Losing Carl Nicks has affected the while O Line

Shoe. · 09-24-2012, 11:44 AM

Originally Posted by SaintsBro

I get what you're trying to do here, but first of all we didn't "trade" Nicks -- he walked -- and we could not afford to keep him. We probably couldn't have afforded him, even if we had let Colston go! The writing was on the wall for a long time that Nicks was going to go, whether we wanted him to stay or not. No matter what we offered him, somebody out there in free agency would have offered $1 more and a bag of chips, and he would have taken it. He was going to take top dollar and nothing less. It was a bidding war the Saints could not win. You can't just sign everybody in the world that you want and keep the ol' gang together forever. It's a business.

When Nicks was here we also had the same dudes but we had an O-line coach who wasn't pulling double duty head coaching the whole team at the same time. Who do you think is supposed to figure stuff out about blocking schemes and game planning against specific opposing players and their styles, or make adjustments when things aren't working? You think Kromer really has the same amount of time during the week or during the game, that he used to have to prepare these guys specifically for the war in the trenches, or make adjustments on the fly? Nicks was a beast but he's not the savior of the team and he's not the only problem we have.

Okay, please excuse my verbage, you are correct, we didn't trade Nicks, he was bought out from under us. I stand corrected.

But my point is this: Can you honestly say, and believe, that the O-line would look no better at all if he were here? Essentially by saying he wasn't the reason we were better (with an O-line coach) than we are now (without), you're also saying that we would be in the same place if he were here, and I really can't be on board with that idea, O-line coach or not.

I do understand that it was a bit of a bidding war, and yes, somebody may have offered a little more and taken him away, and also that it is a business, can't keep the band together, etc.. But we found the money to keep Colston, we found the money to bring in Hawthorne, Herring, Lofton, and Bunkley not to mention making our QB the highest paid in the history of the game. Would I want Nicks over some of these gentlemen? Well hindsight certainly is 20/20, and if our idea of "Saints Football" is to hammer away with a consistently unstoppable offense, and make the defense work piece-meal, we certainly have diverted from that vision. Now we have an offense that can't click, and a defense that, despite several free agent signings in the past two seasons, has yet to show any real improvement

tl;dr - We should've spent the money on Nicks, even if it meant losing some of our current toys, offense/defense not withstanding.

edit: whatever it was that Nicks was doing to help out the OTs, he certainly isn't around to do it now. Maybe it was TE/RB chip blocks. I dunno

44Champs · 09-24-2012, 11:46 AM

Originally Posted by NOLA54

To me, it just seems like defenses now know how to attack us. I believe Payton would have found a way to play call around it. I wonder if anyone on our current coaching staff will find themselves without a job next season.

That's probably true. Payton is a master at adjustments.

I think our coaching staff as a whole is solid WHEN PAYTON IS AROUND. I can't see Loomis canning any of them because they are all doing their best without a rudder. However, you woul think that with having an ex headcoach as our D coordinator, our defense would be leas affected. Dunno.

neugey · 09-24-2012, 01:01 PM

I think where we really miss Carl Nicks is the running game ... our interior run blocking has looked pretty bad.

SaintsBro · 09-24-2012, 04:40 PM

Originally Posted by Shoe.

Okay, please excuse my verbage, you are correct, we didn't trade Nicks, he was bought out from under us. I stand corrected.

But my point is this: Can you honestly say, and believe, that the O-line would look no better at all if he were here? Essentially by saying he wasn't the reason we were better (with an O-line coach) than we are now (without), you're also saying that we would be in the same place if he were here, and I really can't be on board with that idea, O-line coach or not.

I do understand that it was a bit of a bidding war, and yes, somebody may have offered a little more and taken him away, and also that it is a business, can't keep the band together, etc.. But we found the money to keep Colston, we found the money to bring in Hawthorne, Herring, Lofton, and Bunkley not to mention making our QB the highest paid in the history of the game.

tl;dr - We should've spent the money on Nicks, even if it meant losing some of our current toys, offense/defense not withstanding.

Well yeah, I get that you liked Nicks (I did too). I'm not even trying to say that Grubbs is better. We all miss the glory days of Nicks blowing people up on a screen in front of Pierre Thomas, or whatever your favorite Nicks play was.

But Jahri Evans already had the big contract in 2010, making HIM the highest paid guard in the NFL at the time. The Saints were never going to tie up that much money in the guard position, especially with Grubbs on the market. The writing was on the wall, for a long time, that Carl Nicks was going to leave us. You want the Saints to have the TWO highest paid guards in the NFL, plus the highest-paid quarterback?

Nicks commands a $47.5 million five year contract (total)-- that's practically half of the Brees deal right there. Evans is actually around $56.7 million for seven years. I don't remember what the specific cap hit is for Evans, but Nicks is a cap hit in Tampa of something about $10 million dollars...whatever Evans is, it's not cheap...put those two together and it is A LOT. That is TOO MUCH money tied up in guards. You'd lose a lot more than just Colston, that's for sure. You can only do so much with the cap. We got many good years out of Nicks, and I love the guy, but we just couldn't afford to keep him. And the reason is not because of Brees, it's because of Evans at the guard position.

Danno · 09-24-2012, 04:43 PM

ProFootballFocus OG rankings so far this year...

1st - +7.7 grade - Ben Grubbs
3rd - +6.6 grade - Jahari Evans
18th - +2.2 grade - Carl Nicks
44th - -2.3 grade - Ted Larsen

Grubbs has graded out the best in the entire NFL so far.

Also, OT's overall...

#54 Zach Strief
#57 Jermon Bushrod

44Champs · 09-24-2012, 10:04 PM

Originally Posted by Danno

ProFootballFocus OG rankings so far this year...

1st - +7.7 grade - Ben Grubbs
3rd - +6.6 grade - Jahari Evans
18th - +2.2 grade - Carl Nicks
44th - -2.3 grade - Ted Larsen

Grubbs has graded out the best in the entire NFL so far.

Also, OT's overall...

#54 Zach Strief
#57 Jermon Bushrod

Well i guess that squashes my theory. I cant believe grubbs is ranked highest in nfl. I still somehow feel that we're missing Nicks, but then again, this whole fiasco is hard to measure with the loss of Payton.

The Dude · 09-24-2012, 10:14 PM

Grubbs #1 guard in the league right now Evans #6, Nicks somewhere down in the 15s according to PFF. NVM, I see someone had the quote, I was trying to find it.

The Dude · 09-24-2012, 10:16 PM

Originally Posted by Danno

ProFootballFocus OG rankings so far this year...

1st - +7.7 grade - Ben Grubbs
3rd - +6.6 grade - Jahari Evans
18th - +2.2 grade - Carl Nicks
44th - -2.3 grade - Ted Larsen

Grubbs has graded out the best in the entire NFL so far.

Also, OT's overall...

#54 Zach Strief
#57 Jermon Bushrod

Thank you I was trying to find those stats, I read them earlier. Glad you found them.

09-24-2012, 11:44 AM	#21
Shoe. 500th Post Join Date: Nov 2011 Location: Hub City Posts: 576	Re: Losing Carl Nicks has affected the while O Line Originally Posted by SaintsBro I get what you're trying to do here, but first of all we didn't "trade" Nicks -- he walked -- and we could not afford to keep him. We probably couldn't have afforded him, even if we had let Colston go! The writing was on the wall for a long time that Nicks was going to go, whether we wanted him to stay or not. No matter what we offered him, somebody out there in free agency would have offered $1 more and a bag of chips, and he would have taken it. He was going to take top dollar and nothing less. It was a bidding war the Saints could not win. You can't just sign everybody in the world that you want and keep the ol' gang together forever. It's a business. When Nicks was here we also had the same dudes but we had an O-line coach who wasn't pulling double duty head coaching the whole team at the same time. Who do you think is supposed to figure stuff out about blocking schemes and game planning against specific opposing players and their styles, or make adjustments when things aren't working? You think Kromer really has the same amount of time during the week or during the game, that he used to have to prepare these guys specifically for the war in the trenches, or make adjustments on the fly? Nicks was a beast but he's not the savior of the team and he's not the only problem we have. Okay, please excuse my verbage, you are correct, we didn't trade Nicks, he was bought out from under us. I stand corrected. But my point is this: Can you honestly say, and believe, that the O-line would look no better at all if he were here? Essentially by saying he wasn't the reason we were better (with an O-line coach) than we are now (without), you're also saying that we would be in the same place if he were here, and I really can't be on board with that idea, O-line coach or not. I do understand that it was a bit of a bidding war, and yes, somebody may have offered a little more and taken him away, and also that it is a business, can't keep the band together, etc.. But we found the money to keep Colston, we found the money to bring in Hawthorne, Herring, Lofton, and Bunkley not to mention making our QB the highest paid in the history of the game. Would I want Nicks over some of these gentlemen? Well hindsight certainly is 20/20, and if our idea of "Saints Football" is to hammer away with a consistently unstoppable offense, and make the defense work piece-meal, we certainly have diverted from that vision. Now we have an offense that can't click, and a defense that, despite several free agent signings in the past two seasons, has yet to show any real improvement tl;dr - We should've spent the money on Nicks, even if it meant losing some of our current toys, offense/defense not withstanding. edit: whatever it was that Nicks was doing to help out the OTs, he certainly isn't around to do it now. Maybe it was TE/RB chip blocks. I dunno

09-24-2012, 11:46 AM	#22
44Champs Site Donor Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 2,589	Originally Posted by NOLA54 To me, it just seems like defenses now know how to attack us. I believe Payton would have found a way to play call around it. I wonder if anyone on our current coaching staff will find themselves without a job next season. That's probably true. Payton is a master at adjustments. I think our coaching staff as a whole is solid WHEN PAYTON IS AROUND. I can't see Loomis canning any of them because they are all doing their best without a rudder. However, you woul think that with having an ex headcoach as our D coordinator, our defense would be leas affected. Dunno.
44Champs Site Donor Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 2,589

09-24-2012, 01:01 PM	#23
neugey Hu Dat! Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 6,673 Blog Entries: 13	Re: Losing Carl Nicks has affected the while O Line I think where we really miss Carl Nicks is the running game ... our interior run blocking has looked pretty bad.

09-24-2012, 04:40 PM	#24
SaintsBro Site Donor Join Date: Sep 2010 Location: in line with my ridiculous CLEAR PLASTIC BAG Posts: 3,650 Blog Entries: 3	Re: Losing Carl Nicks has affected the while O Line Originally Posted by Shoe. Okay, please excuse my verbage, you are correct, we didn't trade Nicks, he was bought out from under us. I stand corrected. But my point is this: Can you honestly say, and believe, that the O-line would look no better at all if he were here? Essentially by saying he wasn't the reason we were better (with an O-line coach) than we are now (without), you're also saying that we would be in the same place if he were here, and I really can't be on board with that idea, O-line coach or not. I do understand that it was a bit of a bidding war, and yes, somebody may have offered a little more and taken him away, and also that it is a business, can't keep the band together, etc.. But we found the money to keep Colston, we found the money to bring in Hawthorne, Herring, Lofton, and Bunkley not to mention making our QB the highest paid in the history of the game. tl;dr - We should've spent the money on Nicks, even if it meant losing some of our current toys, offense/defense not withstanding. Well yeah, I get that you liked Nicks (I did too). I'm not even trying to say that Grubbs is better. We all miss the glory days of Nicks blowing people up on a screen in front of Pierre Thomas, or whatever your favorite Nicks play was. But Jahri Evans already had the big contract in 2010, making HIM the highest paid guard in the NFL at the time. The Saints were never going to tie up that much money in the guard position, especially with Grubbs on the market. The writing was on the wall, for a long time, that Carl Nicks was going to leave us. You want the Saints to have the TWO highest paid guards in the NFL, plus the highest-paid quarterback? Nicks commands a $47.5 million five year contract (total)-- that's practically half of the Brees deal right there. Evans is actually around $56.7 million for seven years. I don't remember what the specific cap hit is for Evans, but Nicks is a cap hit in Tampa of something about $10 million dollars...whatever Evans is, it's not cheap...put those two together and it is A LOT. That is TOO MUCH money tied up in guards. You'd lose a lot more than just Colston, that's for sure. You can only do so much with the cap. We got many good years out of Nicks, and I love the guy, but we just couldn't afford to keep him. And the reason is not because of Brees, it's because of Evans at the guard position.

09-24-2012, 04:43 PM	#25
Danno Truth Addict Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Spanish Fort, AL (via NO and B/R) Posts: 24,713	Re: Losing Carl Nicks has affected the while O Line ProFootballFocus OG rankings so far this year... 1st - +7.7 grade - Ben Grubbs 3rd - +6.6 grade - Jahari Evans 18th - +2.2 grade - Carl Nicks 44th - -2.3 grade - Ted Larsen Grubbs has graded out the best in the entire NFL so far. Also, OT's overall... #54 Zach Strief #57 Jermon Bushrod The Dude likes this.

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

09-24-2012, 10:04 PM	#26
44Champs Site Donor Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 2,589	Originally Posted by Danno ProFootballFocus OG rankings so far this year... 1st - +7.7 grade - Ben Grubbs 3rd - +6.6 grade - Jahari Evans 18th - +2.2 grade - Carl Nicks 44th - -2.3 grade - Ted Larsen Grubbs has graded out the best in the entire NFL so far. Also, OT's overall... #54 Zach Strief #57 Jermon Bushrod Well i guess that squashes my theory. I cant believe grubbs is ranked highest in nfl. I still somehow feel that we're missing Nicks, but then again, this whole fiasco is hard to measure with the loss of Payton.
44Champs Site Donor Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 2,589

09-24-2012, 10:14 PM	#27
The Dude 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Jul 2011 Posts: 9,048	Re: Losing Carl Nicks has affected the while O Line Grubbs #1 guard in the league right now Evans #6, Nicks somewhere down in the 15s according to PFF. NVM, I see someone had the quote, I was trying to find it.
The Dude 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Jul 2011 Posts: 9,048

09-24-2012, 10:16 PM	#28
The Dude 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Jul 2011 Posts: 9,048	Re: Losing Carl Nicks has affected the while O Line Originally Posted by Danno ProFootballFocus OG rankings so far this year... 1st - +7.7 grade - Ben Grubbs 3rd - +6.6 grade - Jahari Evans 18th - +2.2 grade - Carl Nicks 44th - -2.3 grade - Ted Larsen Grubbs has graded out the best in the entire NFL so far. Also, OT's overall... #54 Zach Strief #57 Jermon Bushrod Thank you I was trying to find those stats, I read them earlier. Glad you found them.
The Dude 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Jul 2011 Posts: 9,048

LinkBacks (?) LinkBack to this Thread: https://blackandgold.com/saints/50740-losing-carl-nicks-has-affected-while-o-line.html
Posted By	For	Type	Date	Hits
Losing Carl Nicks has affected the while O Line	This thread	Refback	09-24-2012 10:13 AM	4