Saints sign Antowain Smith (not 4-1 joke)

spkb25 · 04-01-2005, 07:08 PM

i love the pick up. he can still run and i like it

JKool · 04-01-2005, 09:45 PM

The Gash insurance was to draft a stud FB.

WhoDat · 04-01-2005, 09:49 PM

AS will be on the team. We do need to be more focused on the run, as Billy said. However, IMO, to suggest that our WR corp doesn\'t have talent is questionable. They certainly have not produced like the should have, and that\'s what it all boils down to. However, to say that our receiving corp isn\'t made up of explosive and talented players is kinda crazy to me.

There\'s another issue too. You don\'t win games with a conservative offense and bad defense. There\'s a reason that teams like Minnesota and the Colts and Rams have had explosive offenses. B/c for the most part, their defenses have sucked and they\'ve had to try to outscore people. To say that the Saints should return to a Ricky Williams era ball control offense seems wrong to me b/c our defense isn\'t even a shell of what it was in 2000. I want the Saints to return to their offense of 2002. Balanced, innovative, explosive. If Brooks plays consistently, Deuce stays healthy, Donte steps it up, and the play calling isn\'t easy to predict from my couch - this offense can be top 5-10. Yes, I know that\'s a lot of ifs, but I feel more comfortable believing that the O can move up 5 spots and the defense can move up 10 than suggesting the offense will stay put at 15 but the defense will move up 15 or 20 spots. That\'s just not realistic IMO.

stockman311 · 04-01-2005, 11:14 PM

If A.S. can provide 500 yds rushing, 200 yards receiving, and 4 touchdowns as he did last year this will be an unbelievable signing, mostly due to the fact that we paid him league minimum for a player of his tenure...i.e. he came on the cheap.
Good players on the cheap is what it\'s all about, just ask the Patriots.

Saintuary · 04-01-2005, 11:21 PM

Some holes for Thunder and Plunder to run through and we\'re set.

iceshack149 · 04-02-2005, 12:00 AM

I was actually hoping that the Saints would\'ve picked up Anthony Thomas. I thought that I\'d read a thread here a couple of weeks ago that he might be had for league minimum? He did well in spot duty last year for the Bears and is younger.
Oh well. I\'m with Danno, he\'s a better option than Carter or Smith.

FireVenturi · 04-02-2005, 12:41 AM

I still think Stecker could beat Smith out!!!

mutineer10 · 04-02-2005, 07:00 AM

There\'s another issue too. You don\'t win games with a conservative offense and bad defense.

This troubles me, too. Though I\'ve always liked a ball-control philosophy (must come from being a Tide fan), it\'s true that it simply doesn\'t work without a solid defense. The Ravens and Steelers have gotten by with low-gear offenses the past few years because a stingy defense is always waiting to take over. It\'s gonna be tough for a ball-control offense to play from behind - and if our defense doesn\'t drastically improve, they\'re gonna be doing that ALOT.

Then again, if the offense manages to hold onto the ball, it\'ll keep that abortion of a defense off the field longer!

GumboBC · 04-02-2005, 11:19 AM

Okay, guys .. let\'s keep this in perspective.

I don\'t think Haz wants to run the Carl Smith offense like in the Jim Mora days.

But, I do think Haz wants to take a run first approach.

I know our offense is capable of being a top 5 offense. Aaron, Deuce, Horn and the rest have already proved that. But that was behind a much stronger offensive line in 2002.

But, running the ball more has several advantages. First, if the running game is successful it will eat time off the clock and rest the defense. Second, it will make the opposing defense commit the 8th man to the run and open up the passing game. Third, it will give Mike Sheppard a lot of flexability in the play-calling. Fourth, it will take a lot of pressure off of the offensive line by not having to pass block as much and also the opposing defense won\'t be so willing to blitz.

Nobody said Haz is going to get crazy by being concervative.

mutineer10 · 04-02-2005, 12:11 PM

Nobody\'s flying off the wall here, GumboBC, but what happens when the defense leaves us down 14-0 at the end of the 1st quarter?

I\'m all for controlling the ball, running the clock and keeping the opposing team\'s offense off the field, but the rash of \"3-and-outs\" last season have me a bit worried in regards to our new \"ball-control\" philosophy. The defense aptly proved last season that it can\'t slow the opposition down, so what happens when we fall behind? Odds are we\'ll revert back to the \"throw-and-go\" approach of last season (think early-season vs. 49er\'s and Rams). At some point the defense has to step up and do their job, right?

As WhoDat pointed out, ball-control is far more effective when a stingy defense is waiting on the sideline. Again, what happens when we fall behind?

04-01-2005, 07:08 PM	#11
spkb25 10000 POST CLUB Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Baltimore, MD Posts: 13,101	Saints sign Antowain Smith (not 4-1 joke) i love the pick up. he can still run and i like it

04-01-2005, 09:45 PM	#12
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	Saints sign Antowain Smith (not 4-1 joke) The Gash insurance was to draft a stud FB.

04-01-2005, 09:49 PM	#13
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631	Saints sign Antowain Smith (not 4-1 joke) AS will be on the team. We do need to be more focused on the run, as Billy said. However, IMO, to suggest that our WR corp doesn\'t have talent is questionable. They certainly have not produced like the should have, and that\'s what it all boils down to. However, to say that our receiving corp isn\'t made up of explosive and talented players is kinda crazy to me. There\'s another issue too. You don\'t win games with a conservative offense and bad defense. There\'s a reason that teams like Minnesota and the Colts and Rams have had explosive offenses. B/c for the most part, their defenses have sucked and they\'ve had to try to outscore people. To say that the Saints should return to a Ricky Williams era ball control offense seems wrong to me b/c our defense isn\'t even a shell of what it was in 2000. I want the Saints to return to their offense of 2002. Balanced, innovative, explosive. If Brooks plays consistently, Deuce stays healthy, Donte steps it up, and the play calling isn\'t easy to predict from my couch - this offense can be top 5-10. Yes, I know that\'s a lot of ifs, but I feel more comfortable believing that the O can move up 5 spots and the defense can move up 10 than suggesting the offense will stay put at 15 but the defense will move up 15 or 20 spots. That\'s just not realistic IMO.
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631	\"Excuses, excuses, excuses. ThatÃ¢Â€Â™s all anyone ever makes for the New Orleans SaintsÃ¢Â€Â™ 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.\"

04-01-2005, 11:14 PM	#14
stockman311 1000 Posts + Join Date: Apr 2003 Location: San Diego, CA Posts: 1,137	Saints sign Antowain Smith (not 4-1 joke) If A.S. can provide 500 yds rushing, 200 yards receiving, and 4 touchdowns as he did last year this will be an unbelievable signing, mostly due to the fact that we paid him league minimum for a player of his tenure...i.e. he came on the cheap. Good players on the cheap is what it\'s all about, just ask the Patriots.

04-01-2005, 11:21 PM	#15
Saintuary 100th Post Join Date: Jan 2003 Location: Palm Bay, FL Posts: 198	Saints sign Antowain Smith (not 4-1 joke) Some holes for Thunder and Plunder to run through and we\'re set.

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

04-02-2005, 12:00 AM	#16
iceshack149 1000 Posts + Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: Fairbanks, AK Posts: 4,299 Blog Entries: 1	Saints sign Antowain Smith (not 4-1 joke) I was actually hoping that the Saints would\'ve picked up Anthony Thomas. I thought that I\'d read a thread here a couple of weeks ago that he might be had for league minimum? He did well in spot duty last year for the Bears and is younger. Oh well. I\'m with Danno, he\'s a better option than Carter or Smith.

04-02-2005, 12:41 AM	#17
FireVenturi Cold as Ice! Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Da Big Easy Posts: 2,978	Saints sign Antowain Smith (not 4-1 joke) I still think Stecker could beat Smith out!!!

04-02-2005, 07:00 AM	#18
mutineer10 Site Donor Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Baton Rouge, LA Posts: 1,739	Saints sign Antowain Smith (not 4-1 joke) There\'s another issue too. You don\'t win games with a conservative offense and bad defense. This troubles me, too. Though I\'ve always liked a ball-control philosophy (must come from being a Tide fan), it\'s true that it simply doesn\'t work without a solid defense. The Ravens and Steelers have gotten by with low-gear offenses the past few years because a stingy defense is always waiting to take over. It\'s gonna be tough for a ball-control offense to play from behind - and if our defense doesn\'t drastically improve, they\'re gonna be doing that ALOT. Then again, if the offense manages to hold onto the ball, it\'ll keep that abortion of a defense off the field longer!

04-02-2005, 11:19 AM	#19
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616	Saints sign Antowain Smith (not 4-1 joke) Okay, guys .. let\'s keep this in perspective. I don\'t think Haz wants to run the Carl Smith offense like in the Jim Mora days. But, I do think Haz wants to take a run first approach. I know our offense is capable of being a top 5 offense. Aaron, Deuce, Horn and the rest have already proved that. But that was behind a much stronger offensive line in 2002. But, running the ball more has several advantages. First, if the running game is successful it will eat time off the clock and rest the defense. Second, it will make the opposing defense commit the 8th man to the run and open up the passing game. Third, it will give Mike Sheppard a lot of flexability in the play-calling. Fourth, it will take a lot of pressure off of the offensive line by not having to pass block as much and also the opposing defense won\'t be so willing to blitz. Nobody said Haz is going to get crazy by being concervative.
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616

04-02-2005, 12:11 PM	#20
mutineer10 Site Donor Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Baton Rouge, LA Posts: 1,739	Saints sign Antowain Smith (not 4-1 joke) Nobody\'s flying off the wall here, GumboBC, but what happens when the defense leaves us down 14-0 at the end of the 1st quarter? I\'m all for controlling the ball, running the clock and keeping the opposing team\'s offense off the field, but the rash of \"3-and-outs\" last season have me a bit worried in regards to our new \"ball-control\" philosophy. The defense aptly proved last season that it can\'t slow the opposition down, so what happens when we fall behind? Odds are we\'ll revert back to the \"throw-and-go\" approach of last season (think early-season vs. 49er\'s and Rams). At some point the defense has to step up and do their job, right? As WhoDat pointed out, ball-control is far more effective when a stingy defense is waiting on the sideline. Again, what happens when we fall behind?