Cancerous player file
 

Green Bay - The Green Bay Packers handed out two huge multi-year contracts to defensive linemen in the off-season a year ago. When the Packers picked up tackle Grady Jackson off waivers from the New Orleans Saints, their fortunes took a turn for the better.

And as the team sat at 3-4 going into the bye before getting back to even with the victory at Minnesota in their eighth game, it was obvious that the defense - and particularly the defensive line - was a leading reason for the disappointment.

But on Nov. 4, the Packers claimed Jackson on waivers, and it didn't take long for their defensive numbers to take a turn for the better.

"Grady was a great addition midway through the season, whenever we picked him up," said Bob Slowik, the Packers' new defensive coordinator. "I think that's when we started playing much better defense and he was a real factor in it."

The Packers recognized Jackson's value and signed him to a two-year contract extension on Dec. 27.

http://www.jsonline.com/packer/news/feb04/206716.asp

Cancerous player file
 

I don\'t think this little story has played itself out just yet. Might wanna take a \"wait and see\" approach on this one 08.

Cancerous player file
 

Grady\'s kind of a 2 gap guy right?

Just askin.

Cancerous player file
 

When he feels like it.
For the most part he\'s a 0-gap guy for half a season.

Green Bay will discover what the Saints and Raiders already know. They\'ll realize it about week 8, 2004.

Grady wasn\'t a cancer, he was a lazy player that took half a game off every week.

Cancerous player file
 

Yeah, we\'ll take a wait and see approach, but why can\'t the Saints keep a DT for more than 2 years? Glover, Hand, Jackson, Smith, Chase... I\'m forgetting some. How many new starters have there been at LB, or any spot on D for that matter - and up until this year, the D just kept getting worse. Even this year it\'s not like the unit was good. That spells trouble if you ask me.

Cancerous player file
 

Something to wonder about Whodat, but to insinuate yet another conspiracy theory is a bit too much. Now I can sit back and wait for 08 to come back with his \"Oliver Stone\" version of the Saints and their DT\'s. :casstet:

LOL :P

Cancerous player file
 

No conspiracy theory here. But I have often wondered how the franchise manages to run off so many talented football players that go on to have pro-bowl type careers elsewhere? (Not strictly speaking about DT\'s, but La\'Roi Glover is an example of \"Things that make you go...Huh?\"

I\'ve never figured any sort of byzantine sort of conspiracy, I just figure that someone lacks people skills. Could be Haslett, could be someone else, but that\'s my .02.

But then, What do I know? I\'m kind of ignorant.

Cancerous player file
 

Grady was never noted as a cancer as near as I can remember, but it may be safe to say that his attitude was what was damaged. He and Hand took more than their share of the blame for our failure in 02-03. This misplaced blame can really hurt a player (sure they are professionals, but we all know that motivation and psychology play a role in player performance). I agree that Grady had an inflated sense of how good and valuable he was (which translated into a bit of the lazy), but our coaching staff didn\'t light a fire under him, they broke him. Granted it is hard to say how much there was there to break, but I do believe that they didn\'t help any (in this particular case).

I don\'t know if the Grady case says anything at all about the other DTs we\'ve lost, I\'d have to hear more argument there. Grady however seemed to have very different problems from Glover (expensive and not a run stopper) and Chase (the odd man out) - so I\'m not sure I see much of a trend here.

His success in GB can be attributed to a new environment. He had obviously soured in NO, so a chance to show that he is better than the treatment he got and a chance to feel like he was being valued again probably helped his performance.

Cancerous player file
 

How about my entire team Brooks conspiracy theory ???

It goes like this : Anyone that challenges Brooks is a cancerous threat to the Haslett regime and no one is allowed to be put in the position to challenge Brooks , like Delhomme .....

It kind of follows with things like :

Cancerous player file
 

I rest my case. :casstet:

Kyle Turley was a liability for the Saints two seasons ago, and now he\'s a liability for the Rams. He got his lunch handed to him over and over again last year. Enjoy...

He\'s a pot smokin\' \"surfer dude\" from California. He\'s a \"wendy whiner\" who cries to the media when he doesn\'t get his way. When he\'s 70 years old (He will probalby have smoked himself to death long before he makes 70) he won\'t be half the man Aaron Brooks is today. Your character witness (see Gator for the definition of a character witness :P ) needs to have better character 08.

As usual, nice try...

Cancerous player file
 

For the fun of it Saintsfan , can I get your opinion of Joe Horn ????

Cancerous player file
 

I don\'t think the Saints are any different than other teams around the NFL. All team have their \"problem players.\" Also, this problem is not unique to football, as all sports have their problems with players.

The Saints have had their problem players that have been shipped out, but player turnover is high around the NFL, whether players are causing problems or not. The Saints have had a little higher player turnover than most teams have had the past 3 years, but as bad as the Saints were when Haslett took over, I think that is understandable.

Haslett isn\'t as bad as some think, but he has made mistakes. But, just because he has made mistakes, I don\'t think we should say everything he has done or will do is going to be negitive. That seems to be what a lot of members here say regardless of what Haslett does.

Things might not be going the best in the world, but it\'s not all bad either. This years team could be one of the most talented in the NFL and in Saints history. Haslett has been a victom of having a lot of talent on offense and not on defense. This year WILL be differnent and a lot of fans will be singing a different tune on Haslett next year.

[Edited on 14/2/2004 by FootBallGod]

Cancerous player file
 

Really? You mean on offense, right? I would agree with you there. What about the other side of the ball?

Why do you think so? I mean, I hope so. Every offseason, I hope that the Saints will be better the following year. How are you so sure? What are you seeing that I\'m not? Because I\'m really worried that we won\'t do a whole lot to bring in the right talent to fix holes in the defense. I\'m also concerned about a drop in production on the offensive side last year. Like I said, I hope that the problems will be fixed, but in no way do I know that they will. You gotta go by track record, and as much as I used to love and still want to love Haslett, he just ain\'t got a good one.

.02

Cancerous player file
 

WhoWatches:

Everyone has their reasons as to why the Saints will be a contender or a pretender. We finished the season 8-8 despite every possible problem one could imagine. Do you REALLY think we are going to have ALL the injuries on defense again? If you say YES then I\'m going to have to think you assume the WORST and are generally a negitive person. If you say NO, then you should be hopeful our defense will be better just for that reason alone.

Also, don\'t you think we will pick up some free agents and draft a few players for the defense? Or, have some of the members here convinced you that Haslett will only go after UNKNOWN players who will not make a difference? If you want to go by track record, then how did we get all the talent we have on this team. It isn\'t only limited to the offense. There are many talented players on the defense too.

Right now EVERY team has a REALISTIC chance at making it to the playoffs and any so-called fan that says different doesn\'t follow the game of football very well. Or, they just like to rain on everyone\'s parade.


[Edited on 14/2/2004 by FootBallGod]

Cancerous player file
 

Good points.

I will grant you that injuries played a part in our troubles on the defensive side of the ball last year. But you must also admit that more often than not, our defense looked bland and unorganized. Players were not put into position to be successful. When you have a defensive-minded coach at the helm, this is disturbing to say the least.

As far as free agency goes, I\'m not the type (you can go back and look at my posts) who wants to always go out and sign the big-name players. More often than not, a team ends up shelling out way too much cash just to see the name of some declining-overhyped star on the back of their team\'s jersey. I like finding \'diamonds in the rough\' or unknowns who can come in and prove themselves. That being said, Haslett and co. have not done a good job in the last two or three seasons of finding diamonds; they only seem to come up with rough. Sure, everyone is allowed a few mulligans, but we all know how small the window of opportunity is for an NFL team nowadays. To have so much talent on one side of the ball (Brooks, McAlister, Horn, Stalworth, Bentley, Smith, Williams, etc.), and seemingly no clue on the defense worries me because I see other teams with only one good squad (Miami, KC, Indy) missing the boat year after year.

Can\'t you see us starting to lose some of this offensive talent in the coming years? Will the defense finally become a strength then? What good will it do us?

And yes, we do have some talented players on defense. To me, that makes our lack of real progress even more frustrating.

By the way, I love parades. I also like rain... but the two together... not so much.

Also, welcome to the board. I like you already.

Cancerous player file
 

whowatches:

I understand where you are coming from. But, as unpredictable as the NFL is, why not the Saints? Would it really shock you if the Bengals, Falcons, Cowboys, Jaguars, or Redskins went to the super bowl next year? Those are all teams that didn\'t even make it to the playoffs last year, and I think anyone who would truly be surprised if any ONE of those teams made it to the playoffs does not follow the NFL very close.

So, if we wouldn\'t be shocked to see any of those teams make a trip to the super bowl, then why not the Saints. Sure, we can point to this and that and talk about \"track records\" but, as far as I\'m concerned, it does little good to look at the past and it really doesn\'t mean that much. Just look at last year, all the experts used the same reasoning that you are talking about and look at how WRONG they were. And, they\'ll be wrong again.

So, all the so-called Saint\'s fans can give me all the reasons in the world as to why we will not make the playoffs and I just sit back in amazement at the knowlegde they possess.