GumboBC

I\'ve beat this topic with 2 or 3 sticks -- with no success. I agree with what you\'re saying JKool -- I think what most of the critics (bashers) are saying is Haslett can\'t push the right buttons to turn the \"cancers\" into \"diamond.\"

I\'ve been sayin\' it and sayin\' it, time and time again, that this isn\'t unique to Haslett. Maybe certain people think it goes on more in New Orleans than other places because they keep up with the Saints more. But, it happens to almost every team with just as much frequency.

I listed a bunch of examples on another thread of \"cancerous\" players. (Which I got NO response from) Does anyone remember Jimmy Johnson\'s days with the Cowboys? Can you say Leon Lett?

WhoDat

There\'s ONE GIANT difference in that example Billy. Super Bowls - a couple of them.

I don\'t give a damn if Haslett can\'t control his players off the field if it doesn\'t affect them on the field. They win, I give the man slack and benefit of the doubt. When he has one of the most talented teams this organization has ever had and can\'t get above .500 - then I don\'t give that slack. Then one has to wonder if the lack of discipline shows on the field. Think it does Billy? Think things like penalties, missed blocks, dropped passes, etc. are discipline and focus issues? Wasn\'t that a huge part of the problem last year - by your own comments?

\"Excuses, excuses, excuses. That’s all anyone ever makes for the New Orleans Saints’ 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.\"

GumboBC

If you want to criticize Haslett for his team not living up to expectations, I can\'t argue with you there. If you want to say he has made mistakes by not addressing areas of need on the team, I can\'t argue with you there.

But, when you say it\'s Haslett\'s fault that certain players (and it\'s been no more than other teams) have been \"troubled\"players, then I\'m going to have to disagree.

Just because Haslett hasn\'t won a superbowl, it doesn\'t make it anymore his fault than Jimmy Johnson. Now, I can see how Jimmy Johnson was cut more slack because of the success he enjoyed in Dallas. Winning tends to make fans happy and not living up to expectations, well............it tends to make fans crticize EVERYTHING.

The point I\'m trying to make is, you have some legit gripes, but I think you expand on those legit gripes and use them to hit ol\' Jim over the head for some things that aren\'t his fault.

WhoDat -- You have some valid gripes about Haslett. The man has been disappointing. I think he\'s made a lot of mistakes. But, I\'m going to try and be unbiased. Take this upcoming year for example. He\'s said he can\'t wait to show us what kind of team we have. I can\'t wait either. If he flops, can I join you, gator, and 08?? -- Together we can can the man run out of Nawlins. --

[Edited on 10/5/2004 by GumboBC]

WhoDat

Bill,

I am not saying that players being overweight is Jim Haslett\'s FAULT per se. I am saying that A) Jim is not doing a good job HELPING those players, and B) that the problems with this team are a SIGNAL that Jim is at least questionable at head coach.

You and Saintfan like to play the same game. If we look at a specific incident, you may be right in your assessment that this isn\'t a big deal. Sure, other coaches have players that have weight problems. Other coaches struggle with team discipline, fundamentals, \"cancer\" players, player buy-in, FA busts, draft busts, and let-down seasons. There is no question that those things happen everywhere.

HOWEVER, the question you have to ask is do ALL of those things happen as FREQUENTLY and in the same QUANTITY than occurs in NO? I don\'t think so. Maybe it does, but it happens to coaches in Arizona or the Cincinnati of old, or San Diego. It doesn\'t happen with successful programs and/or successful coaches.

Further, the bottom line here is results and results mean wins and losses. As a new head coach, in your first year or two, you may be able to measure results differently than wins and losses, true, but after that, wins and losses is the ONLY thing that matters in this league when it comes to performance evaluation for a head coach and his staff.

When you look back at Jim Haslett, it is easy to see an average win/loss record. Well, average isn\'t so bad - why all the fuss? B/c he has had some of, if not the, most talented teams this organization has ever had. Further, our talent is above average when compared to the rest of the NFL. Coaches like Andy Reid, Bellicheck, Parcells, Gruden (Oakland), Fox, Fisher, Fassel, even Herm Edwards have all done more with as much or less. Haslett has had free reign to do whatever he wants with this team and so far, things haven\'t gotten any better.

So, when I say tisk tisk to Jim Haslett when the first round draft pick that he spend two number ones on to fill a hole left by overweight defensive linemen shows up to camp overweight, I think it\'s not totally unfounded.

\"Excuses, excuses, excuses. That’s all anyone ever makes for the New Orleans Saints’ 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.\"

GumboBC

WhoDat --

I say Haslett doesn\'t have a higher rate of problem players on his team than most other coaches. Whether that be successful coaches or unsuccessful coaches. I can prove it if you like, but, you are the one making these claims. Have you ever done any research to see if this is true? I\'m just asking and I think it\'s a fair question.

If you don\'t know if it happens with more frequency, then isn\'t it entirely possible that you are making more out of it than what it is??

Now, l said earlier that I can\'t argue with you on the results that Haslett has gotten, or not gotten. He\'s made a bunch of mistakes and I agree with you on your assessment of \'em.

JKool

I\'m not sure that anyone has the power to turn the cancers into diamonds - I think that is usually due to a combination of things: a coach who is able to get the player to see beyond the problem, a new environment that helps the player see beyond his immediate problems, a maturation of the player (we all know these kids are still growing up at 22), family life, and understanding of what to do with new found wealth, and so on. The coach is never the only factor in making a player into a good person and, thus, a good player.

Every team has the problems. As Billy points out, it may be the frequency with which \"cancers\" appear that is troubling. Someone more ambitious than I can probably find out these frequencies. Until then I remain skeptical about how Haz is doing in this regard. My point (to B-I\'s comments) was that it is not enough for a coach to have strict punishments for misbehaving players, but it is also his job to help them not misbehave in the first place (punishments being only one way to do this).

WhoDat, your point is really that winning the SBs in Jimmy\'s case is evidence that he could keep the cancers from derailing the team\'s goals. That is, Haz hasn\'t done enough to show that he is handling the second part of his coachly duties (he does have punishments, but not the other part I noted) - it isn\'t that he is not trying, or is bad at it, or whathaveyou (though I think you could provide evidence for it, I don\'t believe I\'ve heard enought to say one way or the other yet). Thus, there is a difference between Haz\'s cancers and Jimmy\'s - namely that Jimmy\'s didn\'t keep the team from succeeding, in Haz\'s case we cannot say that. Right?

I also agree that we need to look at more general trends. We have all been talking about this for a bit now. I guess the question I have is this: how do we know when two problems are related (that seems to be Billy\'s general strategy too)? Lately, I\'d have to say that WhoDat\'s arguments have been pretty good - and I think that is a result of explicating the connection between two problems, not simply pointing out a bunch of problems and saying that they\'re related. Of course, the challenges have some merit too. (Mmmm... Granola).

Cheers.

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

WhoDat

Once upon a time, Billy and I were arguing about two QBs - Aaron Brooks and Peyton Manning. Billy argued that Manning was not as good as everyone made out. That he hadn\'t won the big one, and that his father hadn\'t won much when he was in the league either. He said that in general he equated the word Manning with the word loser. At the same time, Billy argued that my criticisms of AB were unfair and that parallels could be made between AB and some of the best QBs in the league.

I solved two arguments easily by asking Billy a simple question: would you trade AB for Peyton Manning straight up? He said that he would. So basically, he derailed both of his arguments, to some extent, b/c he affirmed that Manning is better than this QB he was giving so much credit to, while also showing that this QB wasn\'t worth more than a consumate \"loser\".

I find that this is a simple way to clear a topic that may otherwise be muddied. So ask yourself, who wouldn\'t you \"trade\" Haslett for?

Our Division
Gruden - yup
Fox - yup
Mora - nope.

Hell, go division by division if you need to

NFC East
Parcells - bye Jimmy.
Reid - buh-bye.
Coughlin - sign on the line.
Gibbs - maybe... that\'s a wait and see kind of move.

AFC East
Herm Edwards - yep
That guy up in NE? uh maybe...
Wannstedt - not a chance.
Mularkey - Probably, but that\'s a wait and see also.

... you do the rest if you feel it\'s worth it. My point is simple, there are a lot of coaches that I would prefer in here over Jim. The Saints are only 1 of what? 4 teams? that haven\'t made the playoffs in the last three seasons. Us, Cincinnati, San Diego, and Arizona? Is that right? Now that\'s great company to be in. If that\'s good enough for you, fine, but it\'s not for me. Now gimme a granola bar and some tp I\'m going to take a dump in the woods!

\"Excuses, excuses, excuses. That’s all anyone ever makes for the New Orleans Saints’ 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.\"

GumboBC

:P :P :P :P :P :P Please !! You\'re killing me WhoDat.

What really happened was WhoDat was raking Brooks over the coal pretty good and I used Peyton Manning as an example.

Actually, what I was doing was pointing to all the playoff games that Peyton had choked in. And even big gamse in college. It\'s a well documented fact. To prove a point to WhoDat, I said I equate the name \"Manning\" to the word \"loser.\" Because he choked in the playoffs.

Then WhoDat asked me if I would trade Brooks for Manning. I said yes. I said yes because I thought Peyton would correct his mistakes in the playoffs. Even though Peyton had choked in the playoffs for 4 staight years, I had confidence in Peyton. Although he choked big time in the AFC championship game this year, I still have confidence in Peyton.

Just like I have confidence in Brooks. But, given the chance to trade Brooks for Peyton, straight-up -- I have to be honest -- I would do it.



[Edited on 10/5/2004 by GumboBC]

WhoDat

Crawfish, crawfish, crawfish - bottom line, you\'d trade AB for a loser. There\'s only two logical conclusions that can be drawn: 1) You\'re a nimrod b/c you\'d trade a good QB for a \"loser\", or 2) AB is a \"big loser\". LMAO.

STALLOWNED!!!!


And don\'t change the subject, you\'re avoiding my argument probably b/c the same would hold true here for Haslett and coaches. Don\'t be skerd Billy, it\'s ok.

saintfan

I might ask you to prove this Statement Whodat, but I know you can\'t because you don\'t follow another team (I\'m guessing) as closely as you follow the Saints. If you did I think you\'d see the same type of moaning and complaining from just about every team\'s fans in the league, and I think you know it. Other team\'s boards are full of the same type of, \"this player stinks\", \"Lets fire the coach\", \"Our draft sucked\", kind of stuff too.

It\'s easy to say, \"I dont\' think so\", but it\'s an entirely different thing to validate it.

C'mon Man...