SaintsBro

Sheez louise. Do we really need to think like this? Sorry to GO OFF on you like this, but let's review:

2006-2011 - 3rd best winning record in NFL overall
2006-2011 - 67 victories during this period, with just one NFC team securing more wins
2006-2011 3rd best road record in the entire NFL
2009-2011 - tied for best overall record in NFL
2008, 2009 and 2011, first in scoring
2012 - #2 offense in NFL, yardage
2012 - #1 offense in NFL, passing
2012 - #3 offense in NFL, scoring


2 Pro Bowlers 2009
7 Pro Bowlers 2010
5 Pro Bowlers 2011
2 Pro Bowlers 2012

5-3 in the post season
three division titles
2 wild card appearances
3 playoff appearances in a row
11+ wins in 3 consecutive seasons
.500 or below in 3 seasons

That's "incredibly lucky"?

We had ONE bad year, my friend. And even that year wasn't that "off" from normal, except in defense (which was horrible but wasn't really that off, either) and of course, the wins column. And we went 7-9 WITH NO COACH.

------------------------------------------------------------
Now let's look at the Saints disappointing ".500 or below" seasons under Payton - we've had 3 of them.

During the same period, 2006-2012, the Ravens (a very winning team) had only 1 sub-.500 season, 5-11 in 2007. But they had another that was close to .500, a 9-7 record in 2009. And all three of the Saints' ".500 or below" seasons were either 8-8 or 7-9. So, is there really that much difference there, over time, between the two clubs performance? Three middling break-even seasons to two? Are their fans sitting around in their forums in Baltimore, moping about how they "got lucky" to have one of the best overall records in football, year in and year out? Come on, man -- we have a really good freaking team.

-----------------------------------------------------------
Teams With Most Regular Season wins 2009-2012 (including this past year, no Payton):

Patriots - 49
Packers - 47
Falcons - 45
Saints - 44
Ravens - 43
Steelers - 41
San Fran - 38
Giants - 36
etc.

We're "lucky"?

----------------------------------------------------------
And "keeping the band together"? Let's look at that:

Number of Super Bowl offensive starters still on roster = 5 = less than 50%
Number of Super Bowl defensive starters still on roster = 5 = less than 50%
No. of Super Bowl substitution/backup players still on roster = 13 out of 53 = much less than 50%

Number of Super Bowl roster, offensive starters who left the team for more money elsewhere: 6
Number of Super Bowl roster, defensive starters who left the team for more money: 2 definitely, but really more like 5 -- Fujita and Porter, but there's also McCray, Usama Young & Hargrove, who DID leave and sign elsewhere. You can't get much more freaking "popular" with the fans than Tracy Porter, and the front office apparently had no problem letting HIM leave.

Number of Super Bowl Roster, defensive starters who stayed for less money: 2, maybe actually 3...I don't know for sure if Sharper stayed in 2010 for more or less money, but he stayed only one more year, and it could easily have been only the bare vet minimum since they didn't "disclose" the terms.

So...they held onto 5 defensive guys, 2 of which just re-signed for less, and they lost 6 to other teams ...that's keeping the band together?

I guess this winning stuff was all a mirage. It was just dumb luck.

*sigh *