2005: The Hopeful Realist
 

With the draft just around the corner, posting on BnG seems to be at a fevered pitch - but I find myself highly uninterested in most of the draft speculation. I recently asked myself, why?

Maybe I am just the pessimist that some on this board enjoy coloring me to be. After all, I don't expect this team to make the right choices in the draft. They haven't in the past. What's to make them start now?

This got me to thinking about the old Pessimism v. Optimism debate that has raged on this board. Does expecting the Saints not to succeed mean you're a pessimist? Afterall, they haven't succeeded, and expecting them not to doesn't mean that I don't want them to. That's something right?

So I consulted the dictionary, and found what I was looking for.

Optimism is "a tendency to expect the best possible outcome or dwell on the most hopeful aspects of a situation, an inclination to put the most favorable construction upon actions and events or to anticipate the best possible outcome." There are some of those here, no doubt. I am not one of them. So what am I?


A hopeful realist.


A realist is "a person who accepts the world as it literally is and deals with it accordingly." While Billy and Saintfan will no doubt jump on me for this, I think I am closer to this than anything else. That my track record in predicting results and future strengths and weaknesses has bee fairly good, as far as predictions for the Saints go, makes me think I'm on to something.

So what is a hopeful realist?

To me, it's a person who believes that the Saints can have it all go their way. A person who is hopeful (i.e. desires that result) that the Saints will win it all. However, a hopeful realist is one who isn't going to construe things as positively as possible. Nor as negatively as possible either, despite what some might say.

This team is talented. If some of the young players can step it up, the team can be a good one. Then again the reality of situation is that these same players and coaches have had ample time in the past to do just that (step up), and haven't. Why think they will this year? Hope for it sure - but is there reason to think that they will? I haven't seen any.


So looking at the 2005 season, just before draft day, what do I see? I expect an 8-8 or 9-7 year, and I will continue to expect that until the team proves me wrong. What do I hope for? I hope that things can go the Saints' way, that players can play up and coaches can coach better, and we can end up 11-5 and in the playoffs. But then, that's just one Hopeful Realist's view. ;)

2005: The Hopeful Realist
 

there\'s a lot of grease in that one wd-40.............
i\'d have to label you as a faithful realist..........smitty

2005: The Hopeful Realist
 

\"Hopeful Realist\" - I kinda like that. Think I\'ll join your ranks...

LOL! Given that so many of us post on a Saints board, I don\'t think there\'s any lack of \"faith\" here. We\'re all either very faithful or incredibly pathetic.;)

The term \"masochist\" also comes to mind...

[Edited on 19/4/2005 by mutineer10]

2005: The Hopeful Realist
 

WhoDat --

Hey, buddy ....

I don\'t think you put a lot of thought in that post.

One statement really showed your true feelings:

Here is that statement:


There\'s nothing \"realist\" in that statement. Or maybe you just didn\'t think about it before you typed it. But, I believe that\'s exactly how you feel.

Basically what I take from that statement is this:

No matter who the Saints sign or no matter what happens, you will NOT be optimistic (still think we\'ll be 8-8 or 9-7) until they prove otherwise.

That\'s far from being a \"realist\".

A better term for you would be:

CLOSE MINDED!!

No, that is incorrect.

I think you are more of a fan who is just turned off by this particular Saints\' administraion.

But you are far from a realist.

Now, I\'m sure you want to talk about how much of an optimist I am. But think about what I said.

I am more of an optimist. LOL

2005: The Hopeful Realist
 

sigh.... head shake. One day you\'ll learn.


Reasons to expect more of the same:
- 2 significant signings in FA, only one of which MIGHT be at a top 5 position of need.

- 1 new starter on the 32nd ranked defense.

- 20 starters returning without much change other than another year gone by.

- Same HC, same DC, and a new OC who has produced one of the most inconsistent QBs in football.

- 0 players signed who will directly affect the run defense - but we will lose one in Darren Howard.

- A new less explosive offense being put into place (which is a great idea when the only way you can win is by out-scoring people).

- 4 straight years of this type of action having produced the same results.



The fact that you\'re the one to suggest I didn\'t think this through only proves my point. To you, to EXPECT the Saints to get better is average. To EXPECT them to be great is optimistic. To expect them to be stagnant is pessimistic. And to expect them to get worse means you\'re a Falcon\'s fan. Well, I\'ve got news for you. The rest of the world HOPES that the Saints will get better, and doesn\'t expect much more out of them than what they\'ve given us for the last 4 years. That your hope that the team will get better, which cannot be founded on much else, especially this offseason, only proves that when it comes to being a realist, you\'re great at being blindly optimistic.

[Edited on 20/4/2005 by WhoDat]

2005: The Hopeful Realist
 

I like it WhoDat, can I join? I would like to go from \"hopeful realist\" to \"ecstatic believer.\" The only problem is that the team will have to do their part, and in the past that has always been the problem.

2005: The Hopeful Realist
 

I like your post -- a hopeful realist -- I always believed that is where I fit in. Another way to put it is \"A Saints fan\". There is no logic behind believing in them -- history is on the side of 8-8, 9-7. To put it another way -- Vegas has over/unders in how many wins the Saints will log this year -- I don\'t think they are out yet but I would guess the over under will be 8 or 8.5. How is that for realism. Now do I want AB to have a pro bowl year, do I want the Saints to go 12-4 and make it to the SuperBowl -- of course -- but why set expectations so high -- I will cheer for the Saints no matter what -- I will enjoy the games no matter what -- thinking they will go 9-7 makes me no less of a fan than one who thinks they will go 16-0

2005: The Hopeful Realist
 

well said also whodat.

i am hopeful to no end. i have 38 years to show it.

but faith is a different matter than hope. some here do have faith that you and i may not. webster\'s says of faith: firm belief in something for which there is no proof, and, something that is believed especially with strong conviction.

the management by this front office, the coaching on the field, and the performance of many of the players over the past several years has not engendered such belief in me. the moves by the vikes front office this winter is something that can ignite belief whether coming to fruition or not. jeff fisher\'s coaching, no matter what he has to work, with brings expectation of success. faith is powerful but it also fragile and fluid. betrayed faith can wreck one\'s ability to believe at all. i too need to be convinced of there being more substance to this team before i have faith of 12-4 superbowl runs. it could still happen though and i hope it does! fortunately, my faith in this team will not make them win more. but their winning to a new level will increase my faith.

2005: The Hopeful Realist
 

Don\'t let Danno in this thread, you will all be labeled pessimists, cause there is nothing \"realist\" about you apparently unless you blindly predict 12-4 and a deep playoff run. ;)

2005: The Hopeful Realist
 

LOL.
Actually there wasn\'t anything in his post I found pessimistic. Sounded pretty realistic to me.
You\'re confusing criticism with pessimism. They are two totally different things. I\'ve been highly critical of many things. Just not pessimistic. Pessimism is a sure sign of a loser.

2005: The Hopeful Realist
 

So basically, if you do it it\'s criticism, but if someone else does it it\'s pessimism? Yet another double standard? You\'re killing me Danno. ;)

2005: The Hopeful Realist
 

WEbster\'s New World Dictionary says:

Pessimism: The tendencay to always expect the worst.

Honestly whodat, I mean no offense here, but don\'t you qualify? Regardless of who gets drafted or past performance etc, don\'t you always expect the worst. You may hope for the best -- we all do -- but you expect the worst, right?

2005: The Hopeful Realist
 

Whodi, I know you know the difference between criticism and pessimism but I\'ll play along and give you a basic example.

Saints sign a quality free agent...

Critics reply. \"He\'s a decent player. He\'s a great pass rusher but only so-so against the run. He may improve but he still doesn\'t help our run defense much.\".

Pessimist reply: \"He sucks. Everyone we sign sucks so why is this guy different? This front office has no clue about anything. Saints screw up again. More of the same crap.\"

2005: The Hopeful Realist
 

Again, what does this have to do with Saints Football? Someone please explain that to me.

2005: The Hopeful Realist
 

my sentiment will be much the same as whodat i believe...

No, not expect the worst, 0-16.

Yes, expect about the same, 32-32.

To replace one player on the absolutely worst defense in the league, maybe add one impacting replacement player via the draft... is that gonna makeover the defense to championship caliber? say, go from 32nd to 24th, optimistic but possible... you look up and find the last superbowl winner with a 24th or lower ranked defense. nudge into the playoffs and do nothing? could happen and be no surprise. it seems that will be plenty enough for many fans. not me.

2005: The Hopeful Realist
 

LMAO!!! That was pretty good Danno, and I very much understand the difference, even before that clever example. But I have yet to see anyone be THAT pessimistic, so I have to label them a critic no? But that was funny stuff.

Anyways, JKool mentioned in the other thread this is not football related, even though this post is about a personal labeling of someone for themselves. So let me go off topic of this thread and ask if you are pumped about the draft being a couple days away. Do you think the Saints plans of trying to use the Eagles and Raiders as smokescreens to drive up the price for Howard is gonna work, or backfire?

2005: The Hopeful Realist
 

Kool, no offense man, but in case you hadn\'t noticed, this thread was never about football to begin with. And we have kept in line with the topic it raises, same as the other thread. The post before this one I tried to bring it back to football just for you my man. ;)

2005: The Hopeful Realist
 

Nice work Whodi.

I\'m really not opposed to these threads when they are going well, but it is the kind of thing that turns sour fast.

I am also very confused as to why people are interested in determining who the optimists and pessimists are? I\'ve never really understood that. And I\'m sure that saying that one is a realist is merely asserting that one takes one\'s views to be more or less correct, and who doesn\'t think that?

Either way, I wasn\'t scolding anyone actually, I was more trying to provide a warning and an attempt to determine whay optimism and pessimism are interesting to us?

PS - I noticed these threads last night, and I told myself I\'d check in on them in the morning. I knew they weren\'t about Football. Though, oddly, sometimes some of the best discussions come about in very odd threads.

2005: The Hopeful Realist
 

right on whodi, this is a football forum isn\'t it?, not a forum about itself. let\'s cut the I AM thoughts and get back to draft picks. Go realize yourself in a philosophy forum.

2005: The Hopeful Realist
 

PS - Whodi, :thumbsup:

2005: The Hopeful Realist
 

As grumpy as I may come across at times, honestly, no, I don\'t always expect the worst. I doubt that you\'ll believe that, but it\'s true.

There are times when I look at the Saints schedule at about this time in preseason (and yes, this happens every year), and I wonder how we will win 4 games. Then there are times that I look at the schedule and think, well if this or that just happens to go our way, we could win 12! But in the end, with this team, I always seem to come back to what I believe to be a more \"realistic\" record given the situation.


And that\'s not to say I\'m always right. I think in the preseason of 2001 it would have been pessimistic after the 2000 season to predict 7-9. I certainly didn\'t. I predicted 11-5. I wasn\'t sure that the team could keep pace after such an incredible year, but with all that talent, and the new \"air\" about the Saints, I thought it was up, up, and away. If you think my view has been particularly less optimistic since then, it has. But I don\'t think that is unfounded.

In other words, there\'s being negative because there\'s good reason to be. Then there\'s being negative simply because you\'re a grumpy bugger. I know which you think I am, but it hasn\'t always been that way. My current outlook is the fault of the team and staff, not my own personal negativity. Compare that to Billy, who will always give you the absolutely most positive shine on things possible. That\'s optimism, not simply a positive outlook on the facts as they actually appear.

It\'s just my opinion. Think I\'m a pessimist if you want. But when the team gives me reason to be positive, I am. I was in 2001. I was hesitant in 2002, but after the first 9 games or so I was talking about the Saints potentially being the team to beat in the NFC. Like I said, I\'m not always right - but I will give credit where due. Right now, the Saints\' \"good faith\" balance is WAY into the red.

2005: The Hopeful Realist
 

People might call me a so called \"pessimist\". Those guys that label probably don\'t realize that a pessimist like me has Aaron Brooks, a player that I loathe for his apathy and gereral idiocy, on the screensaver on my computer, I sleep under a black and gold Saints blanket in my barracks. I have two jerseys(AB and Deuce) that I wear proudly to the Hooters that I have to drive an hour to just to watch the Saints on satellite in upstate NY. I am an avid player of Madden football, and play with the Saints a good 95% of the time(usually win about that same amount).

I do as much as anyone, Saints FO included, to promote the Saints as a legitimate team in the NFL. That doesn\'t mean that we will turn a blind eye to the past whenever the team says that things are different and it\'s a new beginning. Occasionally I, along with many other Saints fans, will rant and complain and moan about things. Yeah it can be repetitive and what not, but it\'s theraputic for people like me to do it here, rather than complain to fans of other teams, who already think we suck. I\'d rather show a happy face to the general public, and complain and moan to my fellow Saints fans.

No one here \"expects the worst\". We just mentally prepare ourselves for the possibility that we might not win the Super Bowl this year. There is a middle ground between optimism and pessimism, and that\'s people like myself.

I would consider myself a \"hopeful realist\". The true pessimists are the ones that have totally tuned out the Saints and don\'t even watch them anymore, convinced that they will never amount to anything. I don\'t see how anyone could call a fan a pessimist.

2005: The Hopeful Realist
 

Good post, GT.

2005: The Hopeful Realist
 

I second that. Seems this hopeful realism has a future at BnG. :)

2005: The Hopeful Realist
 

Sure beats the crap outta that Doubtful Skepticism thats been infecting this place for too long. ;)

2005: The Hopeful Realist
 

I knew how WhoDat was going to respond. Typical!!

WhoDat wants to turn this thread into something other than what he said.

He wants to talk about how \"optimisim\" is just misguided.

But, I want to talk about a statement that WhoDat made and see if he is going to stand behind it.

With all due respect, WhoDat ... You made this statement and you should provide some kind of answer!!??

You\'re going to expect 8-8 or 9-7 no matter what until the team proves me wrong!!

That\'s \"exactly\" what you said.

So, that means it doesn\'t matter who we sign in free-agency or who we draft ... you\'re going to preach an 8-8 season!!

That, sir, is pretty closed-minded.

And it really explains a lot!!

You started this thread to talk about yourself. Don\'t turn it into something about me!!! :cool:

2005: The Hopeful Realist
 

With all due respect Gum, based on other comments by Who, including his statement that we have not adequately addressed needs, the team proving him wrong could be just that, adequately addressing glaring needs. Such as getting a Hartwell at LB or a Samari Rolle at corner something to that nature outside of this middling approach to free agency. I am sure that would be enough for him to change his mind. It\'s not necessarily them attaining a better record, it could just as well be them going all out for a change to make a difference on this team. Getting Smith was good, getting Mayberry to play RT is not gonna receive glowing reviews. Getting Shad Meier, eh. Levar Fisher? We\'re cooking now. I am certain this is what he means, show him a different approach to getting this team over the hump, and he will be proven wrong. His stance has been all along that we would not do much in FA, is he wrong?

[Edited on 20/4/2005 by saintswhodi]

2005: The Hopeful Realist
 

saintwhodi --

I get bogged down in these discussions sometimes and things generally become very confusing.

Let me clear something up real quick, though.

If I were betting ... I would say this team, as it stands right now, is about an 8-8 team. That\'s what the smart money says, IMHO.

Hell, it doesn\'t take a rocket scientist to figure that out!!

But that really doesn\'t have ANYthing to do with what I\'m talking about.

What gets me about some fans is how they DWELL on the negative!!

For those that didn\'t catch what I just said:

SOME FOLKS LOVE TO DWELL ON THE NEGATIVE!!!

One more time:

SOME FOLKS LOVE TO DWELL ON THE NEGATIVE!!!

And what that does is defeat the purpose of debating Saints\' football.

Now ... I\'m only talking about a few select folks. I\'m not going to name names, so not to offend anyone.

But ... as the ol\' sayin\' goes: If the shoe fits ... wear it!!

If someone is getting offended about right now ... then I\'m probably talking about you.

For the record: I don\'t give a flyin\' flip how anyone feels about the Saints.

I\'m going to remain optimistic no matter what.

If we would have finished 1-15 for the past 30-years, I\'m still going to be optimistic that we have improved. That is, unless it is so blantently obvious that we cannont compete.

The fact is that we\'ve got a lot of talent on this team and we are very close to having one hell of a team.

That might not equate to anything more than an 8-8 record.

Hell, I don\'t know what our record is going to be this year.

But ... get this ... no one else does either.

If someone is so damn sure that we\'ll finish 8-8 .. then go to Vegas and bet your house.

Preaching 8-8 or 9-7 over and over and over is very old. Very old!!

Peace



[Edited on 20/4/2005 by GumboBC]

2005: The Hopeful Realist
 

I didn\'t hear anyone preaching 8-8; 9-7 --- The odds are that they are but I agree with you -- they have loads of talent -- on defense too -- I actually, in a thread a while back, have them going 10-6 -- so what -- that is my opinion -- do I want them to go 16-0, 17-0, 18-0, 19-0 sure -- but I do not see the point in posting that either -- I think I am missing something here in this whole thread ---

2005: The Hopeful Realist
 

Well, so is the team underachieving to these records. That\'s been old for about 3 years now. If someone says the past 3 years, the Saints will be 8-8 or worse, and the Saints ARE 8-8 or worse, how does that mean they DWELL on the negative? I am just trying to understand that logic. It\'s not like we have been 10-6 and someone is predicting 8-8. We haven\'t been 9-7 except 4 years ago under this regime. So I just don\'t see why it\'s so terrible for someone to say that\'s how it will be, after we have made hardly any significant changes to alter this team\'s status as a mediocre team. Is all this talent suddenly gonna play above its head? Just wanna understand how predicting the record the team has been for the past 4 years to remain the same without major changes taking place is so wrong.

2005: The Hopeful Realist
 

You\'re not missing anything.

WhoDat hates all the draft talk (and I\'m not into that much,either) and this is a discussion that we\'ve had for the past few years.

We\'re just trying to get our teams picked (moonshiners vs. sunshiners) before the season starts.

We love to say: \"I told ya so.\" ;)

LMAO!!

2005: The Hopeful Realist
 

saintwhodi --

There\'s nothing wrong with thinking this team is going to be 8-8.

There\'s nothing in the world wrong with feeling that way.

But there are a few select folks who love to try and convince fans that this team sucks and there is no reason to expect anything other than 8-8.

Note: If someone is getting offended right about now, then I am probably talking about you.

It\'s not hard to recognize the \"doom and gloom\" preachers. It\'s really not.


Those guys can think of 1000 different reasons why we will suck .. but they can\'t think of ONE reason why we might not.

That\'s all folks!! ;)

2005: The Hopeful Realist
 

Another Billy great folks.

In the SAME POST:

You\'ve definitely improved this offseason. It used to take you at least two posts to totally contradict yourself. Good job!

I make a pretty penny betting on football. Thanks. How much money have you made on football Bill? How much to do reckon you\'d have lost given your predictions the last few years.

You said that \"WE\" love to say told you so... I don\'t remember you having been able to do that yet... But 2005 is a new year. Funny, you\'re predicting the same as me right now so no matter what you won\'t be able to say I told you so this year either. Maybe some day.

How? How does that defeat the purpose? What is the PURPOSE of debating Saints football to you? Pointing out only the positives? Making huge leaps of faith, expectations that are unrealistically optimistic and believing everything that comes out of Saints\' camp? Then yeah, I guess that might defeat that purpose.

2005: The Hopeful Realist
 

WhoDat --

Listen up real close and you might understand.

While I wouldn\'t bet any real money that the Saints will finish better than 8-8 ... I don\'t post that over and over and over and over and over and over ...

and over and over and over and over

and over and over.

Just a sec....

and over and over and over .. on a Saints\' message baord.

Some of the pessimisits are so full of crap.

You guys can think of one-thousand reasons why the Saints will suck but can\'t think of ONE reason why they might not.

And what\'s a damn shame is you guys try to beat everyone down with the same ol\' tired stuff.

Why are some of you guys so intent to beat folks over the head with this 8-8 stuff?

Did you know ... I predicted 8-8 for the Saints last season?

But, it would have not suprised me if the Saints had won 10 or even 11-games.

And that\'s the same way I feel this year.

I think the Saints could finish anywhere from 6-10 to 11-5.

That\'s not unrealistic.

But the smart money says bet 8-8.

Saying this team is going to be 8-8 takes absolutely NO courage, WhoDat.

Get some b*alls and really make a prediction.

2005: The Hopeful Realist
 

LOL. Billy \"No Balls\" Carpenter. Or did you not predict 8-8?

You know Gator said the same think to me two years ago in preseason but used the corresponding female anatomy. How\'d the Saints finish?

Never have I said that the Saints CAN\'T get better.

Saying 8-8 over and over and being correct is apparently a problem for you. I can understand that, you haven\'t been right in 4 years. How exactly is predicting 13-3 better again?


And one more time - what have the Saints done this offseason to adequately address the biggest areas of need this offseason?? Next to nothing. You said so yourself. That the middle is weak. Shall I find a quote?

2005: The Hopeful Realist
 

WhoDat --

I don\'t know how to be more clear.

But, no one is running around here saying the Saints are going to make the playoffs.

No one is saying the Saints have addressed all of their needs.

Yet, there are a few select folks who want to beat folks over the head anytime they make an optimistic post regarding the Saints and the playoffs.

Some of you guys act as if it\'s UNrealistic that we could make the playoffs.

I don\'t know what y\'alls deal is. Maybe you guys are just bitter.

Maybe it makes some of you mad as hell for someone to suggest the Saints might be a contender!!

You guys love to point to the past as the end-all for what\'s going to happen this year.

And that ruins a lot of good discussions here.

Instead of debating what is relevant to the thread, we have to stop and address the whole tenure under Jim Haslett.

Or sometimes ... we have to debate the whole 38-year history of the New Orleans Saints.

What gets me is how hung-up on the past some of you are.

No one wants to beat over the head with the doom and gloom posts.

And no one wants to have sunshine pumped up their butt.

For the most part I think the over-all balance is much better on this board.

I like for folks to call me out if I\'m being too optimistic.

But I do not like when folks continuiously bring up the same ol\' tired arguements for the sole purpose of convincing folks that this team sucks.

2005: The Hopeful Realist
 

So you would say that the pessimism you say some are bringing to the board by constantly bringing up the past is quite similar to the arguments that are used to defend AB by bringing up everyone but AB? Like the line and the receivers and yatta yatta yatta. So in one argument, it is okay to look beyond just the subject of the argument, but in another it\'s totally pessimistic and ruins arguments? Yikes.

So just so we are clear, if someone wants to discuss AB\'s faults, you are allowed to bring up the line and the defense and the running game and the receivers but if someone wants to discuss this team and their outlook next year, they have to be myopic and not look at recent history? Yeah, seems fair. Double standard much?

2005: The Hopeful Realist
 

saintwhodi --

First of all ... it\'s not the Brooks\' supporters who run around here starting 100,000 threads tellin\' everyone how great Brooks is.

It\'s the Brooks\' bashers that go around making all kinds of outragous remarks.

And get this, whodi ... You can\'t discuss the play of the QB without discussing other players!!!

I know that must come as quite a shock to you. I know you think the QB makes plays and mistakes by himself. I know you have blinders on and can see only the QB. When it fits your arguement anyway. Of course, you would never blame Peyton for any of those playoff losses. It\'s never Peyton\'s fault and it\'s always Brooks\' fault.

Short-sighted much?

2005: The Hopeful Realist
 

So basically you agree that when looking at a situation it is okay to look at it from more than one angle, which in this case would be looking at recent history we seem to be repeating when discussing the upcoming season? Thanks for agreeing. So you should have no more problem with anyone predicting 8-8. Have a good one. :o

2005: The Hopeful Realist
 

Man, the draft can\'t get here quick enough. Nerves are getting as raw as sushi around here. ;)

Just a question. Ain\'t it a little early for ANY of us - optimists, pessimists, realists, methodists ... whoever - to be making predictions right now? Heck, it\'s April for chrissake!

I\'ve somehow gotten less \"pessimistic\" lately ... probably a little less \"realistic\" too, but I\'ve got big hopes for draft day (and next season for that matter). Sure, history doesn\'t provide evidence that we\'ll have a good draft (or a good season), but like my old man used to say, \"the sun shines on every dog\'s @ss every once in a while.\"

Still waitin\' on that sunshine...

- Mutey, putting my bong away now

[Edited on 21/4/2005 by mutineer10]