pakowitz

“The Saints are sorry. They have as much talent at the skill spots as anyone — Kansas City, Denver, Green Bay, Buffalo — you name it. How that team is (8-8) is baffling.�

- unnamed NFL scout

JKool

So, at the end of the season you are only as good as your record. I suppose there are two reasons that is true:
1. There are no more games to be played by that team; therefore, Means no longer matter,
AND
2. There is no reason to continue evaluating that team, since it will not exist next season.

Those seem like reasonable points. These, though, are merely pragmatic points - that is, there may be no good reason to waste our time with what might have beens. Thus, it seems to me that there may well be to camps in terms of evaluation - those who are interested in what might be there for next year, and what if questions, and those who are simply interested in how things turned out. I see no reason that one camp is more in the right than the other.

It seems perfectly reasonable to me to ask who would win in the following game, right now, if it were played - Bengals versus Saints. Surely we could figure that out? Presumably, we would pick the BETTER team to win that game.

I\'m not trying to be a pain in the az, but it seems to me that evaluation of how good a team is is NOT, as Parcells\' quote suggests, merely a function of a team\'s record (even at the end of the season, depending on your reason for asking how good the team is). Pakowitz\'s quote merely agrees with this: people who know football are confused as to how things turned out for our boys (since they should have been better than their record).

I\'m sorry if I peeved anyone; I think I learned a lot from this thread. Thanks to all for your thoughts.

"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks

deadflatbird

No dude its fine...

But you can\'t dwell on could have, should have, would have especially if you have been a Saints fan for any amount of time. When the season is over you can evaluate the talent of the team and see what you want to address in the offseason. You can\'t say the Saints are better than the Bengals and give either the win or loss unless they play. ITs about match-ups, game plans... and anyone can beat anyone on any given sunday due to match-ups, preparing ect.

BillyC

A team is only as good as it\'s record, as it relates to that particular season. But, that does not mean that a particular team (saints) are not better than the record they posted for that particular year. I think the Saints could go into next season with the same players and coaches and have a good chance at making the playoffs. But, the samething is true for many teams that didn\'t make the playoffs.

Anyway, I don\'t really think this topic has anything to do with well..........ANYTHING. The bottom line is, we have had enough talent to at least make the playoffs for the past couple of year, but the coaches weren\'t able to get the job done. At some point you\'ve got to ask yourself who is to blame. Should we blame the players? Of course not. If we as fans can blame the players, then Haslett and company could just point their finger at the players and blame them.

I don\'t think the fan\'s should really be upset with any of the coaches. The person we should be upset with is Tom Benson.....

JKool

Whether or not coaches are to blame can be decided by comparing Means to Ends. We finished 8-8, and, as DFB and WhoDat pointed out (correctly I now believe), for this season that is all that matters NOW THAT IT IS OVER.

However, if we were able to evaluate teams by Means, which I suggest we can, we do, and we should, then we could figure things out like this - given our shedule and the skill of our players versus the skill of their players, we should have finished say 9-7. If that is possible, then we could say that the coaches cost us one game (or we could at least make a resonable argument to that effect).

In essence, I believe that those of us, practically everyone by now, who think that the coaches are to blame for at least some part of our losses have been making arguments like the hypothetical one I just laid out above. Thus, it is helpful to understand what underpins our evaluation of a team in that respect. Also, I think that this idea of Means versus Ends has helped me to understand what some people have been saying, including Parcells\' I suppose. And, I guess, I disagree.

That said, I agree with Billy, and so many others, that there is a need for stronger leadership above the coaching ranks, whether that be a GM (I like the Mueller Conspiracy thread) or the owner.

"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks

jm

Amen , Gator

JKool

I agree Gator. Excuses suck.

Parcells\' comment has some context for me now. It makes a bit more sense - thank you all for helping me to get my head around it.

I think there is a difference in the time frame that tells us when to care about Means (and matchups and so on) versus when to care about Ends. It seems that most here are of the opinion, and I can\'t say I disagree, that at the end of the season Ends are all that matter. Thus, the Saints are 8-8 - as WhoDat pointed out, they are not good nor are they bad, but either way they didn\'t make the playoffs. I still think it is an open question as to whether or not they are better than the Bengals, but, as Billy notes, that isn\'t a very interesting question. However, during the season, before the playoffs start, maybe even before the pre season starts, we do care about Means. That is how we come to make predictions about how a team will do.

What does any of this matter, I don\'t know - I was just wondering why one person says we suck because we finsihed 8-8 and another person thinks we\'re better than some of the teams who made the playoffs. I think I have the answer now - one person is talking about Means, the other Ends.

"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks

BillyC

One man\'s \"excuses\" are another man\'s \"reasons\". Is saying Stallworth\'s injury hurt the offense an excuse? Or, could it have some truth to it? ANYBODY that says injuries are no excuse is . There are many REASONS that this team underachieved this year. I think it\'s pretty short-sighted to say things such as:

1. We didn\'t make the playoffs.......Nuff said.
2. Parcell\'s did great in Dallas..........Nuff said.

Not only is it short-sighted, it\'s Pure , that\'s what it is.

There is no doubt that this team had the talent to make the playoffs. Even with the injuries, I think we should be in the playoffs. There\'s little doubt in my mind that coaching is the #1 problem with this team. However, I can look beyond the coaching and realize there were several other factors that contributed to us losing games.

I think some need to learn the meanings of the words \"excuses\" and \"reasons\".

Coaching is more to blame than anything else, IMO, but everyone ,from the players, assistant coaches, on down the line had a hand in our season.


JK00l--

I wasn\'t trying to insult the question you presented and it was a very good question. I just knew what kind of response you were going to get.

[Edited on 9/1/2004 by JOESAM2002]

JKool

No offense taken. I was just wondering why you seemed to think the distinctions were irrelevant.

I agree also that there is an important distinction between reasons and excuses. Those two things are oft confused though. When someone notes that we didn\'t win a game because we were missing six defensive starters, is that a reason or an excuse? Isn\'t the problem that it is often BOTH?

Here is a suggestion, but I don\'t know what I think about it yet: reasons have to do with understanding Means, but excuses have to do with dismissing lack of Ends. Maybe that is another way in which this distinction is helpful?

Of course, we\'re all interested in what makes a team good, so we can get that (the goodness of our team). I think I was a bit unfair to supporters of Parcells\' quote until I understood that we were just talking about two different kinds of \"good\".

"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks

jm

Gator,

You make a lot of sense, There are reasons and Excuses. Finding the reasons for failures is a good tool if used to identify and correct problems. The Saints problems didn\'t just start in 2003 as we have seen in the results of the last 3 seasons.
Changes have been made but only to see the sames results (missing the playoffs).
There must be a common denominator for lack of progress in the last 3 years. I don\'t profess to know what that might be but perhaps using the proper \"Reasoning\" someone can identify the problem or problems.