Chase Daniel...

burningmetal · 08-24-2017, 12:21 AM

Originally Posted by Tobias-Reiper

I would argue, compared to today's Saints o-line, Brooks had a superb o-line back then, arguably the best o-line in Saints history: Roaf, Neole, Fontent, Williams, Turley. All of them 16 game starting veterans. The Saints were ranked #8 in rushing in 2000.

I would also argue, the Saints had a proven defense back then, ranked #8 in 2000.

So Brooks had a lot to support around him.

You give Brees that team today, the Saints win 3 SB's back to back to back.

Compared to today's offensive line, yes, Brooks had a better one. Compared to O-lines Drew had during a 3 or 4 year run, beginning in '08, when he had Jahri Evans, Carl Nicks, Jonathan Goodwin and Jon Stinchcomb; Drew's line was at least as good, if not better than what Brooks had. Not as strong at tackle, but good enough, and the interior line Drew had was ridiculously good.

But this isn't a comparison of Drew to Aaron Brooks. Clearly Drew is far better, and it isn't a discussion. But you mentioned Drew would have won back to back to back Super Bowls if he had Aaron's O-line and defense... Obviously in order for a team to have a chance without really good QB play, they must have a strong O-line and defense, and that's the point. Heck, we've seen just how good this team is WITH an elite QB, but no defense, haven't we? In order to stay at least competitive without your starter, you MUST have a good defense and a backup QB who is competent enough. But a lot of people would have you believe that without Drew there is no hope, period. People are so used to having Drew that they forgot that not every winning team has had an elite QB.

Though I am not comparing Drew to Aaron, as I said before, I would still like to point this out: If Drew would have won three Super Bowls in a row (as you said) with what Brooks had, then why didn't we win it in 2010, when we had a top ten defense and still had that strong offensive line? That team was better than any of Aaron's teams. It wasn't as good as the '09 or '11 teams, for sure, due to some injuries, but it still stacked up better than what Brooks had. I don't miss Aaron as our starter, but let's cool the hyperbole just a bit.

Seer1 · 08-24-2017, 06:24 AM

Originally Posted by burningmetal

Compared to today's offensive line, yes, Brooks had a better one. Compared to O-lines Drew had during a 3 or 4 year run, beginning in '08, when he had Jahri Evans, Carl Nicks, Jonathan Goodwin and Jon Stinchcomb; Drew's line was at least as good, if not better than what Brooks had. Not as strong at tackle, but good enough, and the interior line Drew had was ridiculously good.

But this isn't a comparison of Drew to Aaron Brooks. Clearly Drew is far better, and it isn't a discussion. But you mentioned Drew would have won back to back to back Super Bowls if he had Aaron's O-line and defense... Obviously in order for a team to have a chance without really good QB play, they must have a strong O-line and defense, and that's the point. Heck, we've seen just how good this team is WITH an elite QB, but no defense, haven't we? In order to stay at least competitive without your starter, you MUST have a good defense and a backup QB who is competent enough. But a lot of people would have you believe that without Drew there is no hope, period. People are so used to having Drew that they forgot that not every winning team has had an elite QB.

Though I am not comparing Drew to Aaron, as I said before, I would still like to point this out: If Drew would have won three Super Bowls in a row (as you said) with what Brooks had, then why didn't we win it in 2010, when we had a top ten defense and still had that strong offensive line? That team was better than any of Aaron's teams. It wasn't as good as the '09 or '11 teams, for sure, due to some injuries, but it still stacked up better than what Brooks had. I don't miss Aaron as our starter, but let's cool the hyperbole just a bit.

Wasn't '10 our year without a running back?

burningmetal · 08-24-2017, 07:15 AM

Originally Posted by Seer1

Wasn't '10 our year without a running back?

We went through a lot of running backs that year, yeah. But we still had that offensive line and were able to run well enough, most of the time. In keeping with the theme of the 2000 season, we lost Ricky Williams for the last 6 games of the regular season that year, and STILL made it with a backup QB. We also won that first playoff game without him.

No excuses for the 2010 team to go in and lose to a 7-9 team in the first round.

spkb25 · 08-24-2017, 05:06 PM

Originally Posted by Seer1

Wasn't '10 our year without a running back?

OMG YES...EVERYONE WAS HURT. That was how we lost to Seattle who went into the playoffs with 7 wins

Tobias-Reiper · 08-24-2017, 12:11 PM

Originally Posted by burningmetal

Compared to today's offensive line, yes, Brooks had a better one. Compared to O-lines Drew had during a 3 or 4 year run, beginning in '08, when he had Jahri Evans, Carl Nicks, Jonathan Goodwin and Jon Stinchcomb; Drew's line was at least as good, if not better than what Brooks had. Not as strong at tackle, but good enough, and the interior line Drew had was ridiculously good.

"Not as strong at tackle"? Not even close. And Fontenot was a better center than Goodwin. Drew had better guards, but that is not a wash. That o-line was the best o-line in Saints history. If you want to debate o-lines, that's another thread.

But this isn't a comparison of Drew to Aaron Brooks.

Ok? Who's comparing them?

But you mentioned Drew would have won back to back to back Super Bowls if he had Aaron's O-line and defense... Obviously in order for a team to have a chance without really good QB play, they must have a strong O-line and defense, and that's the point. Heck, we've seen just how good this team is WITH an elite QB, but no defense, haven't we? In order to stay at least competitive without your starter, you MUST have a good defense and a backup QB who is competent enough. But a lot of people would have you believe that without Drew there is no hope, period. People are so used to having Drew that they forgot that not every winning team has had an elite QB.

At this point, I have no idea what your actual point is, but if all of that was meant as a counterpoint to my statement that Drew would've won more SB's had he had that team, are you going to debate that a Drew Brees with an 8th ranked defense would not have taken the Saints to multiple SB's?

I know hope is the last thing to die, but if Drew goes down, people are going to quickly find out how not-so-good many players are in offense.

burningmetal · 08-24-2017, 04:49 PM

Originally Posted by Tobias-Reiper

"Not as strong at tackle"? Not even close. And Fontenot was a better center than Goodwin. Drew had better guards, but that is not a wash. That o-line was the best o-line in Saints history. If you want to debate o-lines, that's another thread.

Ok? Who's comparing them?

At this point, I have no idea what your actual point is, but if all of that was meant as a counterpoint to my statement that Drew would've won more SB's had he had that team, are you going to debate that a Drew Brees with an 8th ranked defense would not have taken the Saints to multiple SB's?

I know hope is the last thing to die, but if Drew goes down, people are going to quickly find out how not-so-good many players are in offense.

YOU made the comparison of Drew to Aaron, in a clear sign that the point some of us were discussing had completely escaped you. I simply made a case to counter your statement that Aaron was surrounded with more, and that Drew would have won "back to back to back" SB's.

Drew HAD a top ten defense in 2010, as I just pointed out. How'd that end? We had the 4th ranked defense is Rob Ryan's first year here. How'd that go? Nobody is saying Aaron was a better QB than Drew Brees. You're the only person I see in here who would even make that out to be part of the conversation. But your opinion that Aaron had more to work with doesn't hold much water, in MY opinion.

As for your offensive line comparison; what evidence do you have that Fontenot was better than Goodwin? Because you said so? At best they were about the same, but having watched both of them play, Goodwin appeared more athletic and able to cover more ground. But, I will just call that a wash. Naeole was good, not great. Evans and Nicks were THE two best guards in the entire league when they were here together. Wally Williams, with all due respect to him, just wasn't anywhere near their class.

At tackle, Drew had Jon Stinchcomb, who developed into a pro bowl right tackle, and while he wasn't as good as Turley, he was not a big drop off during his prime years. The only obvious drop off was at left tackle. Drew didn't have anyone like Willie Roaf, but when you look at the totality of what he had at O-line, I think it was easily as good, if not better, than that line of the early 2000's.

We know Drew makes some players look better than they are. But it's been proven if you build your team correctly, you don't HAVE to have an elite QB. So for all the defeatists who don't care about the backup QB, because they think no Drew is "give up" time, I would just like for them to think about these things before they poo poo on everyone who takes a legitimate interest in who our backup will be. Needless to say, we'd all much rather have Drew in the equation.

jeanpierre · 08-23-2017, 10:16 PM

If it's working, don't mess with it - as Daniels is not an heir apparent, I'd stayed with Cool Hand Luke...

If not for a couple of dropped passes, McCown played a superb game to beat Carolina in their house...

The Dude · 08-23-2017, 10:17 PM

McGowin

Beastmode · 08-23-2017, 10:58 PM

Should have never given Brooks the keys. Blake was what got us there. I'm still upset about that but meh...he did get red hot from time to time but not nearly enough to be a starter. We can win with Chase but the game plan has to change. Deeper passes and give him some runs.

spkb25 · 08-23-2017, 11:55 PM

AT the end of the day we are screwed because Chase is our backup. Never been a fan of his. There is a kid in Atlanta who looks pretty good, Simms. But we need a better backup than we have on the roster

08-24-2017, 12:21 AM	#1
burningmetal 1000 Posts + Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 3,923 Blog Entries: 3	Re: Chase Daniel... Originally Posted by Tobias-Reiper I would argue, compared to today's Saints o-line, Brooks had a superb o-line back then, arguably the best o-line in Saints history: Roaf, Neole, Fontent, Williams, Turley. All of them 16 game starting veterans. The Saints were ranked #8 in rushing in 2000. I would also argue, the Saints had a proven defense back then, ranked #8 in 2000. So Brooks had a lot to support around him. You give Brees that team today, the Saints win 3 SB's back to back to back. Compared to today's offensive line, yes, Brooks had a better one. Compared to O-lines Drew had during a 3 or 4 year run, beginning in '08, when he had Jahri Evans, Carl Nicks, Jonathan Goodwin and Jon Stinchcomb; Drew's line was at least as good, if not better than what Brooks had. Not as strong at tackle, but good enough, and the interior line Drew had was ridiculously good. But this isn't a comparison of Drew to Aaron Brooks. Clearly Drew is far better, and it isn't a discussion. But you mentioned Drew would have won back to back to back Super Bowls if he had Aaron's O-line and defense... Obviously in order for a team to have a chance without really good QB play, they must have a strong O-line and defense, and that's the point. Heck, we've seen just how good this team is WITH an elite QB, but no defense, haven't we? In order to stay at least competitive without your starter, you MUST have a good defense and a backup QB who is competent enough. But a lot of people would have you believe that without Drew there is no hope, period. People are so used to having Drew that they forgot that not every winning team has had an elite QB. Though I am not comparing Drew to Aaron, as I said before, I would still like to point this out: If Drew would have won three Super Bowls in a row (as you said) with what Brooks had, then why didn't we win it in 2010, when we had a top ten defense and still had that strong offensive line? That team was better than any of Aaron's teams. It wasn't as good as the '09 or '11 teams, for sure, due to some injuries, but it still stacked up better than what Brooks had. I don't miss Aaron as our starter, but let's cool the hyperbole just a bit.
	If I had a nickel for every time I heard that, the NFL would fine and suspend me.

08-24-2017, 06:24 AM	#2
Seer1 Site Donor Join Date: Apr 2010 Location: Bayou Bayfield CO Posts: 4,722	Re: Chase Daniel... Originally Posted by burningmetal Compared to today's offensive line, yes, Brooks had a better one. Compared to O-lines Drew had during a 3 or 4 year run, beginning in '08, when he had Jahri Evans, Carl Nicks, Jonathan Goodwin and Jon Stinchcomb; Drew's line was at least as good, if not better than what Brooks had. Not as strong at tackle, but good enough, and the interior line Drew had was ridiculously good. But this isn't a comparison of Drew to Aaron Brooks. Clearly Drew is far better, and it isn't a discussion. But you mentioned Drew would have won back to back to back Super Bowls if he had Aaron's O-line and defense... Obviously in order for a team to have a chance without really good QB play, they must have a strong O-line and defense, and that's the point. Heck, we've seen just how good this team is WITH an elite QB, but no defense, haven't we? In order to stay at least competitive without your starter, you MUST have a good defense and a backup QB who is competent enough. But a lot of people would have you believe that without Drew there is no hope, period. People are so used to having Drew that they forgot that not every winning team has had an elite QB. Though I am not comparing Drew to Aaron, as I said before, I would still like to point this out: If Drew would have won three Super Bowls in a row (as you said) with what Brooks had, then why didn't we win it in 2010, when we had a top ten defense and still had that strong offensive line? That team was better than any of Aaron's teams. It wasn't as good as the '09 or '11 teams, for sure, due to some injuries, but it still stacked up better than what Brooks had. I don't miss Aaron as our starter, but let's cool the hyperbole just a bit. Wasn't '10 our year without a running back?

08-24-2017, 07:15 AM	#3
burningmetal 1000 Posts + Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 3,923 Blog Entries: 3	Re: Chase Daniel... Originally Posted by Seer1 Wasn't '10 our year without a running back? We went through a lot of running backs that year, yeah. But we still had that offensive line and were able to run well enough, most of the time. In keeping with the theme of the 2000 season, we lost Ricky Williams for the last 6 games of the regular season that year, and STILL made it with a backup QB. We also won that first playoff game without him. No excuses for the 2010 team to go in and lose to a 7-9 team in the first round. Barry from MS likes this.

08-24-2017, 05:06 PM	#4
spkb25 10000 POST CLUB Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Baltimore, MD Posts: 13,145	Re: Chase Daniel... Originally Posted by Seer1 Wasn't '10 our year without a running back? OMG YES...EVERYONE WAS HURT. That was how we lost to Seattle who went into the playoffs with 7 wins

08-24-2017, 12:11 PM	#5
Tobias-Reiper Merces Letifer Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 4,161	Re: Chase Daniel... Originally Posted by burningmetal Compared to today's offensive line, yes, Brooks had a better one. Compared to O-lines Drew had during a 3 or 4 year run, beginning in '08, when he had Jahri Evans, Carl Nicks, Jonathan Goodwin and Jon Stinchcomb; Drew's line was at least as good, if not better than what Brooks had. Not as strong at tackle, but good enough, and the interior line Drew had was ridiculously good. "Not as strong at tackle"? Not even close. And Fontenot was a better center than Goodwin. Drew had better guards, but that is not a wash. That o-line was the best o-line in Saints history. If you want to debate o-lines, that's another thread. But this isn't a comparison of Drew to Aaron Brooks. Ok? Who's comparing them? But you mentioned Drew would have won back to back to back Super Bowls if he had Aaron's O-line and defense... Obviously in order for a team to have a chance without really good QB play, they must have a strong O-line and defense, and that's the point. Heck, we've seen just how good this team is WITH an elite QB, but no defense, haven't we? In order to stay at least competitive without your starter, you MUST have a good defense and a backup QB who is competent enough. But a lot of people would have you believe that without Drew there is no hope, period. People are so used to having Drew that they forgot that not every winning team has had an elite QB. At this point, I have no idea what your actual point is, but if all of that was meant as a counterpoint to my statement that Drew would've won more SB's had he had that team, are you going to debate that a Drew Brees with an 8th ranked defense would not have taken the Saints to multiple SB's? I know hope is the last thing to die, but if Drew goes down, people are going to quickly find out how not-so-good many players are in offense.
	'Cause the simple man pays the thrills, the bills and the pills that kill

08-24-2017, 04:49 PM	#6
burningmetal 1000 Posts + Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 3,923 Blog Entries: 3	Re: Chase Daniel... Originally Posted by Tobias-Reiper "Not as strong at tackle"? Not even close. And Fontenot was a better center than Goodwin. Drew had better guards, but that is not a wash. That o-line was the best o-line in Saints history. If you want to debate o-lines, that's another thread. Ok? Who's comparing them? At this point, I have no idea what your actual point is, but if all of that was meant as a counterpoint to my statement that Drew would've won more SB's had he had that team, are you going to debate that a Drew Brees with an 8th ranked defense would not have taken the Saints to multiple SB's? I know hope is the last thing to die, but if Drew goes down, people are going to quickly find out how not-so-good many players are in offense. YOU made the comparison of Drew to Aaron, in a clear sign that the point some of us were discussing had completely escaped you. I simply made a case to counter your statement that Aaron was surrounded with more, and that Drew would have won "back to back to back" SB's. Drew HAD a top ten defense in 2010, as I just pointed out. How'd that end? We had the 4th ranked defense is Rob Ryan's first year here. How'd that go? Nobody is saying Aaron was a better QB than Drew Brees. You're the only person I see in here who would even make that out to be part of the conversation. But your opinion that Aaron had more to work with doesn't hold much water, in MY opinion. As for your offensive line comparison; what evidence do you have that Fontenot was better than Goodwin? Because you said so? At best they were about the same, but having watched both of them play, Goodwin appeared more athletic and able to cover more ground. But, I will just call that a wash. Naeole was good, not great. Evans and Nicks were THE two best guards in the entire league when they were here together. Wally Williams, with all due respect to him, just wasn't anywhere near their class. At tackle, Drew had Jon Stinchcomb, who developed into a pro bowl right tackle, and while he wasn't as good as Turley, he was not a big drop off during his prime years. The only obvious drop off was at left tackle. Drew didn't have anyone like Willie Roaf, but when you look at the totality of what he had at O-line, I think it was easily as good, if not better, than that line of the early 2000's. We know Drew makes some players look better than they are. But it's been proven if you build your team correctly, you don't HAVE to have an elite QB. So for all the defeatists who don't care about the backup QB, because they think no Drew is "give up" time, I would just like for them to think about these things before they poo poo on everyone who takes a legitimate interest in who our backup will be. Needless to say, we'd all much rather have Drew in the equation.
	If I had a nickel for every time I heard that, the NFL would fine and suspend me.

08-23-2017, 10:16 PM	#7
jeanpierre Site Donor 2018 Join Date: Mar 2008 Location: Thibodaux Posts: 43,543 Blog Entries: 39	Re: Chase Daniel... If it's working, don't mess with it - as Daniels is not an heir apparent, I'd stayed with Cool Hand Luke... If not for a couple of dropped passes, McCown played a superb game to beat Carolina in their house...

08-23-2017, 10:17 PM	#8
The Dude 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Jul 2011 Posts: 9,066	Re: Chase Daniel... McGowin
The Dude 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Jul 2011 Posts: 9,066

08-23-2017, 10:58 PM	#9
Beastmode 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 9,126	Re: Chase Daniel... Should have never given Brooks the keys. Blake was what got us there. I'm still upset about that but meh...he did get red hot from time to time but not nearly enough to be a starter. We can win with Chase but the game plan has to change. Deeper passes and give him some runs.
Beastmode 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Jul 2010 Posts: 9,126

08-23-2017, 11:55 PM	#10
spkb25 10000 POST CLUB Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Baltimore, MD Posts: 13,145	Re: Chase Daniel... AT the end of the day we are screwed because Chase is our backup. Never been a fan of his. There is a kid in Atlanta who looks pretty good, Simms. But we need a better backup than we have on the roster SaintGnome likes this.

LinkBacks (?) LinkBack to this Thread: https://blackandgold.com/saints/83937-chase-daniel.html
Posted By	For	Type	Date	Hits
The Latest New Orleans Saints News \| SportSpyder	This thread	Refback	08-21-2017 07:31 PM	9
Chase Daniel...	This thread	Refback	08-21-2017 06:46 PM	1