GumboBC

Myself and WhoDat were discussing several different things in another thread. One of the things discussed was "probability."

Now, I must say, I don't always agree with WhoDat. As a matter of fact, I think WhoDat goes overboard sometimes when trying to prove his point. But, to be honest, I do too. I think most of us do.

Well, all of this got me to thinking.(I know, it's dangerous ain't it) What it got me to thinking about is how would I evaluate this Saints team if I weren't a big fan of it.

When you do something like that it's actually a two-sided sword. On one hand, I feel like because I'm a big fan I know more about this team than some outside folks because I keep up with everything that goes on and I have actually watched ALL of the games.

On the other hand. Because I'm a big fan, I want to believe in this team.

But, if I look at this team and take all emotion out of it.... There are many question marks that can't be overlooked. On offense, we are more than capable. Our offensive line is fine. Our running game is fine. At the very least, our QB is capable. I don't even want to get into Aaron Brooks. So, I'll just say he is adequate.

However, when I look at our defense with no prejudice. I would have to say that the "probability" of our defense playing well enough for us to get in the playoffs is not good.

We are weak in the secondary and all of our hopes are dependent on a very good pass rush. No doubt, a strong pass rush can overcome a weak secondary. But, looking at it, with no prejudice, I don't see us having the kind of pass rush needed to be that dominant. (it's a possibility, but I don't think it's "probable")

Then there's the matter of stopping the run. Any hope we have this year is going to depend on whether or not we can stop the run. I think it's too many unknowns there to say it's "probable" that's going to happen. We got Cie Grant, Courtney Watson, Orlando Ruff, Sedrick Hodge, James Allen, and Derrick Rodgers at linebacker. That's a lot of linebackers. And of all the linebackers, NONE of them have proven they are the answer. It's troubling. The only good thing I can say is we have some different competetion at the position this year.

The last thing, and probably the most important thing is the coaching. I think we're fine with McCarthy. But, I can't say that for Haslett and Venturi.

Jim Haslett has shown in the past that he doesn't handle his players very well. They certainly don't rally around him. Joe Horn, who is probably the leader of this team has even come out publicly and expressed displeasure with Haslett. That can't be setting a good example for the young guys on the team.

Jim Haslett is suppose to be this big tough guy but he's never been able to control Joe Horn. Joe pulls out the cell phone, talks bad about the coaching staff and I don't see Haslett controlling the situation well. I don't see the discipline that needs to be there with Jim Haslett and it goes way beyond Joe Horn.

Then there's Rick Venturi. What can you say good about Venuri? Not much. About all you can do is point to injuries and give him a pass. The fact of the matter is, his guys weren't prepared to play last year. Sure, they got better towards the end of the year. But, were there ever any games where you were really impressed with our defense? I would have to say no. I was just glad to not see 'em get embarrassed.

To sum up my feelings on this coaching staff, I believe the coaching has been the number one thing that has held this team back.

Right now, I would have to say this team is average. Which means I see this as an 8-8 team. The good news is we have the talent to make the playoffs. So, it's possible. But, I don't know how probable it is.


[Edited on 21/5/2004 by GumboBC]

kenpersons

I agree, the coaches have to take responsibility for the mediocrity.

I can\'t let you give McCarthy a free pass. He\'s been a bonehead at times himself.

The best example I have is when Ricky was still running (and I forget the opponent but we were in New Orleans) the offense had the ball inside the fifteen and went three and out (field goal) on three straight incompletions. With Ricky. Not one touch.

One of the perks of a premeier running back is production in the redzone and he didn\'t even try it once.

That\'s the example that\'s stuck in my head but objective evaluation has to lead one to question McCarthy\'s play calling.

This past season everytime they lined up single back with two tight ends (balanced) and two WR\'s (balanced) you could bank on seeing the zone running play or play action off it. He\'s been known to go to shotgun in too soon without getting results.

He\'s a young coach and creative one, and ultimately I think all of this is building him into a damn fine one, but he hasn\'t earned a free pass on the criticism.


However, when I look at this team without bias, I also see they\'ve beaten both champions and contenders. They have what it takes.

The coaches know they\'re running out of rope: it\'s either win or hang themselves at this point.

This will be the year it comes together.

[Edited on 21/5/2004 by kenpersons]

It\'s not a question of whether or not the Saints will win the Super Bowl this year. It\'s a question of which Saint will be the MVP of the game.

What do you mean I\'m not supposed to snort the granola?

JKool

I have to say, I pretty well agree. Stopping the run will be a problem. However, it seems to me that the pass rush will be sufficient. With Howard, Grant and Smith, the pass rush should be just plain SICK! Damn.

Offense is pretty solid (aside from play calling), but only if the receivers can get over the dropsies.

Defense still needs a couple of proven players to get things going - we could use a LB and a CB (and potentially a S) still; this unless one of these kids at LB turn out to be good (we\'ll cross our fingers for Grant, Watson and Allen - I\'ve given up on Ruff and Hodge).

An interesting analysis though.

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