This Article tends to support Haslett's new (ball control) a
 

This Article tends to support Haslett's new (ball control) a
 

I\'m a big fan of ball control. I\'ve been MIA most of this off-season, but has Haz actually said he wants to play ball control somewhere? I\'ve missed it.

This Article tends to support Haslett's new (ball control) a
 

You mean to tell me all those three and outs, not scoring in the first quarter, red zone turnovers, regular turnovers and ineptitude from our offense might have had an effect on our defense? Jinkies.

This Article tends to support Haslett's new (ball control) a
 

Here\'s my problem...

Can you get to the SB with a ball control offense? Yes.

Can you get to the SB with an explosive offense? Yes.

Can you get to the SB with a defense built on speed? Yes.

Can you get to the SB with a defense built on size? Yes.



Watch carefully - here\'s the kicker:

Can you get to the SB with a bad offense or defense? Very very rarely.


The problem with the Saints and Haslett, IMO, has NEVER been scheme. The \"big\" defensive scheme has worked around the league. So has the \"fast\" scheme. Ball control works. Explosion works.

The problem with the Saints is two-fold: execution and consistency. If you cannot consistenty execute a scheme, it doesn\'t matter if the scheme is great or terrible. Execution is something Haslett has to ensure as coach. However, consistency may be a greater problem - and I don\'t just mean in the sense that our players are inconsistent. I think the Saints lack of execution has caused schizophrenia - the Saints NEVER stick to a plan or scheme. Our schemes change every year. In four years, here\'s what we\'ve tried to do on defense: get bigger, get smaller and faster, get athletes, get football players, attack, read and react, rebuild, jell... yeah, it\'s a wonder things haven\'t worked out.

[Edited on 2/5/2005 by WhoDat]

This Article tends to support Haslett's new (ball control) a
 

I think Mike Sheppard is more responsible for the ball control rumors. I don\'t have a link, but I heard Sheppard recently on the Gerry V show, and he spoke more of \"simplifying the playbook\" than outright ball control. He likened the Saints offensive play calling mistakes last season to overly-complicated baseball signals (touch head, touch nose, slap knee, spin cap, stomp right foot, do the hokey-pokey & turn yourself around = bunt). He claimed he was \"trimming the fat,\" so to speak.

But the drafting of Jammal Brown does seem to lend credibility to the rumors of a slowed down offense. Brown\'s a mauler in the run game, and placed between Jermane Mayberry (if healthy) and a decent blocking TE (maybe Zach Hilton or even Shad Meier) - not to mention Mike Karney knocking LB\'s outta the way - the run game could be quite formidible. Deuce, if he shows up in shape, could be in for a big year. Adding Antoine Smith to the backfield can only help when Deuce needs a breather, and Aaron Stecker is a nice utility RB.

I\'m a big fan of ball control, too, but I\'ll admit serious fears about it. If the defense doesn\'t significantly improve, what\'s gonna happen when we\'re playing from behind?

This Article tends to support Haslett's new (ball control) a
 

Yeah well when Venturi took over the Defense he said the same thing... making everything simple and we are ranked 32.

This Article tends to support Haslett's new (ball control) a
 

naw man---it\'s everyone else\'s fault..good one.

This Article tends to support Haslett's new (ball control) a
 

WhoDat --

It seems - to me - that no matter what change Haslett and co. make, it\'s NEVER the right one.

What changes could Haslett make that would make you happy?

If you want consistent offense., a ball-control approach gives an offense it\'s best chance to be consistent.

Sure ... any \"approach\" can work on offense. But a \"ball-control\" offense takes less risk and is much more likely to be consistent than some offense that throws the ball 600 times a season.

The Panthers went to the Super Bowl because of a ball control approach. The Patriots are the best ball control offense in the NFL. The Eagles are a ball control offense.

The Colts are a high flying offense and you see where that got them. Even the Steelers with rookie QB Ben Rothisburger got further than Peyton and the Colts? Why? Ball control offense!!



[Edited on 2/5/2005 by GumboBC]

This Article tends to support Haslett's new (ball control) a
 

Actually, it was cause Doug Brien missed TWO field goals that would have won the game for the Jets, not cause of ball control, although they do run that type of offense.

This Article tends to support Haslett's new (ball control) a
 

I think you missed the point entirely, Billy. In this case, with our defense, yes, I am concerned about an offense that isn\'t seeking to be explosive.

However, I haven\'t necessarily disagreed with Haslett\'s scheme changes. I HAVE disagreed with the frequency of them (at least once a year, sometime more). I also won\'t be satisfied with ANY scheme until the team proves that it can EXECUTE well.


I don\'t know that the ball-control offense will make the Saints more consistent. If Gandy holds or false starts, if the o-line misses blocks, or WRs drop passes, or Brooks fumbles... etc, how will the offense get better?

It seems the move to the ball control offense is for three reasons:

1. It favors Deuce (and \"featuring\" him in the offense).
2. It simplifies things for Brooks.
3. Hypothetically, it should keep our defense off the field.


Call me crazy, but the answer to that \"why?\" was not \"Ball control offense.\" The correct answer is DEFENSE.

You think Ball Control = consistency??? Really? Ask the Ravens about that. Ask the Chicago Bears. It\'s funny that you mention the Colts b/c there probably wasn\'t a more consistent and effective offense in the league this season. Their problem is defense, just like ours. So what\'s better than the best and most explosive offense in the league when you have a bad defense?


Here\'s the concern Billy - the Saints are inconsistent and don\'t execute well. That is NOT a scheme problem. It is a coaching problem, but it\'s not about strategy or tactics (and that\'s what scheme is). So, if I\'m going to have an inconsistent offense, (and bad defense), would I prefer an offense built for explosiveness (and come backs or quick strikes), or one built for long methodical drives (long slow drives are good, but not when you\'re down by 20)???

I don\'t know, honestly. I think our personnel is better-suited for a high-powered offense. Regardless, I\'m not impressed with anything Haslett comes up with as a \"scheme\" until he proves he can get the team to EXECUTE it well.

This Article tends to support Haslett's new (ball control) a
 

WhoDat --


I really don\'t want to get into some long drawn-out conversation about your feelings on Haslett.

I think no matter what changes Haslett made, you\'d find something negative about it. You would find some reason to dobut it. You\'d find some way to criticize.

If Haslett said he was going to the \"spread\" offense, you wouldn\'t like that.

If Haslett went to a 2 tightend set, you wouldn\'t like that.

If Haslett wanted to play a conservative ball-control offense .. you wouldn\'t like that.

I\'m wondering what kind of offense that you\'d like to see?

This Article tends to support Haslett's new (ball control) a
 

Billy --


I really don\'t want to get into some long drawn-out conversation about your feelings on Haslett.

I think no matter what changes Haslett made, you\'d find something positive about it. You would find some reason to love it. You\'d find some way to validate.

If Haslett said he was going to the \"spread\" offense, you would like that.

If Haslett went to a 2 tightend set, you would like that.

If Haslett wanted to play a conservative ball-control offense .. you would like that.


LOL. I thought I had answered this question twice already. Let me spell it out.

Answer: A consistent one.

If you need any help with any of the words in that sentence just let me know. Consistent is a big word, I know. If you\'re wondering, it\'s the opposite of Aaron Brooks.


One last time Billy - scheme is irrelevant. Execution is what this team needs. In Meier, Boo, Conwell, Hilton, Hall, Banks, and whoever else we have, we could easy run a 4 TE set if we need to.

With Karney and Deuce/A Smith, we can easily run a Pro-Set ball control style offense.

With Horn, Stallworth, Henderson, the Beerman, Gardner, D. Lewis (if he\'s still around), Crowell, Nathan Black (if he\'d come back), Chase Lyman, or any of the FA\'s out there, the Saints could eaily run a spread offense.

My point is this, one more time. See if you get it yet. I DO NOT CARE which of those schemes Haslett picks. I DO CARE that he make the team EXECUTE it properly.