|
this is a discussion within the Saints Community Forum; McKenzie - very good CB, should be good in 2005. Brown - good CB, should be even better in 2005. Reaching his prime. Craft - decent, should be better in 2005 two years removed from ACL tear. Thomas - aging ...
|
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
02-24-2005, 02:22 PM | #21 |
Truth Addict
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Spanish Fort, AL (via NO and B/R)
Posts: 24,723
|
Secondary Okay heading into next season?
McKenzie - very good CB, should be good in 2005.
Brown - good CB, should be even better in 2005. Reaching his prime. Craft - decent, should be better in 2005 two years removed from ACL tear. Thomas - aging fast, becoming injury prone. A shadow of former self Ambrose - A shadow of his former shadow of former self. Craver - Won\'t make final roster The rest are street free agent fill ins Jones - decent, but hugely overpaid Bellamy - A decent SS. At worst an excellent back-up. Mitchell - A promising kid who should be better in 2005 two years after ACL tear. Gleason - Special teams stand-out who wouldn\'t start at FS/SS for any team in the league. We need another young prospect at CB and S, and a quality starter at either SS or FS via free-agency. www.myownfrickinopinion.com |
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 |
02-24-2005, 02:38 PM | #22 |
1000 Posts +
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 2,423
|
Secondary Okay heading into next season?
Danno, you really think that Bellamy, Mitchell, and T-buck aren\'t serviceable if we improve our LBs? I\'m honestly just asking.
I agree that we\'re going to need a CB or a Safety for depth. I also agree that a playmaker at Safety would be nice, but right now I\'m sort of of the view that that would be a luxury (wow, that sentence sucked). It just seems to me that the defense would improve the quickest if we changed our MLB or SLB to a stud. After that, I am currently of the view that another LB is more of a priority than a Safety or Corner; but, I\'m open to argument here. |
"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks
|
|
02-24-2005, 02:47 PM | #23 |
500th Post
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 690
|
Secondary Okay heading into next season?
Wow == agreeing with and getting agreement from Gumbo and Jkool all in the same day -- I\'m playing the lottery tonight. Actually JKool I have to agree with you -- a solid linebacking core will make our DBs play better by allowing our CBs and safeties to actually play their own position -- and who knows they may be a lot better at it than we think -- Haz and Venturi constantly think we are fine at that position so its possible they have the skills. But its tough to cover someone when you are also supposed to be watching for the run. Not sure if I am making this up but I seem to remember a scary stat -- our cornerbacks and safeties made more tackles than the linebackers --
|
\"I have a photographic memory -- I just don\'t have any film.\"
|
|
02-24-2005, 02:51 PM | #24 |
Banned
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,616
|
Secondary Okay heading into next season?
When I look at NEEDS on defense, I look at it like this: Which is the weakest area? 1. Stopping the run. 2. Stopping the pass. I say it\'s stopping the run. I think LB is the biggest impact to addressing that situation. Also, another one of our big weaknesses was our LBs inability to cover the middle of the field. And covering tightends. There\'s no question in my mind that LB is the right choice. Of note, we need another safety that is a difference maker, but we\'re not terribly weak back there. However, the Ravens\' Ed Reed has shown how much of an impact a great safety can make. Maybe he benefits from playing with Ray Lewis and that great front 7, though? |
02-24-2005, 02:56 PM | #25 |
500th Post
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Vancouver, B.C.
Posts: 596
|
Secondary Okay heading into next season?
I\'d like to second Gumbos comment on the LB. As for covering tight ends just look what Gates did in that SD game. Enough said.
|
02-24-2005, 03:03 PM | #26 |
1000 Posts +
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 2,423
|
Secondary Okay heading into next season?
With this number of us agreeing, I\'m starting to worry that we\'re wrong...
|
02-24-2005, 03:03 PM | #27 |
500th Post
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 690
|
Secondary Okay heading into next season?
Seems like most agree that a stud linebacker is our biggest need with a stud safety being second. That is certainly my opinion
|
02-24-2005, 03:06 PM | #28 |
1000 Posts +
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 2,423
|
Secondary Okay heading into next season?
SFN, welcome aboard!
Billy we agree. I was wondering what Danno thought, since he is a good roster guy. I thought he might have some insight on Mitchell\'s status/ability to take the starting job. I really think we\'re passable at DB in general. We have solid outside rushers - the a complete package in the middle LB spot and a solid run-stuffer at DT, I think our secondary will be just fine. Also, Ed Reed has had me rethinking my view of the Safety position. |
02-24-2005, 03:10 PM | #29 |
500th Post
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 690
|
Secondary Okay heading into next season?
JKool -- if I win the lottery I will make sure you and Gumbo get a cut -- or at least invite you to attend the catered luxury box I intend to rent with some of the winnings. If you are from out of town I\'ll even fly you in.
|
02-24-2005, 03:27 PM | #30 |
1000 Posts +
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: Madison, WI
Posts: 2,423
|
Secondary Okay heading into next season?
|