12:44 PM

We need:

1. A new head coach who knows more about winning and getting his players ready than he does about excuses and \"locker room cancers.\"

2. An offensive coordinator with a little imagination. Someone who understands that against SOME teams, you run to setup to pass, and against others, YOU DO THE OPPOSITE.

3. A defensive coordinator who is a defensive coordinator, not just some guy who has been around forever and NEVER been on a winning team as a coordinator or head coach other than last year\'s team (and that winning record obviously had NOTHING to do with our defense last year).

4. A GM who knows anything about players and talent. What has that bean-counter done? Managed to somehow give us the highest payroll in the league. Oh, and what did he do with the 5th most money available under that cap last offseason? Brought us such greats as: Ruff, Rodgers, Ambrose, Sullivan, Conwell, Stinchomb, and a whole slew of other players that never saw the field... oh, and let\'s not forget Tsucky. Yeah, some great GM that guy is.

5. A middle linebacker who knows how to play middle linebacker. The kind of guy who can at least effect a play every once in a while, if not control the middle.

6. A true shutdown corner. The kind of guy NO has never had. Someone who dares you to throw his way and then makes you pay if you do.

7. An outside linebacker who isn\'t named Allen, Hodge, or Smith. (Rodgers is OK)

8. A dominant left tackle (move Gandy to the right).

9. A big play receiver (No stallworth doesn\'t count - you have to be on the field to make plays).

10. A healthy viable backup RB.

11. If all of the above, then a little luck and the Lombardi trophy we will deserve.

JKool · 12-22-2003, 12:44 PM

Well, I\'m just so agreeable today.

This post seems exactly right to me. I feel stupid for giving up on my thesis that the run-defense was our biggest problem. I guess I got too excited when they played well a game or two in a row.

I\'ll tell you what though - Sammy Knight may have got beat deep a few (ha ha) times, but he was a ball hawk, and he could definitely stop the run. I think that was a huge loss. Not that Bellamy wasn\'t great this year, but the loss of Knight I think played a big role in the demise of our already poor run defense. It didn\'t matter that our corners were average (no offense to Fred) this year, since no one had to pass.

So, I think we need two run stuffers (get us Al Wilson!) and a freakin\' shut down corner BECAUSE the second we stop the run, they\'re gonna shred our secondary.

WhoDat · 12-22-2003, 02:05 PM

I think we need two run stuffers.

Don\'t say that! Why did you say that? Here comes the Lunch Bunch Part II!

BlackandBlue · 12-22-2003, 02:35 PM

Funny thing is, we need a fatass next to Sullivan that only has one job- rock forward when the ball is snapped- that\'s all. Surely there are some available.

JKool · 12-22-2003, 03:42 PM

Yikes! I\'m sorry to say that I did say that - but I didn\'t realize that entailed the Heavy Lunch Bunch II! That\'s worse than Jason vs Freddie.

Let me rephrase, though I did enjoy a laugh over this one: two run stuffers who are not both near 320 lbs a peice. What I acutally had in mind is an OLB or MLB plus a DLman who isn\'t simply built for rushing (though, it would be nice if he could do that too

)

jm · 12-22-2003, 03:56 PM

After 34 years of popping Rolaids and Tylenol pulling for the Saints I thought I had seen it all, but the Saints seem to find new ways to snatch your heart out and stomp it flat. Yesterday has topped it all. A one in a million play that was sucessful only to be ruined by a missed extra point!!!! I never get used to losing I just get numb. Am I ready to jump ship? No, just call me a glutton for punishment, I\'ll still be here pulling for em again next year. I don\'t know why but I will. And Although a win yesterday wouldn\'t have secured a playoff spot it would have been nice to see something positive.
Its for some major changes, we certainly don\'t want to be going through the same stuff a year from now!

[Edited on 22/12/2003 by jm]

BillyC · 12-22-2003, 07:00 PM

This loss hurt, but not nearly as bad as some have. It was a meaningless game, really. I wish we would have won it, but in the end, we still weren\'t going to the playoffs.

But, you are right. This team finds all different kinds of ways to lose. Who would have thought that Deuce would be most responsible for losing the game for us? It\'s just not fair to Deuce. So what Deuce lost 2-fumbles when no one hit him. I know that the Jags scored 1-TD off one of his fumbles and the other one killed a good drive. I\'m still not going to fault Decue though. Deuce more than made up for losing us the game yesterday with the way he has played this year. Don\'t let the critcism get to you Deuce...

[Edited on 23/12/2003 by BillyC]

subguy · 12-22-2003, 07:23 PM

Billy prior to the loss did we know we werent\' going to the playoffs? It was far from meaningless.

[Edited on 23/12/2003 by subguy]

BillyC · 12-22-2003, 08:10 PM

Billy prior to the loss did we know we werent\' going to the playoffs? It was far from meaningless.

OK, so the game might COULD have had some meaning. But, I don\'t want anyone blaming Deuce for the loss. I know how hard members criticised Brooks for fumbling the game away in Tampa. Deuce can\'t be criticised for the samething, because Deuce only lost 2 fumbles and not 3 like Brooks. Now, if Deuce had of lost 3 fumbles, then I would blame him for the loss like Brooks got balmed. I\'ll take up for you Deuce, I know the Deuce bashers will be out soon.........

[Edited on 23/12/2003 by BillyC]

JKool · 12-22-2003, 11:45 PM

Billy, it doesn\'t look like anyone has taken the bait here.

However, here is a possible reply: Duece has done more than his part this year (and IS a pro bolwer). Thus, this is actually \"just a bad game\" for him; I think the stats will attest to that. Your critic will say this: Brooks on the other hand has been INCONSISTANT (whatever that means) all year, so his fumbles are just a part of that trend (such as it is). Therefore, there is no comparison - thus, Duece takes no blame for this game (especially since Carney is available for that), whereas Br

ks does for his fumble game.

Please pardon all spelling errors tonight. I\'ve got to say, I\'m pretty tired.

12-22-2003, 12:44 PM	#1
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631	Losing We need: 1. A new head coach who knows more about winning and getting his players ready than he does about excuses and \"locker room cancers.\" 2. An offensive coordinator with a little imagination. Someone who understands that against SOME teams, you run to setup to pass, and against others, YOU DO THE OPPOSITE. 3. A defensive coordinator who is a defensive coordinator, not just some guy who has been around forever and NEVER been on a winning team as a coordinator or head coach other than last year\'s team (and that winning record obviously had NOTHING to do with our defense last year). 4. A GM who knows anything about players and talent. What has that bean-counter done? Managed to somehow give us the highest payroll in the league. Oh, and what did he do with the 5th most money available under that cap last offseason? Brought us such greats as: Ruff, Rodgers, Ambrose, Sullivan, Conwell, Stinchomb, and a whole slew of other players that never saw the field... oh, and let\'s not forget Tsucky. Yeah, some great GM that guy is. 5. A middle linebacker who knows how to play middle linebacker. The kind of guy who can at least effect a play every once in a while, if not control the middle. 6. A true shutdown corner. The kind of guy NO has never had. Someone who dares you to throw his way and then makes you pay if you do. 7. An outside linebacker who isn\'t named Allen, Hodge, or Smith. (Rodgers is OK) 8. A dominant left tackle (move Gandy to the right). 9. A big play receiver (No stallworth doesn\'t count - you have to be on the field to make plays). 10. A healthy viable backup RB. 11. If all of the above, then a little luck and the Lombardi trophy we will deserve.
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631	\"Excuses, excuses, excuses. ThatÃ¢Â€Â™s all anyone ever makes for the New Orleans SaintsÃ¢Â€Â™ organization.\" - Eric Narcisse \"Being a Saints fan is almost like being addicted to crack,\" he said.[i]\"You know you should stop, but you just can\'t.\"

12-22-2003, 12:44 PM	#2
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	Losing Well, I\'m just so agreeable today. This post seems exactly right to me. I feel stupid for giving up on my thesis that the run-defense was our biggest problem. I guess I got too excited when they played well a game or two in a row. I\'ll tell you what though - Sammy Knight may have got beat deep a few (ha ha) times, but he was a ball hawk, and he could definitely stop the run. I think that was a huge loss. Not that Bellamy wasn\'t great this year, but the loss of Knight I think played a big role in the demise of our already poor run defense. It didn\'t matter that our corners were average (no offense to Fred) this year, since no one had to pass. So, I think we need two run stuffers (get us Al Wilson!) and a freakin\' shut down corner BECAUSE the second we stop the run, they\'re gonna shred our secondary.
	"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks

12-22-2003, 02:05 PM	#3
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631	Losing I think we need two run stuffers. Don\'t say that! Why did you say that? Here comes the Lunch Bunch Part II!
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631

12-22-2003, 02:35 PM	#4
BlackandBlue Kinder, gentler Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: dirty south Posts: 3,889	Losing Funny thing is, we need a fatass next to Sullivan that only has one job- rock forward when the ball is snapped- that\'s all. Surely there are some available.

12-22-2003, 03:42 PM	#5
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	Losing Yikes! I\'m sorry to say that I did say that - but I didn\'t realize that entailed the Heavy Lunch Bunch II! That\'s worse than Jason vs Freddie. Let me rephrase, though I did enjoy a laugh over this one: two run stuffers who are not both near 320 lbs a peice. What I acutally had in mind is an OLB or MLB plus a DLman who isn\'t simply built for rushing (though, it would be nice if he could do that too )

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

12-22-2003, 03:56 PM	#6
jm 100th Post Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 133	Losing After 34 years of popping Rolaids and Tylenol pulling for the Saints I thought I had seen it all, but the Saints seem to find new ways to snatch your heart out and stomp it flat. Yesterday has topped it all. A one in a million play that was sucessful only to be ruined by a missed extra point!!!! I never get used to losing I just get numb. Am I ready to jump ship? No, just call me a glutton for punishment, I\'ll still be here pulling for em again next year. I don\'t know why but I will. And Although a win yesterday wouldn\'t have secured a playoff spot it would have been nice to see something positive. Its for some major changes, we certainly don\'t want to be going through the same stuff a year from now! [Edited on 22/12/2003 by jm]
jm 100th Post Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 133

12-22-2003, 07:00 PM	#7
BillyC Banned Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 842	Losing This loss hurt, but not nearly as bad as some have. It was a meaningless game, really. I wish we would have won it, but in the end, we still weren\'t going to the playoffs. But, you are right. This team finds all different kinds of ways to lose. Who would have thought that Deuce would be most responsible for losing the game for us? It\'s just not fair to Deuce. So what Deuce lost 2-fumbles when no one hit him. I know that the Jags scored 1-TD off one of his fumbles and the other one killed a good drive. I\'m still not going to fault Decue though. Deuce more than made up for losing us the game yesterday with the way he has played this year. Don\'t let the critcism get to you Deuce... [Edited on 23/12/2003 by BillyC]
BillyC Banned Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 842

12-22-2003, 07:23 PM	#8
subguy 1000 Posts + Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: FL Posts: 2,092	Losing Billy prior to the loss did we know we werent\' going to the playoffs? It was far from meaningless. [Edited on 23/12/2003 by subguy]

12-22-2003, 08:10 PM	#9
BillyC Banned Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 842	Losing Billy prior to the loss did we know we werent\' going to the playoffs? It was far from meaningless. OK, so the game might COULD have had some meaning. But, I don\'t want anyone blaming Deuce for the loss. I know how hard members criticised Brooks for fumbling the game away in Tampa. Deuce can\'t be criticised for the samething, because Deuce only lost 2 fumbles and not 3 like Brooks. Now, if Deuce had of lost 3 fumbles, then I would blame him for the loss like Brooks got balmed. I\'ll take up for you Deuce, I know the Deuce bashers will be out soon......... [Edited on 23/12/2003 by BillyC]
BillyC Banned Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 842

12-22-2003, 11:45 PM	#10
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	Losing Billy, it doesn\'t look like anyone has taken the bait here. However, here is a possible reply: Duece has done more than his part this year (and IS a pro bolwer). Thus, this is actually \"just a bad game\" for him; I think the stats will attest to that. Your critic will say this: Brooks on the other hand has been INCONSISTANT (whatever that means) all year, so his fumbles are just a part of that trend (such as it is). Therefore, there is no comparison - thus, Duece takes no blame for this game (especially since Carney is available for that), whereas Br ks does for his fumble game. Please pardon all spelling errors tonight. I\'ve got to say, I\'m pretty tired.
	"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks