mutineer10

If signing Mayberry put us out of the running for Miller, but we needed Miller more, somebody explain to me why in the HECK we signed Mayberry???

4 games at tackle is NOT what we\'ve been looking for. So although Mayberry may be an upgrade over Jacox or Holland, he ain\'t really helping much in the real area of need.

By the way, whatever happened to that Jamar Nesbit guy we picked up last year? He\'s a OG, younger than Mayberry, and so far as I know not injury prone. The depth chart says he started 4 games last season. Wonder why he\'s not getting a look?

I sure hope Mayberry is more impressive than I think he\'ll be...

On a scale of 1 to 10, I\'d give the OG\'s a 7. They were a ho-hum tandem, probably helped by having Bentley between them. At least they didn\'t seem to get penalized as often as Riley or Gandy, but OG\'s rarely draw as many penalties as OT\'s. Our poor rushing ranking (27th, was it?) indicates that all is not well. But at the same time, injuries to Deuce - and constantly playing from behind - had an effect on our rushing rank, too.

[Edited on 6/3/2005 by mutineer10]

GumboBC

Mayberry wasn\'t my first choice, to be sure. But, not only has Mayberry started 4-games at RT ... He\'s started 17-games at LT. Obviously, he\'s got some skills. That\'s over a full season he played at LEFT TACKLE!

Jim Pyne, the new assistant offensive line coach, coached Mayberry in Philly. So, I would think he knows what Mayberry brings to the table?

To be honest, I don\'t know if Mayberry or Fred Miller is the best player at this point in their careers? I don\'t think any of us do.

I\'m just going to have to wait and see. Until then, I guess I\'ll just have to hear from \"some folks\" how much of a mistake it was.

Negativity ... what a wonderfut thing....

mutineer10

Hey, I\'m being as positive as I can. I don\'t have anything against Jermane Mayberry per se, I simply don\'t think OG was the first order of business. If they wanna give him a shot at OT, that\'s fine with me. As I said...

...and I\'m willing to wait and see.

http://www.nfl.com/teams/story/NO/8257733

I dunno if Loomis knows anything about talent or not, but he may have a point. Posters have talked before about Nesbit & Stinchcomb in the \"why aren\'t they on the field yet\" vein. Maybe, having played several positions, Mayberry can serve to mentor those two a bit.

Trying to stay postive ... where\'s my JD???

GumboBC

mutineer10 --

I think you\'re being much more fair about the signing of Mayberry than most. That comment wasn\'t intended for you. They know who they aree..

papz

Trust me I stay positive... I have no problem with us signing this guy. If it makes our team better, and not break us financially, go for it! Not only did he come cheap, if he\'s not run-down, I think he\'ll be a good right tackle. :P

That\'s hard for me to grade Gumbo because if we didn\'t have to abandon the running game every second half, I\'m pretty sure it would have made them look much better. And judging from previous seasons, last season was a fluke. If you say our guard play was horrible, can you really say Holland out performed Jacox, vice versa? Nah I don\'t think you can and you are judging by previous seasons and potential. I agree with you Holland is better, but not by much. Look at Jacox\'s track record... he blocked for Tomlinson and Deuce, two ProBowl running backs. He must be doing something right. They both are very good run blockers.

With ALL factors included.... it went from a 9 to a 6.5. And if you think Mayberry is an improvement over Jacox, we\'ll just find out whether Fred Miller is signed or not. After all, Mayberry\'s natural position is right guard... oh wait, Montrae Holland starts there

[Edited on 6/3/2005 by papz]

Everyone is entitled to be stupid, but some abuse the privilege.

All little common sense goes a long way.

GumboBC

My way of thinking, papz, is IF we could have run the ball with any consistency, we would have stuck with it.

The simple TRUTH of the matter is we couldn\'t run the ball with ANY consistency.

Power running teams, don\'t abandon the run. Not when it\'s working.

It\'s true we got away from the running the football is SOME games. But I posted the stats when we DIDN\'T get away from running the football and we sucked.

I don\'t know whose fault it was. I do know I saw defenders crashing into our backfield on a pretty consistent basis.

I can\'t count the times I saw Decue take the handoff and get met in the backfield by a defender.

[Edited on 6/3/2005 by GumboBC]

saintswhodi

I saw those too, and those defenders were LBs, cause those are called blitzes, some of which failed to audible out of. Not 100% the line\'s fault there, but point made.

GumboBC

Well, according to Joe Horn, McCarthy wouldn\'t let Brooks check from a pass to a run. He said McCarthy was scared receiever would run the wrong route or one of the offensive linemen would screw it up. Joe also said Brooks has asked to be allowed to check off from a run to a pass or a pass to a run this year.

And, yeah, some of that pressure was coming from linebackers. But many times it was just a defensive lineman.

I expected our offensive line to be good this past year. When I saw how they played in preseaon, with Bouman at QB, I thought there was NO way in hell this group could be that bad. I even posed here that it was only preseaon and I wasn\'t that concerned. Much to my surprise, it carried right into the regular season. Something was badly wrong.

If it\'s one area that HAS to get fixed this offseason, it\'s the offensive line. They played just as bad as the defensvie line, IMHO.

saintswhodi

Like I said, point made. But trying to pass this off as 100% on the line was false. It was LBs more than it was defensive linemen on run downs, and defensive lineman more than LBs on passing downs. Our line DOES need to get better, I agree whole-heartedly. But why is THAT the priority? As you have so often pointed out, our defense was 32nd. No matter how much I feel the O may have a part in that, the D HAS to be improved. HAS TO. IF nothing else, a stuffing DT. Not nothing. Whish is where we are right now. I guess Howard Green played well enough or they believe Sully\'s crap. :casstet:

papz

Everyone has their own idea on how to fix things and that\'s fine. What I\'m trying to point out is that it\'s not entirely the RB\'S fault, Jacox\'s fault (whole line is to blame) , etc... defense, playing calling, lack of IQ :exclam: . Our play calling leading to 3 and outs the entire first half of every game, kind of puts a strain on the running game and defense every game. Same can be made about the defense putting us in the hole early. I think sw made a very good point on how our poor defense made our offense look worse in one of the other threads. Get\'s kind of predictable when teams know we are going to run the ball on first and 2nd down, while they have 8 men in the box, and they can\'t complete a 3rd down pass to save their lives.

Basically I\'ve come to a conclusion about everything... it\'s the coaches fault. I think we can all agree we are never prepared in the first halves of games making our WHOLE team look bad.

I just can\'t stand when some of our talented players get dogged out. Deuce being injured, Jacox being no good, Mitchell having no talent, Stecker playing like garbage etc... I like to see the right people being faulted that\'s all. Maybe I\'m just too loyal. But I don\'t think that\'s a bad thing with so much negativity around.

[Edited on 6/3/2005 by papz]

Everyone is entitled to be stupid, but some abuse the privilege.

All little common sense goes a long way.