This is a fallacy. Each game of the season is a mini episode onto itself. The performance (good or bad) in one game does not readily translate into equal performance in the subsequent game or games?

How many times this season has a team that had been crowned fallen (Seattle, Cinncinatti)? Or a team that has left for dead all of a sudden become a top contender again (Green Bay, New England)?

I went to the Atlanta game the first game of the season. After that game one would have thought that the Lombardi had been graced upon the 'Clowns and that the Saints season was over. It's 5 weeks later and take a look at the standings.

There's a reason most atheletes and coaches stick to the "one game at a time" mantra. An NFL season really isn't a 16 game season over 17 weeks. It's 16 one week seasons, each unique and special.

Here's the simple fact: The Saints win Sunday and the Panther's take another loss (against a very tough opponent on the road) and the Saints will be up 0.5 games in the loss column.

It's not going to be that if we spank the Lions, we will instantly have another LombardiGras. Or if we make mistakes that the season is lost.

However, right at this moment the Lions game is the most important game of the Saints season. Why? Because it's the next game.

SFIAH

There's a lot of truth in what you just said, and I for one agree with this 100%. The issue is this is the 6th game of the season and I haven't been impressed with our play in any of the games, so if the effort we have seen in the first 5 games continues after the bye, then I think I am absolutely correct

Nothing about that is a fallacy

Fallacy may be a bit strong, but I can't help but think if our defense had just made one key stop in each game this season we'd be 5-1.

2 of our 3 losses could have easily, and I mean VERY easily gone the other way and we'd be 5-1 discussing how our defense has dodged some bullets but stepped up when needed.

I don't think we're as bad a team as our record indicates, but we're playing as bad as our record indicates. If that makes sense.

.

I don't think we're as bad a team as our record indicates, but we're playing as bad as our record indicates. If that makes sense.

Fallacy may be a bit strong, but I can't help but think if our defense had just made one key stop in each game this season we'd be 5-1.

2 of our 3 losses could have easily, and I mean VERY easily gone the other way and we'd be 5-1 discussing how our defense has dodged some bullets but stepped up when needed.

I don't think we're as bad a team as our record indicates, but we're playing as bad as our record indicates. If that makes sense.

Had a dream Joe Morgan caught two TD's this week.

this game will be won if we commit to the run. pound on the lions front four make the lb's and db's peak in the back field and then you'll be able to get the ball to open receivers.

Question: When is the last Saints game that you've seen where that formula has actually been used? My memory is a bit hazy...

SFIAH

ha ha this is too funny! watch a saints game really? read my bio. not only am i a fan of the saints but i'm a fan of football. let me educate you (and others) about the concept of football. the teams that were dominant on offense always has and always will be the team that had or (in present day) has premier running back(s). now there is a combination of things such as having a decent qb, decent wr's, coaches etc etc. every position is important but how most historical teams that won superbowls had a good running back and or fullback. fullbacks, yeah some of you all dont even know what a fullback is. you think its a te coming off the line going into the back filed to help block. lol. but back to the topic at hand. name a team historically that was dominant on offense that won a sb and didnt have a running game? even the year the saints won the sb we had a very good run game whether it was coming from screens or draws to r bush. now lets go to modern day times, the dallas cowgirls is 5-1 not because of t nomo but because of d murray. now dont go give me this notion that every team is built differently and every team does this or does that.. every team in the nfl now want this premier qb. every team. name one that so much emphasis isnt placed on qb's and wr's? go ahead i'm waiting.............. thought so none! every sports analyst highlights the qb and wr position. meanwhile the rb position is down played and damn near a thing of the past. i garauntee if the saints start running the ball EFFECTIVELY, because that is the key is how EFFECTIVELY you can run the ball they will win games. if the dallas cowgirls continue to run like they're doing, they're going to the super bowl and i'll put a bet on that and i dont gamble!

I think you missed my point. I'm not arguing one way or the other if running the football is the path to success. I too believe that the Saints would benefit from both running the ball more and more effectively.

My point is you have an offensive brain trust in Payton, Carmichael, and Brees that's been in place for 8 seasons now. The offense is etched in granite. It's an offense that from 2006 on has piloted the team to winning, elite, and championship level football.

My point is that wishing for a fundamental change isn't going to make it happen. At this point it would literally take flushing out the entire organization to effect such a fundamental change.

Currently what the Saints do well is run the ball effectively. They are #2 in the NFL at 5.2 YPA.

Also we always have this discussion as if the Saints do not run the ball at all. Or that each and every pass isn't a screen or a long handoff. It isn't really like the Cowboys are having 55 rushes per game and the Saints have 3. The actual numbers up until now is 33 attempts vs. 25 attempts.

So will 8 more rushes per game really make the Saints offense the absolute unbeatable juggernaut that will only end at the Lombardi Trophy?

Now I will admit that sometimes Brees and Payton get a bit pass happy. 57 pass attempts in any game is way way too much.

But the perceived lack of rushing really isn't the problem for the offense. The real problems are failure to convert red zone opportunities into TDs and turnovers.

Fix those two, along with the defense getting a stop or turnover a bit more often, and you'll see more of the rushing attack because the team will be executing that rushing attack in the 8 minute drill in the 4th quarter of games.

BTW, I see what you did. You didn't answer my question...

SFIAH