Danno

I think I know what Haslet's plan may be. He seems to be surrounding himself with older, very experienced assistants. Pease, Roland, and now rumors of Trestman.
Maybe he knows he's missing something that these hugely experienced coaches have. An intuition maybe about things that he can't put his finger on. He knows he knows the X's and O's, but something just isn't there.
I don't think its a coincidence our defense started to look much better as rumors of He and/or Pease were either calling the shots or at the least providing much more input.
He's hiring sounding boards. Bouncing things off of them. And its less likely one of these guys is a threat to his job.
I may be totally wrong but who knows? It would be interesting to see him hire Trestman for the OC, then maybe suddenly hire another seasoned DC. Standing on the shoulders of giants perhaps?

SaintFanInATLHELL

Absolutely nothing wrong with that. One of the signs of a good executive is knowing when to ask help from his/her people.

But the most glaring mistake on the coaching staff still hasn\'t been addressed: Venturi. He needs to be retired, or at least moved out of the DC position.

SFIAH

Saint_LB

Yep, like how to coach, when to make changes, who to keep, who to get rid of.....little things like that!

Danno

Judging by the last 4 games, maybe he already has. Haz and/or Pease was rumored to have taken over, or at least provided more input. Hopefully if Venturi stays as DC its in name only. I think they may have a plan to enter 2005 with a 3-headed DC.
This is where Loomis should step in and take charge. Bring in a DC!

WD52

I think they should promote Venturi into a non coaching position. He is a good judge of talent, plus if you want to bring in good coaches, you have to be a little more commited to your staff than just canning them cause maybe there not in the best role with the team. Rick is playing out of position. We need a good defensive motivater, rick is not that!!!

GumboBC

Haslett was hired mainly due to his experience on the \"defensive\" side of the ball. Haslett had no experience running an offense. But, not too many coaches can say they are experts on both sides of the ball....

Due to the fact that most coaches don\'t have the knowledge of being able to run an offense and a defense, there\'s a premium placed on coordinators.

While McCarthy has been around some of the best offensive minds in the game, he had no experience as an NFL offesnsive coordinator. To me, that\'s a risky move.

I\'d rather have hired someone who had experience once the real bullets started flying. Someone who has that experience in trenches.

As opposed to someone who is training on the job. Which is basically what McCarthy was doing. Unitl someone has that experience, they are learning.

All in all, I think McCarthy did Okay. I also think McCarthy will be a better coordinator because of the experience he gained in New Orleans.

I think Danno is right. I think Haslett wants folks around him who have been there and done that. Folks who have proven themselves in the league.

I think Haslett is on the right track. Don\'t forget, Haslett had no experience being an NFL head coach himself. I\'ve heard many NFL head coaches say they were better coaches their second go-around.

Maybe Haslett has learned a valueable lesson. Maybe Benson\'s decision to keep Haslett will pay off?

Head coaches (Haslett) should let the offensive and defensive coordinators do their thing on game day, but they need to be knowledgeable enough on both sides of the ball so they can step in when things are shaky.

Head coaches need to have their finger on the pulse of the team and make adjustments on the fly.

My 2 cents.









[Edited on 28/1/2005 by GumboBC]

Tobias-Reiper

... it may be it is rumored that Haslett/Pease had more input on the defense, but what if they didn\'t?
... maybe the rumor came about because people don\'t believe that Venturi could make changes to improve the defense...
...maybe it was that Haslett that was impeding Venturi\'s play calling and fiinally let Venturi loose...
...maybe it was the new blood (McKenzie, Fahkir as a starter, Colby, Courtney, return of Whitehead)... maybe it was that the last 4 games of the season were against bad teams (Cowboys, Bucs), a team that played not the get injured (Falcons), and a team with a myrad of injuries (Panthers)... maybe is a combination of all...

...however people want to rationalize ikeeping Haslett around; I guess the stats were better, and some players showed they can play, but I would prefer to see a proven DC and a proven OC , and no Haslett..

'Cause the simple man pays the thrills, the bills and the pills that kill

saintswhodi

Agreed Tobias. New DC, new OC, no Haslett.

WhoDat

While I\'ve pointed my finger rather harshly at Haslett for years, I must say, for the first time in a while, I like what he\'s doing. That\'s not to say I believe it will work, or that I want him back. What I will say is that if Trestman comes and something is done with Venturi, I will still believes that Haslett has earned a ticket out of town... but maybe I\'ll be willing to delay the train and see how things work out.

Coordinators, IMO, are the key to a HC\'s success. I believe Ron Zook was the major factor in the playoff run in year 1, and it appears that Haslett MAY be surrounding himself with, as Danno said, some seasoned and respected coaching talent. Of course, this is a two way street... again. Good players, good coaches = no excuses.... for the 7000th time.

[Edited on 29/1/2005 by WhoDat]

\"Excuses, excuses, excuses. That’s all anyone ever makes for the New Orleans Saints’ 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.\"

papz

Not only Ron Zook, but also John Bunting. When we were using the co-defensive coordinator concept, we had a lot of success. Then both leave us and we got stuck with Venturi.