New Member on the Block

Danno · 06-25-2004, 01:25 PM

I don\'t disagree with anything you just said. I have always held that the weak link is coaching. Why did you say you understand that I disagree with that?

There\'s only one thing I kinda disagree with. The most glaring need on this team for 3 years has been D-line, LB, and CB, in that order. I don\'t think anyone but the Brooks Haters would debate that.

Over that span we\'ve drafted 4 LB\'s, 5 DL and 1 CB. It appears to me we are addressing all but 1 position, CB. In 2004 our front 7 will probably consist of 7 guys brought in under this coach. They may not be developing the players properly, but they are addressing it.

And By the way, thats twice you\'ve said I blamed it (8-8) all on bad luck.
For the record... I NEVER SAID THAT!

When did I even remotely suggest that?

saintfan · 06-25-2004, 01:58 PM

It wasn\'t you Danno, it was me. I have said in the past that the ball just didn\'t bounce the Saints way last year...and I have included this as PART of the reason our record was what it was. Sometimes it does, and sometimes it doesn\'t. There are those that don\'t think injuries have anything to do with a team\'s record. I disagree. There are those that don\'t think a team needs to be fortunate to win the superbowl. I disagree with this also. I am not saying talent, or coaching, or schemes aren\'t also a part of the big picture. I\'m suggesting that fortune, good and bad, is also a part of the big picture. I would submit the Carolina Panthers as the team that was last year\'s most fortunate team. Anyone argue that statement?

Now, the luck thing is sarcastically tossed into the mix by those that generally think Haz is clueless or those that think Brooks isn\'t a quality QB, but it\'s people being just that...sarcastic. Show me one person who doesn\'t think luck plays a role and I\'ll show you someone who isn\'t really paying attention.

[Edited on 25/6/2004 by saintfan]

WhoDat · 06-25-2004, 03:57 PM

Over that span we\'ve drafted 4 LB\'s, 5 DL and 1 CB. It appears to me we are addressing all but 1 position, CB. In 2004 our front 7 will probably consist of 7 guys brought in under this coach. They may not be developing the players properly, but they are addressing it.

There is a difference to me Danno, between properly addressing and addressing. Show me any three other positions on this roster that haven\'t seen the same amount of change since Haslett got here. Problem is, when they need a safety they go get Tebucky Jones. He didn\'t work out real well last season, but it was a decent move - I can\'t fault them for going after a guy who was touted by many. When they need a TE - Sloan and Conwell - they draft Boo and Hilton. Conwell and Sloan didn\'t work out great either, but again, I can\'t and don\'t blame them.

However, when we need a MLB more than anything else and they go sign Orlando Ruff - well, when he doesn\'t work out I feel that I can be upset with that. Some people on this board wishfully thought he could be OK, but it was no surprise to a lot of us when he had problems cracking the starting lineup let alone excelling. That\'s my point. You want to think it\'s unfair, fine, go right ahead. Doesn\'t hurt my feelings.

Danno · 06-25-2004, 05:12 PM

Over that span we\'ve drafted 4 LB\'s, 5 DL and 1 CB. It appears to me we are addressing all but 1 position, CB. In 2004 our front 7 will probably consist of 7 guys brought in under this coach. They may not be developing the players properly, but they are addressing it.

There is a difference to me Danno, between properly addressing and addressing. Show me any three other positions on this roster that haven\'t seen the same amount of change since Haslett got here. Problem is, when they need a safety they go get Tebucky Jones. He didn\'t work out real well last season, but it was a decent move - I can\'t fault them for going after a guy who was touted by many. When they need a TE - Sloan and Conwell - they draft Boo and Hilton. Conwell and Sloan didn\'t work out great either, but again, I can\'t and don\'t blame them.

However, when we need a MLB more than anything else and they go sign Orlando Ruff - well, when he doesn\'t work out I feel that I can be upset with that. Some people on this board wishfully thought he could be OK, but it was no surprise to a lot of us when he had problems cracking the starting lineup let alone excelling. That\'s my point. You want to think it\'s unfair, fine, go right ahead. Doesn\'t hurt my feelings.

ORLANDO RUFF????
A guy brought in and touted as a 2 down MLB???
Darren Smith I believe was the starter and by season\'s end Ruff was the starter. I think he even led the team in tackles for several games down the stretch.
I don\'t think anyone thought this guy was Takeo Spikes. You make it seem like all the sunshiners wanted this guy instead of Spikes.
Thats my point. Gross mis-representation of the actual facts to suit an agenda.
Just like Ambrose. Most of us knew he\'d be a nickle back and a spot starter when he signed with us. But the moonshiners have to come out and act like everyone but them thought he was the 2nd coming of Deion Sanders.
And just like Craft this year. Most of us think he\'ll be a good compliment to Thomas. Challenge for the 2nd CB spot and probably see a lot of action as the nickle at worst.
But I\'m sure if he only sees nickle action the moonies will say I told you he wasn\'t Charles Woodson you clueless boobs!!!.
Putting words into peoples\' mouths is not being open-minded. I know YOU don\'t agree with that but I do.

WhoDat · 06-25-2004, 05:44 PM

You make it seem like all the sunshiners wanted this guy instead of Spikes.

Actually, I wasn\'t talking about you at all. I was talking about Jim Haslett. I gave Haslett credit for certain moves but was illustrating how he continues to make the wrong (or INADEQUATE, whatever you want to call it) moves at key positions of need. Maybe your problem is simply that you take things personally. I was criticizing Haslett for personnel decisions - I made no reference to A) you personally, and B) I said that SOME PEOPLE thought he would be OK. I didn\'t suggest that you said he would be the next coming of Spikes. READ the post before you attack based on its comments. How about that?

GumboBC · 06-25-2004, 05:49 PM

This is some FUNNY stuff.

Hey, B&B hates everybody, but I love all all of ya!! :P

I don\'t agree with all of ya. But, I love ya just the same...LMAO....

Come on, Gator. I\'m ready.

subguy · 06-26-2004, 12:51 AM

I think when I referred to myself as a realist.......someone on this board blasted me saying something to the effect of a realist is a pessimist in sheeps clothing.....just wondering.......do I straddle the fence or which side am I on?????

JKool · 06-26-2004, 02:07 PM

Good question Subguy.

I suppose I don\'t know which side you are on (and that is probably a credit to you).

Realist is a word we need to do away with. Realist is what everyone thinks they are - there is no point arguing over that. What we need to do is cut through the \"agendas\" and get to the truth. This happens when pessimists and optimists finally come to agreement - that is when we are allowed to be realists, NOT before that.

I once saw a study that the people who see the world most clearly are depressives. To be psychologically healthy, apparently we have to delude ourselves into thinking things are better than they are. You can take this anyway you want, but I\'d rather be healthy than dead on accurate. I think the goal is to see that you (fill in your name here) see the world through a lens and try to make due with what you can get by filtering out the cr*p (by discussing with others).

As another respected poster might put it:
.02

Danno · 06-26-2004, 03:04 PM

Realist: Someone who looks at the situation with an open mind and tells it like they see it.

Pessimist: Someone who searches for the down side of every statement, every pesonnel decision, and every coaching move and rams that negativity down the throat of everyone who feels even the most remote hint of optimism.

Put me down as a realist ma man.

WhoDat · 06-26-2004, 10:11 PM

WRONG.

Optimist: Someone who searches for the up side of every statement, every pesonnel decision, and every coaching move and rams wishful expectations down the throat of everyone who feels even thinks about questioning a team that is 226-338 all time.

Put Danno down in the optimist category.

06-25-2004, 01:25 PM	#21
Danno Truth Addict Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Spanish Fort, AL (via NO and B/R) Posts: 24,720	New Member on the Block I don\'t disagree with anything you just said. I have always held that the weak link is coaching. Why did you say you understand that I disagree with that? There\'s only one thing I kinda disagree with. The most glaring need on this team for 3 years has been D-line, LB, and CB, in that order. I don\'t think anyone but the Brooks Haters would debate that. Over that span we\'ve drafted 4 LB\'s, 5 DL and 1 CB. It appears to me we are addressing all but 1 position, CB. In 2004 our front 7 will probably consist of 7 guys brought in under this coach. They may not be developing the players properly, but they are addressing it. And By the way, thats twice you\'ve said I blamed it (8-8) all on bad luck. For the record... I NEVER SAID THAT! When did I even remotely suggest that?

06-25-2004, 01:58 PM	#22
saintfan Donated Plasma Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 18,556 Blog Entries: 5	New Member on the Block It wasn\'t you Danno, it was me. I have said in the past that the ball just didn\'t bounce the Saints way last year...and I have included this as PART of the reason our record was what it was. Sometimes it does, and sometimes it doesn\'t. There are those that don\'t think injuries have anything to do with a team\'s record. I disagree. There are those that don\'t think a team needs to be fortunate to win the superbowl. I disagree with this also. I am not saying talent, or coaching, or schemes aren\'t also a part of the big picture. I\'m suggesting that fortune, good and bad, is also a part of the big picture. I would submit the Carolina Panthers as the team that was last year\'s most fortunate team. Anyone argue that statement? Now, the luck thing is sarcastically tossed into the mix by those that generally think Haz is clueless or those that think Brooks isn\'t a quality QB, but it\'s people being just that...sarcastic. Show me one person who doesn\'t think luck plays a role and I\'ll show you someone who isn\'t really paying attention. [Edited on 25/6/2004 by saintfan]
	C'mon Man...

06-25-2004, 03:57 PM	#23
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631	New Member on the Block Over that span we\'ve drafted 4 LB\'s, 5 DL and 1 CB. It appears to me we are addressing all but 1 position, CB. In 2004 our front 7 will probably consist of 7 guys brought in under this coach. They may not be developing the players properly, but they are addressing it. There is a difference to me Danno, between properly addressing and addressing. Show me any three other positions on this roster that haven\'t seen the same amount of change since Haslett got here. Problem is, when they need a safety they go get Tebucky Jones. He didn\'t work out real well last season, but it was a decent move - I can\'t fault them for going after a guy who was touted by many. When they need a TE - Sloan and Conwell - they draft Boo and Hilton. Conwell and Sloan didn\'t work out great either, but again, I can\'t and don\'t blame them. However, when we need a MLB more than anything else and they go sign Orlando Ruff - well, when he doesn\'t work out I feel that I can be upset with that. Some people on this board wishfully thought he could be OK, but it was no surprise to a lot of us when he had problems cracking the starting lineup let alone excelling. That\'s my point. You want to think it\'s unfair, fine, go right ahead. Doesn\'t hurt my feelings.
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631	\"Excuses, excuses, excuses. ThatÃ¢Â€Â™s all anyone ever makes for the New Orleans SaintsÃ¢Â€Â™ 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.\"

06-25-2004, 05:12 PM	#24
Danno Truth Addict Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Spanish Fort, AL (via NO and B/R) Posts: 24,720	New Member on the Block Over that span we\'ve drafted 4 LB\'s, 5 DL and 1 CB. It appears to me we are addressing all but 1 position, CB. In 2004 our front 7 will probably consist of 7 guys brought in under this coach. They may not be developing the players properly, but they are addressing it. There is a difference to me Danno, between properly addressing and addressing. Show me any three other positions on this roster that haven\'t seen the same amount of change since Haslett got here. Problem is, when they need a safety they go get Tebucky Jones. He didn\'t work out real well last season, but it was a decent move - I can\'t fault them for going after a guy who was touted by many. When they need a TE - Sloan and Conwell - they draft Boo and Hilton. Conwell and Sloan didn\'t work out great either, but again, I can\'t and don\'t blame them. However, when we need a MLB more than anything else and they go sign Orlando Ruff - well, when he doesn\'t work out I feel that I can be upset with that. Some people on this board wishfully thought he could be OK, but it was no surprise to a lot of us when he had problems cracking the starting lineup let alone excelling. That\'s my point. You want to think it\'s unfair, fine, go right ahead. Doesn\'t hurt my feelings. ORLANDO RUFF???? A guy brought in and touted as a 2 down MLB??? Darren Smith I believe was the starter and by season\'s end Ruff was the starter. I think he even led the team in tackles for several games down the stretch. I don\'t think anyone thought this guy was Takeo Spikes. You make it seem like all the sunshiners wanted this guy instead of Spikes. Thats my point. Gross mis-representation of the actual facts to suit an agenda. Just like Ambrose. Most of us knew he\'d be a nickle back and a spot starter when he signed with us. But the moonshiners have to come out and act like everyone but them thought he was the 2nd coming of Deion Sanders. And just like Craft this year. Most of us think he\'ll be a good compliment to Thomas. Challenge for the 2nd CB spot and probably see a lot of action as the nickle at worst. But I\'m sure if he only sees nickle action the moonies will say I told you he wasn\'t Charles Woodson you clueless boobs!!!. Putting words into peoples\' mouths is not being open-minded. I know YOU don\'t agree with that but I do.

06-25-2004, 05:44 PM	#25
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631	New Member on the Block You make it seem like all the sunshiners wanted this guy instead of Spikes. Actually, I wasn\'t talking about you at all. I was talking about Jim Haslett. I gave Haslett credit for certain moves but was illustrating how he continues to make the wrong (or INADEQUATE, whatever you want to call it) moves at key positions of need. Maybe your problem is simply that you take things personally. I was criticizing Haslett for personnel decisions - I made no reference to A) you personally, and B) I said that SOME PEOPLE thought he would be OK. I didn\'t suggest that you said he would be the next coming of Spikes. READ the post before you attack based on its comments. How about that?
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631	\"Excuses, excuses, excuses. ThatÃ¢Â€Â™s all anyone ever makes for the New Orleans SaintsÃ¢Â€Â™ 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.\"

Latest Blogs
2023 New Orleans Saints: Training Camp Last Blog: 08-01-2023 By: MarchingOn Puck the Fro Browl! Last Blog: 02-05-2023 By: neugey CFP: "Just Keep Doing What You're Doing" Last Blog: 12-08-2022 By: neugey

06-25-2004, 05:49 PM	#26
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616	New Member on the Block This is some FUNNY stuff. Hey, B&B hates everybody, but I love all all of ya!! :P I don\'t agree with all of ya. But, I love ya just the same...LMAO.... Come on, Gator. I\'m ready.
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616

06-26-2004, 12:51 AM	#27
subguy 1000 Posts + Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: FL Posts: 2,095	New Member on the Block I think when I referred to myself as a realist.......someone on this board blasted me saying something to the effect of a realist is a pessimist in sheeps clothing.....just wondering.......do I straddle the fence or which side am I on?????

06-26-2004, 02:07 PM	#28
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	New Member on the Block Good question Subguy. I suppose I don\'t know which side you are on (and that is probably a credit to you). Realist is a word we need to do away with. Realist is what everyone thinks they are - there is no point arguing over that. What we need to do is cut through the \"agendas\" and get to the truth. This happens when pessimists and optimists finally come to agreement - that is when we are allowed to be realists, NOT before that. I once saw a study that the people who see the world most clearly are depressives. To be psychologically healthy, apparently we have to delude ourselves into thinking things are better than they are. You can take this anyway you want, but I\'d rather be healthy than dead on accurate. I think the goal is to see that you (fill in your name here) see the world through a lens and try to make due with what you can get by filtering out the cr*p (by discussing with others). As another respected poster might put it: .02
	"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks

06-26-2004, 03:04 PM	#29
Danno Truth Addict Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Spanish Fort, AL (via NO and B/R) Posts: 24,720	New Member on the Block Realist: Someone who looks at the situation with an open mind and tells it like they see it. Pessimist: Someone who searches for the down side of every statement, every pesonnel decision, and every coaching move and rams that negativity down the throat of everyone who feels even the most remote hint of optimism. Put me down as a realist ma man.

06-26-2004, 10:11 PM	#30
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631	New Member on the Block WRONG. Optimist: Someone who searches for the up side of every statement, every pesonnel decision, and every coaching move and rams wishful expectations down the throat of everyone who feels even thinks about questioning a team that is 226-338 all time. Put Danno down in the optimist category.
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631