Grady slimmer then Sullivan - It's Official
 

Jackson tackles weighty issues

By TOM SILVERSTEIN


Green Bay - The off-season had potential disaster written all over it for nose tackle Grady Jackson and the Green Bay Packers.

Though Jackson had been the catalyst in reviving the Packers' pass rush during the second half of last season, he required minor surgery on his right knee Feb. 16. Considering that weight had always been an issue for the eighth-year veteran, some in the Packers organization held their breath over the effect a three- or four-week layoff would have on him.

Yet Jackson reported to town weighing a respectable 355 pounds, 15 below what he weighed when he was first picked up off waivers from New Orleans Nov. 4 and 5 to 10 pounds below what he weighed at the end of the season.

"To be honest, I'm ecstatic because anytime you have surgery on a big guy, you have an extra two or three weeks before you can start doing stuff," pro personnel director Reggie McKenzie said. "The red flag comes up more with a big guy because maybe he's not doing anything."

Jackson said he made a conscious effort to walk as much as possible and report to camp in the best shape he could. It doesn't hurt that he has four $50,000 weight bonuses in his contract, the first of which required him to be 345 pounds at the start of this minicamp.

Despite not making the first incentive, Jackson has given the Packers plenty of hope that he'll pick up where he left off last season, when he invigorated the entire defense with his ability to penetrate the backfield. His weight might not be perfect but it is not a hindrance to his play.

"When we're out here doing drills he's as quick as a freaking cat, I'll tell you that much," defensive-line coach Jethro Franklin said. "But he can be quicker. For us to do what we set out to accomplish, that has to happen. He just has to improve each time."

The weight clauses that were included in the two-year, $2.31 million contract extension that Jackson signed Dec. 27 also require him to weigh 340 pounds at the June minicamp, 335 at the start of training camp and 330 at the start of the regular season. Jackson will be paid $50,000 for meeting any of those prescribed weights.

Jackson's weight was not an issue when he sparked the defense last year and it probably won't be one this year, provided he stays around 350. A year after totaling 33 tackles, 21/2 sacks and a forced fumble in 10 games (including playoffs), Jackson, 31, said he was ready to take his game to another level.

"I'm a guy who gets sacks and my goal is to get 10," Jackson said. "I've always been stuck on eight or seven. If I can get 10, that would be great. Ten is the goal."

http://www.jsonline.com/packer/news/apr04/226231.asp





[Edited on 4/5/2004 by saintz08]

Grady slimmer then Sullivan - It's Official
 

[unverified statements, no link provided]
Grady has always shown up at his new job in decent shape. He has a history of ballooning up after his initial inspired new-attitude.
Hmmm, he started at 340 last year with us and weighed 370-plus by week 9 and was taking plays off left and right.
He\'ll probably do good for GB for about 6-8 weeks, then he\'ll balloon up again and they\'ll learn the same thing the Saints and Raiders already know.
At least GB had the foresight to put weight penalties in his contract, not just weight bonuses.
[/unverified statements, no link provided]

Grady slimmer then Sullivan - It's Official
 

Grady is history as far as I\'m concerned. It\'s time to see what Sullivan can do or maybe see how he looks in a Packers uniform too!

Grady slimmer then Sullivan - It's Official
 

didnt gravy show up for cmap weighin like 400 pounds? i remember hazlitt bein all, \"were concerned about the mans health.\"

Grady slimmer then Sullivan - It's Official
 

This says it all. In New Orleans the guy is overweight, a locker room distraction, and average at best on the field. In Green Bay, he\'s the reason that they got better at the end of the year. But you guys are right, that has nothing to do with coaching.

Two words: Mickey Mouse.

Grady slimmer then Sullivan - It's Official
 

370 plus pounds, taking plays off, missing meetings, refusing to visit doctors for a bad PINKY... Yea thats all coaching
LMAO!

Ya think him being humiliated publicly by Haz had anything to do with his new-found motivation? Something he\'s done his whole career?
Unbelievable! Can you say AGENDA!!!!

[Edited on 3/5/2004 by Danno]

Grady slimmer then Sullivan - It's Official
 

OK - so by your own claims we should hear about Grady being \"370 plus pounds, taking plays off, missing meetings, refusing to visit doctors for a bad PINKY\" by mid-season right?

That\'s not due to coaching, or at least the general environment, culture if you will, that the coach creates? You think there\'s a reason that this entire team is undisciplined? No, that\'s not coaching, that\'s just a bad seed right? Grady is just a bad seed... what about the other 15 players over the last year or two Danno? They just bad seeds also? Man, Haslett sure is a bad judge of character and how that relates to play then huh? Oh, no, wait, he couldn\'t possibly have seen this coming, it\'s just bad luck. Amazing, the Saints must be the unluckiest team in the league. Nearly 30% of their players are overweight, underperforming, or \'cancers\'. Did some crazy voodoo witch put a spell on them?

Unbelievable.

Grady slimmer then Sullivan - It's Official
 

Here\'s an idea, let\'s think about the starters from last season, and the other important players:

Grant - debateable. I\'ve heard people go both ways with him, so I\'ll just give this one to the sunshiners and say he played great.

Sullivan - coaches are calling him a disappointment and are unhappy with his ability to step up his game or control his weight. Score one for the moonshiners, especially when you consider he cost us two first rounders.

Grady - was such a \'let down\' that the coaches cut him mid-season. I can\'t even remember who took his spot, so you know he must have been good. Moonshiners 2, sunshiners 1.

Howard - injured... but played very well when he returned. In his stead, Willie Whitehead was a beast. It\'s all tied up at 2.

Hodge - Still poo. You cannot possibly say you\'re happy about his play with a straight face unless you are arguing just to argue. Moonshiners score another.

Ruff - we actually went out and targeted this guy. He was supposed to come in a stop the run. How\'d that work out? He didn\'t really even see the field until late in the season. I don\'t care who you\'ve got in that position, if Orlando Ruff can play there it\'s a problem spot. Moonshiners up 4-2.

Rodgers - played well considering his age. He probably wouldn\'t start anywhere else in the league, but he\'s not a bad player. I\'d say this guy is a scratch, but I know the sunshine club will b!tch if I do that so I\'ll give it to them. 4-3.

Dale Carter - Bad. By any stretch of the imagination this guy was a bust. 5-3 Moon men.

Fred Thomas - He\'s a good number 2 corner. He\'s not spectacular, but he gets the job done. He plays well enough to warrant a score for the sun worshipers, so they get it. 5-4.

Mitchel - hurt. Bellamy - played much better than the previous year. Was actually pretty good at times. He definitely played over his head, score one for the sunshine club. 5-5.

Jones - 5-5 going into the final player... who unfortunately cost us tons and can\'t tackle to save his life. Now, by most accounts this guy was a bust last year. However, if I say that, the sunshiners will no doubt come out of the woodwork. This one is a push.


So what have we learned? Even with a generous accounting system, HALF of the starting defense underachieved. What\'s worse, is that even with all this POTENTIAL, all these young talented players in reserve, none of them could step up and take a starting spot. That\'s some kind of bad luck, no? Shall we talk offense? Just ask the sunshiners about all the missed blocks, false starts, and dropped passes, (not to mention turnovers), and I think you\'ll find an outcome no different than that of the defense.

Grady slimmer then Sullivan - It's Official
 

Whtas up with the bad-luck nonsense you posting in just about every post. Where\'d you get that from?

Grady slimmer then Sullivan - It's Official
 

Ask your partner in crime, Saintfan.

Grady slimmer then Sullivan - It's Official
 

Its official

Packers | Jackson Reports Slightly Over Weight Target - from www.KFFL.com
Mon, 3 May 2004 21:10:12 -0700

Pete Dougherty, of PackersNews.com, reports Green Bay Packers DT Grady Jackson (knee) showed up at the team\'s offseason minicamp on Tuesday, April 27, weighing around 349 pounds. The Packers set a weight target of 345 pounds for Jackson, who had arthroscopic knee surgery in February. \"He\'s been doing something as far as conditioning and came back about four pounds off the mark, which is pretty significant,\" said Packers head coach Mike Sherman. \"I thought he did a nice job, and his knee, as looked at by the doctors, is fine.\"

Sullivan’s shape has Saints feeling a strong sense of déjÃÂÂÂ* vu

New Orleans

A shiver went through the Saints’ organization when second-year DT Johnathan Sullivan showed up for the team’s recent minicamp tipping the scales at a whopping 350 pounds.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gravy Jackson is thinner ...... ;)

Amazing what a little inspirational coaching can do .......

Grady slimmer then Sullivan - It's Official
 

Its amazing what getting your fatasss fired from two jobs can do to motivate you. ;)
Grady came into Saints camp last year at 340. Looks like GB ain\'t exactly motivating Gravy either does it agenda-guy?

Grady slimmer then Sullivan - It's Official
 

I don\'t remember Grady reporting at 340. Can you please provide a link?

Grady slimmer then Sullivan - It's Official
 

Take my word for it.

Grady slimmer then Sullivan - It's Official
 

At Grady\'s weight he \"has\" to take every other play off to catch his breathe. When he was with the Saints he looked good at first but then went back to his old ways. I see the same pattern in GB. Maybe we should get him back and trade him after 7 or 8 games :)

Grady slimmer then Sullivan - It's Official
 

HA HA HA! C\'mon Danno - that should be pretty easy to verify.

http://www.allsports.com/network/con...61&story=45708

This seems to be contradicting you to some degree. If he weighed 330 or 340 when he came to NO I don\'t think that the Saints would have been all that concerned with him handling his weight. I could be wrong, but then again you haven\'t provided a link. ;)


Also interesting:

These guys rated Brooks a C BEFORE he started fumbling profusely. Tell me again why he\'s so great?

And it begins... AGAIN.

Grady slimmer then Sullivan - It's Official
 

WhoDat,

I thought someone said this: doing the same thing over and over again and expecting a different result was INSANE? ;)

Grady slimmer then Sullivan - It's Official
 

Looks like I\'ve handed my \"link police\" job over to Whodat. Make me proud Whodat...don\'t let me down.

:P

Grady slimmer then Sullivan - It's Official
 

HA HA HA! C\'mon Danno - that should be pretty easy to verify.

Here\'s the f\'ing link

http://www.blackandgold.net/site/mod...rticle&sid=474

He was 344, my flippin bad, like I said, GB seems to have a bit of a problem motivating him also doesn\'t it?

[Edited on 5/5/2004 by Danno]

Grady slimmer then Sullivan - It's Official
 

Way to delegate authority there Captain of the link police .. :P

Sitting behind a desk now polishing your badge ???

Grady slimmer then Sullivan - It's Official
 

You\'re referencing THIS board? That doesn\'t seem like third party verification to me. Can I get an outside link from an established professional please? :)

See how fun this can be for everybody?

Grady slimmer then Sullivan - It's Official
 

OK you made me laugh. I\'ve officially lightened up. Thanks. ;)

Grady slimmer then Sullivan - It's Official
 

I try... but really where\'s the proof? ;) In the pudding, or in the eye of the beer holder?

Grady slimmer then Sullivan - It's Official
 

I hope it is not in the eye of the beer holder... I cringe when I think of some of the errors I\'ve made when lookin\' at things with a beer in hand... I guess, I\'m hopin\' its in the puddin\'. :D

Grady slimmer then Sullivan - It's Official
 

WhoDat --

I suppose it COULD be Haslett\'s fault that Grady had problems here. Haslett could have created a situation that produced a bad working enviroment for Grady.

But, if this is true, why didn\'t every player on the Saints follow Grady\'s path? Deuce certainly didn\'t seem to have a problem with the way things were run last year. As a matter of fact, Deuce excelled in the same enviroment that Grady was in.

I have to wonder how Deuce could thrive in the same enviroment that was detrimental to Grady Jackson. My opinion is, Deuce just has stronger character than Grady Jackson.

These arent kids that should have to be baby-sat out there. These are GROWN MEN, who make millions of dollars, to play a game.

If Grady was insulted or somehow got his feelings hurt by Haslett, I wonder what Grady would have thought if Vince Lombardi was his coach? And, I think we have a good idea what someone like Parcells would have told Grady.

Now, I\'m happy for Grady. He seems to be on the right path in Green Bay. But, Grady has a history of problems that date back way before his introduction to Haslett.

Grady is starting to be one of those players that bounces around the league, largely because of his own self-inflicted damage.

I\'m pulling for Grady, but he\'s going to have to play more than 5 or 6 games in Green Bay to prove to me that he\'s a changed man.

Grady slimmer then Sullivan - It's Official
 

Grady is starting to be one of those players that bounces around the league, largely because of his own self-inflicted damage.


You are being to generous...... I prefer the term \"jiggles\" around the league .... ;)

Grady slimmer then Sullivan - It's Official
 

Here we go again....

Every time something like this happens, certain members of the board are quick to write the guy off as a person of low character (Grady, Joe Johnson, Kyle Turley...). Well, this begs a couple of questions.

First, if these players are such bad eggs, why did our coaching staff sign them in the first place? I remember Haslett speaking very highly of all three of those players I mentioned. So what happened? Did they degenerate into worthless piles of garbage in a year or two? If so, why did it happen in New Orleans? Or were they always problems and our coaches either couldn\'t see that or chose to ignore that?

Any way you look at it, Haslett has to accept some responsibility here. No one made him sign Grady Jackson. IT was no secret about the type of player Grady was before he got here. Haslett chose to sign him anyway.

When you single out one player, it\'s easy to make the argument that he\'s just a \"cancer\". However, when you look at the big picture, you see an organization that has consistently had a problem with \"personalities\" over the last 4 years. Haslett\'s tenure has been riddled with locker room problems, players speaking out and leaving, disappointments, and a number of gambles that didn\'t pay off (Carter, Grady, Albert Connell...). If you guys want to ignore what seems to me to be a pretty clear and consistent trend, go right ahead.

You guys must realize that by acknowledging that Haslett has his faults, you\'re not saying that a) you think he is a bad coach, or b) that you want him to fail. I mean, both BC and Danno have said in the not too distant past that the coaches are a problem. Well, if that is the case, why do you support every move they make? Are they good talent evaluators but bad at the Xs and Os? If they are bad at the Xs and Os, then how do you know that they even really understand what kind of players they need in the first place? The questions could go on forever; my point is simply that I am perplexed by the two of you speaking out about the coaches and then defending the moves that they make.


Further, BC if you need more proof that there is a problem under Haslett, just look at this team\'s discipline. You\'re right that Haslett SHOULD not have to babysit these men. However, when antics off the field go unchecked, it can show on the field. Weren\'t you the one arguing last year about all of the penalties, missed blocks, dropped passes, etc? That\'s poor execution and it is basically nothing more than a function of discipline. Haslett, by being a \"players coach\", or for whatever other reason, has created an environment that allows players to be undisciplined and that creates conflict or brings out character flaws... and we wonder why our young players don\'t develop. ;)

Grady slimmer then Sullivan - It's Official
 

WhoDat --

Look, I\'m done defending Haslett. And, let me tell you something else. If we don\'t do SOMETHING this year, I\'ll be the first one calling for Haslett to be fired.

Now, I think you bring up some VALID points. Haslett has a pattern of having some \"cancers\" on this team. But, I prefer to judge each one of those \"cancers\" on their on merits. You are also lumping some players in there that weren\'t let go because they are \"cancers.\"

I never considered Joe Johnson a cancer, nor have I ever heard Haslett refer to him as a cancer. Kyle Turley I don\'t think was a cancer, but he was very hot-headed. I think Haslett could have handled it better, but I also think Turley could have handled it better too. I have to say though, it is troubling that we\'ve had some problem players.

You don\'t like Haslett, I understand that. I know you are going to call him on anything that is questionable. But, I\'m going to try to judge him fairly. I suppose everyone has their own opinion as to what is fair. I\'m not here to bash him and I\'m not here to defend the guy. But the players have to be professionals too.

Grady slimmer then Sullivan - It's Official
 

I think virtually everyone here falls into two camps on Haz (and I\'m sure I\'ll take some flack for saying this): (1) Haz blows, should a been gone last year, and (2) Haz pretty well blows, we\'ll still give him this last chance.

That said, I think there is an important point Billy missed (welcome back btw): supporting a move by the coach is not (necessarily) supporting the coach. E.g. I have a really, really dumb cousin, but every once in awhile, he does something good. He got his mom flowers for her B-day - I support such a move, but I do not support his eating dirt (or many other things he does or represents).

Grady slimmer then Sullivan - It's Official
 

Quick, somebody knock that chip off Gator\'s shoulder before he has to have it surgically removed! Jeesh, man...lighten up already.


You\'re absolutely right whodat. He surely does...the responsibility for signing Grady is all on Jim, but Gradys inability to get his fat act together is all on Grady. If Jim made a mistake signing Grady then I suspect he\'s in good company. Name me ONE coach that has never had problems with players in a similar fashion. You know you can\'t, because some people just don\'t respond. Bill Parcells is having similar troubles with a particular Offensive Lineman here in Dallas...yes even Bill Parcells has failed to get the man to lose weight. Please tell me you can at least see my point.

Which antics are you speaking about Whodat? Jim simply cannot control EVERYthing these players do! He can fine \'em, and he does. I recall an article from a training camp or two ago that mentioned how Jim was fining players for being late to meetings and missing their preferred weight etc. Just what is it, exactly, that you want him to do? You can complain about Turley having an attitude problem, but I don\'t see any solutions being suggested other than to fire Haz...as if that would magically correct all the players personal problems and immediately have unseasoned players in the pro bowl. Do you (or any of you naysayers) think Bill Parcells would have kept Kyle Turley on his team? I think the safe bet is he wouldn\'t have tolerated it and tried to work it out even to the extent that Haz did.

Is there another team in the NFL that hasn\'t signed a player(s) that didn\'t work out? Is there another team in the NFL that didn\'t speak highly of their recent signee whether he was worth the praise or not? Are there other teams that signed a \"quality\" player only to see him not perform up to expectations? You want to single Haz out as if he\'s the only coach (successful or otherwise) with these issues, and he\'s not. FYI Joe Johnson\'s issues were with the contract negotiations as I recall. Why is he even mentioned?

I can see your points Whodat...I really can. I know where you\'re coming from, but try and see the Sunshine side for a sec. I jump on this board and regardless of what the situation is or the variables attached you\'re quick to the trigger when it comes to Haslett. Surely you can see at least SOME of what I\'m trying to say here. If you can\'t I have to think its because you won\'t.

The thing is that there is NOTHING the man can do to please some of you. EVERYTING he does or doesn\'t do gets weighed against his ability to coach, and it seems as tho the people doing that aren\'t taking into account that these players are PROFESSIONALS -- and sadly some of \'em just don\'t get it. They must be responsible to the team...and I betcha that\'s what Parcells would tell \'em too.

In spite of some sarcastic comments on this thread, I haven\'t seen anyone defend EVERY move the team has made or EVERY thing about a particular palyer. It just seems that way to the short sighted because they refuse to see all the variables.

Grady slimmer then Sullivan - It's Official
 

Wow, this one is about to spiral out of control. I\'ll try to be as diplomatic as possible.

Sunshine (BC)
I hope this is a joke. Turley was sent to anger management classes, he spoke out against the team while on it, and he attacked Brooks, which led to his eventual departure. Turley was a good player and he wasn\'t let go b/c he couldn\'t hack it. If Turley isn\'t the definition of a locker room cancer in NO, please name someone who was worse.


It has nothing to do with liking or disliking, it has to do with ability. I don\'t care about Jim Haslett one way or the other, but yes, I am pretty confident in my opinion that Jim Haslett is the wrong coach for the New Orleans Saints. I like my boss. She\'s a nice lady of relative intelligence. However, she is not very good at her job. I don\'t wish her ill-will. I don\'t disagree with her b/c of some personal grudge. But I would like to see her replaced b/c it would be better for my organization.


Well J, anyway you slice it Haslett still blows, so what are we talking about here? How much longer you give a coach you know to be bad a chance to further prove you right?


Fine, not the point really. If your mom said she was going to let this dirt-eating nimrod manage her money would you protest?


Absolutely. The thing I most wish for in relation to this board is to have been a member when Ditka was still the coach. I bet these guys loved him... up until the day he got fired. Then he became a bum, in that instant.


Let me get this straight - Haslett hired a player who couldn\'t get his act together and said, we think he can get his act together here. He didn\'t. Now, I\'m supposed to be more disappointed in the player than in the coach?

And still, I have to disagree Saintfan - at least to some extent. When a company hires someone they don\'t show that person to his desk and say, \"OK, good luck and get to work.\" You have training, exercises, your co-workers help you get a feel. Yeah, you have to perform, but it\'s not all on you. If a kid falls behind at school do you kick him out or do you give him a tutor? Point is, if Grady was going to be a problem, Haslett either should never have signed him, or if he felt signing him was worth the risk and the aggrevation, he should have seen to it that Grady worked with a trainer or something. There is also the issue of player buy-in. You keep mentioning the Tuna. When he showed up in Dallas he said no one was safe. He made everyone earn their spot. He is very strict and limits the players freedoms compared to other teams. He also tells his players that if they listen to him and do what their asked, the team will win. Then he goes out and proves that. The players believe and work harder. Maybe the players don\'t believe enough in Jim Haslett to work harder. ???


Oh c\'mon Saintfan. You\'re so good at that game, but don\'t get into a numbers debate with me. It\'s not about IF it happens to a coach, we all know that it does. It\'s about HOW OFTEN it happens. It happens here with greater regularity than it does in, oh, say, New England.


Finally SF, I don\'t know why you keep bringing up Parcells. There is a coach who has always gone into a place and implemented his own plan. His players are disciplined and do it his way. He sticks to a plan and his teams tend to get better year over year. And he wins. This is not Jim Haslett we\'re talking about.

Can anyone on this board, anyone at all say that this team is consistent and disciplined? Not one player, the TEAM. I guess they\'re consistently mediocre. They consistently underachieve. They consistently bring in good talent at the wrong positions and it rarely materialized. Their play is consistenly inconsistent and undisciplined. I mean, who are you guys trying to fool?

[Edited on 6/5/2004 by WhoDat]

Grady slimmer then Sullivan - It's Official
 

WhoDat --

I\'ve debated with you many times on this board. I KNOW you can give a FAIR assessment when you want to.

You are certainly entitled to feel however you want to about Haslett and this team. It\'s my opinion that for what ever reason you have no cofidence in Haslett to get the job done?

You point out all the mistakes you percieve that Haslett has made. You like to use your job sitution as a analogy. I understand that, and making such references is a good way of gettting a point accross.

But, there\'s some of us that do believe that Haslett can get the job done. I, for one, knows Haslett has made some mistakes, but I believe he has learned from his mistakes. He can\'t go back and correct those mistakes. I see your point. You think there\'s a pattern there and that the pattern is doomed to contiue????

Well, maybe, but, it\'s entirely possible that Haslett will succeed. He made NO mistakes this offsesaon. He might not have signed the players YOU wanted him to, but he made NO mistakes.

He signed CB\'s, LB\'s, WR, FB, DE, DT, etc, etc.......

Instead of living in the past, I perfer to look at this season. Is that unfair??

Grady slimmer then Sullivan - It's Official
 

It was worth it just for the reply, WhoDat. \"Dirt-eating nimrod\", priceless - I\'m still chuckling.

The only point I was trying to make (and probably failing) was that people keep saying things like \"so-and-so is supporting the coach at every turn\" and so on. It seems to me that this is not actually going on. Furthermore, I can\'t remember the last person here who said they were happy with Haz.

Some people need to relax about who agrees with whom, who usually says what, and so on. We need people from both groups (if there are indeed such groups at all) - \"pessimists\" and \"optimists\". This is the only way to get at what is true - sift through the shiznit. There is nothing wrong with 08 or SF\'s posts just because they have an \"agenda\" (even if they do). I don\'t see why everyone is getting so upset these days about who annoys them, who is trying to corrupt the innocent (who is getting corrupted by these posts, really), and who\'s method is better (at any point you end up making fun of a particular person, rather than their argument, your method stinks IMO), (perhaps it is the lack of anything better to talk about right now? The rivialries are fun, but not when they appear in every thread.

Grady slimmer then Sullivan - It's Official
 

Sounds like some tree-hugging granola eating queer-a$$ liberal talk to me! LMAO. ;)

Grady slimmer then Sullivan - It's Official
 

Mmmmm, granola.

Also, you\'ll notice that Billy just made me look dumb too by supporting Haz right after I said no one had done that for a long time.

I guess it\'s not my day; must be bad luck.

Mmmmm, trees.

Grady slimmer then Sullivan - It's Official
 

LOL... That WAS funny.......... :P

In all seriousness though, where\'s the good FOOTBALL debates? Did ya\'ll get away from breaking down things, both from a positive and negitive perspective?

Instead for just saying \"a player is UPROVEN and until he shows me something, then I\'m going to assume he can\'t get it done.\" Why not talk about both the upside and downside for that player? It sure would help me to learn more about our team if we debated the good and the bad about EVERYTHING...

Grady slimmer then Sullivan - It's Official
 

Gumbo is right. We need to be fair about the players we got and talk about what they give us to work with. I cant hardly figure how no matter what move Jim makes a whole bunch of folks is ready to run him off for doing the dumest thing ever in football. We may be looking at the best year the Saints has ever had coming up and a bunch of yall is acting like Jim has gone and cancelled Christmas.

Grady slimmer then Sullivan - It's Official
 

Not unfair at all. And let me be clear. I DOUBT Haslett\'s ability. I further DOUBT a turnaround at this point, but I have NOT ruled it out. I hope the man proves me wrong. I truly truly truly do. My heart says yes, but my head\'s saying hell no!

It is funny that you said you were unhappy about the coaches minutes ago and now you\'re back to saying Haslett can get it done.... or shall I post some old comments? ;)