why is nobody addressing the non-usage of McCallister?

williebingbing · 09-16-2004, 04:19 PM

I believe the Saints had 53 offensive plays, 37 passes and 17 runs. After two years of being one of the most productive runners in the game, why go to an offense that doesn't use McCallister?
The one back backfield was pathetically restraining for Barry Sanders. With a fullback leading him all those years, it is hard to imagine how much more successful he would have been.
Inspite of the 35 year trend, I have denied the conspiracy theory that the NFL does not wish to see small market teams succeed. However, seeing the Saints consciouslly restrain McCallister would suggest conformity to this theory. "Don't try to win, just do good enough to create a little local interest, but always remember, it is in the best interest of the NFL to let the more nationally marketable teams have the huge success."
"yeh, ok, let's let some small markets have a little success every now and then, like Green Bay and Carolina, but we don't need any of these teams to go on 3 and 4 years dynasty type runs. So Jim, you be a good little boy, and stop using that good running back so much."

[Edited on 9/16/2004 by Halo]

BlackandBlue · 09-16-2004, 04:29 PM

3.6 yards per carry last week.

Saintsin04 · 09-16-2004, 05:50 PM

I believe the Saints had 53 offensive plays, 37 passes and 17 runs. After two years of being one of the most productive runners in the game, why go to an offense that doesn\'t use McCallister?
The one back backfield was pathetically restraining for Barry Sanders. With a fullback leading him all those years, it is hard to imagine how much more successful he would have been.
Inspite of the 35 year trend, I have denied the conspiracy theory that the NFL does not wish to see small market teams succeed. However, seeing the Saints consciouslly restrain McCallister would suggest conformity to this theory. \"Don\'t try to win, just do good enough to create a little local interest, but always remember, it is in the best interest of the NFL to let the more nationally marketable teams have the huge success.\"
\"yeh, ok, let\'s let some small markets have a little success every now and then, like Green Bay and Carolina, but we don\'t need any of these teams to go on 3 and 4 years dynasty type runs. So Jim, you be a good little boy, and stop using that good running back so much.\"

[Edited on 9/16/2004 by Halo]

we used a fullback on less than 30% of the plays last year and Deuce still had his 1600.
so whats up

Euphoria · 09-16-2004, 11:33 PM

when you get behind in a game you pretty much scrap the running game and start you non-effective passing attack.

game dictates what you do in certain situations.

you can\'t compare Barry to Deuce slightly different runny styles and a lot of times Barry was given the call and let him make something happen which is what he did...

Deuce needs a little more help setting up blocks from the backfield which is ok as long as you know this and do this... lol.

26DEUCE26 · 09-17-2004, 12:20 AM

Haslett just needs to realize there needs to be a fullback back there with Deuce. I wonder if he is thinking that we have 2 good tightends so we should put them both in the game, or if he doesn\'t trust the rookie FB. He looked ok to me. Who would he rather have playing well Deuce , or Ernie Conwell. Run the ball to open up the pass. I wonder if he would have inserted a 2 TE set in the playbook if T. Smith was still here.

WhoDat · 09-17-2004, 08:32 AM

The Saints SHOULD be using the Mike Holmgren/Seattle Seahawks approach to running. Open up the field and tire the defense with the spread passing attack, THEN establish the run. When you line up with 2 TEs and run 0 dives into the line 10 or 12 times for 20 yards and then try to pass, you generally have little success.

SaintFanInATLHELL · 09-17-2004, 02:50 PM

The Saints SHOULD be using the Mike Holmgren/Seattle Seahawks approach to running. Open up the field and tire the defense with the spread passing attack, THEN establish the run. When you line up with 2 TEs and run 0 dives into the line 10 or 12 times for 20 yards and then try to pass, you generally have little success.

Whodat,

That would require an offensive coordinator that actually savvy enough to realize that you can in fact game plan your offense. Someone who actually understands that misdirection/play action can cause enough indecision in the defense so that the talent can make a play.

Do we have such a guy? After three years I seriously have my doubts.

SFIAH

CheramieIII · 09-17-2004, 03:25 PM

Believe what you want too, but we did have a game plan for this game and either Haslett\'s plan was to feature our lightning fast receivers, who drops alot of balls or run Deuce alot, but after about three plays Haz figured out that Deuce was going to be killed and laid off of the second option, at which point we had not game plan at all.

:smile_bounce: :smile_bounce: :smile_bounce: :smile_bounce: :smile_bounce: :smile_bounce: :smile_bounce: :smile_bounce: :smile_bounce: :smile_bounce: :smile_bounce: :smile_bounce: :smile_bounce: :smile_bounce: :smile_bounce:

09-16-2004, 04:19 PM	#1
williebingbing Rookie Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 1	why is nobody addressing the non-usage of McCallister? I believe the Saints had 53 offensive plays, 37 passes and 17 runs. After two years of being one of the most productive runners in the game, why go to an offense that doesn't use McCallister? The one back backfield was pathetically restraining for Barry Sanders. With a fullback leading him all those years, it is hard to imagine how much more successful he would have been. Inspite of the 35 year trend, I have denied the conspiracy theory that the NFL does not wish to see small market teams succeed. However, seeing the Saints consciouslly restrain McCallister would suggest conformity to this theory. "Don't try to win, just do good enough to create a little local interest, but always remember, it is in the best interest of the NFL to let the more nationally marketable teams have the huge success." "yeh, ok, let's let some small markets have a little success every now and then, like Green Bay and Carolina, but we don't need any of these teams to go on 3 and 4 years dynasty type runs. So Jim, you be a good little boy, and stop using that good running back so much." [Edited on 9/16/2004 by Halo]
williebingbing Rookie Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 1

09-16-2004, 04:29 PM	#2
BlackandBlue Kinder, gentler Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: dirty south Posts: 3,889	why is nobody addressing the non-usage of McCallister? 3.6 yards per carry last week.

09-16-2004, 05:50 PM	#3
Saintsin04 Registered Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 68	why is nobody addressing the non-usage of McCallister? I believe the Saints had 53 offensive plays, 37 passes and 17 runs. After two years of being one of the most productive runners in the game, why go to an offense that doesn\'t use McCallister? The one back backfield was pathetically restraining for Barry Sanders. With a fullback leading him all those years, it is hard to imagine how much more successful he would have been. Inspite of the 35 year trend, I have denied the conspiracy theory that the NFL does not wish to see small market teams succeed. However, seeing the Saints consciouslly restrain McCallister would suggest conformity to this theory. \"Don\'t try to win, just do good enough to create a little local interest, but always remember, it is in the best interest of the NFL to let the more nationally marketable teams have the huge success.\" \"yeh, ok, let\'s let some small markets have a little success every now and then, like Green Bay and Carolina, but we don\'t need any of these teams to go on 3 and 4 years dynasty type runs. So Jim, you be a good little boy, and stop using that good running back so much.\" [Edited on 9/16/2004 by Halo] we used a fullback on less than 30% of the plays last year and Deuce still had his 1600. so whats up
Saintsin04 Registered Join Date: Aug 2004 Posts: 68

09-16-2004, 11:33 PM	#4
Euphoria 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Hollywood, CA Posts: 7,601 Blog Entries: 5	why is nobody addressing the non-usage of McCallister? when you get behind in a game you pretty much scrap the running game and start you non-effective passing attack. game dictates what you do in certain situations. you can\'t compare Barry to Deuce slightly different runny styles and a lot of times Barry was given the call and let him make something happen which is what he did... Deuce needs a little more help setting up blocks from the backfield which is ok as long as you know this and do this... lol.

09-17-2004, 12:20 AM	#5
26DEUCE26 100th Post Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 116	why is nobody addressing the non-usage of McCallister? Haslett just needs to realize there needs to be a fullback back there with Deuce. I wonder if he is thinking that we have 2 good tightends so we should put them both in the game, or if he doesn\'t trust the rookie FB. He looked ok to me. Who would he rather have playing well Deuce , or Ernie Conwell. Run the ball to open up the pass. I wonder if he would have inserted a 2 TE set in the playbook if T. Smith was still here.
26DEUCE26 100th Post Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 116

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

09-17-2004, 08:32 AM	#6
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631	why is nobody addressing the non-usage of McCallister? The Saints SHOULD be using the Mike Holmgren/Seattle Seahawks approach to running. Open up the field and tire the defense with the spread passing attack, THEN establish the run. When you line up with 2 TEs and run 0 dives into the line 10 or 12 times for 20 yards and then try to pass, you generally have little success.
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631

09-17-2004, 02:50 PM	#7
SaintFanInATLHELL The Professor Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Lithonia, GA Posts: 2,773	why is nobody addressing the non-usage of McCallister? The Saints SHOULD be using the Mike Holmgren/Seattle Seahawks approach to running. Open up the field and tire the defense with the spread passing attack, THEN establish the run. When you line up with 2 TEs and run 0 dives into the line 10 or 12 times for 20 yards and then try to pass, you generally have little success. Whodat, That would require an offensive coordinator that actually savvy enough to realize that you can in fact game plan your offense. Someone who actually understands that misdirection/play action can cause enough indecision in the defense so that the talent can make a play. Do we have such a guy? After three years I seriously have my doubts. SFIAH

09-17-2004, 03:25 PM	#8
CheramieIII Fan Since 1967 Join Date: May 2004 Location: Nomad Posts: 7,480 Blog Entries: 3	why is nobody addressing the non-usage of McCallister? Believe what you want too, but we did have a game plan for this game and either Haslett\'s plan was to feature our lightning fast receivers, who drops alot of balls or run Deuce alot, but after about three plays Haz figured out that Deuce was going to be killed and laid off of the second option, at which point we had not game plan at all. :smile_bounce: :smile_bounce: :smile_bounce: :smile_bounce: :smile_bounce: :smile_bounce: :smile_bounce: :smile_bounce: :smile_bounce: :smile_bounce: :smile_bounce: :smile_bounce: :smile_bounce: :smile_bounce: :smile_bounce: