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

GumboBC · 05-01-2005, 02:49 PM

One of the biggest reasons that so many gamblers, not to mention football fans have this misconception is that they do not draw a distinction between a great offense and a high powered one.

Great offenses are not the ones that can consistently beat a team with a 60-yard bomb, but teams that can over and over again get 15-20 play seven-minute scoring drives.

Also, there is no such thing as depth these days, so a few key injuries to skilled position players can literally mean the difference between worst and first.

Great offenses keep defenses off of the field. The greatest team of all time was the 1972 Miami Dolphins, who not-so-coincidently had the greatest ball control team ever.

They gained an average of 5.6 yards per play. Their fourth leading rusher averaged 5.3 yards per carry. The reason their ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢Â‚Â¬Ã…Â“No Name DefenseÃƒÂ¢Ã¢Â‚Â¬? was so successful was because you donÃƒÂ¢Ã¢Â‚Â¬Ã¢Â„Â¢t give up many points or much yardage when you are standing on the sidelines watching your offense meticulously move those yard markers.

Great offenses are not measured by points scored. There are no official statistics, but much like the complicated quarterback ratings, a more accurate formula for measuring a successful offense would take strongly into account points per possession and average length of each possession.

There is a colossal difference average points per game and average points per possession. Likewise, there is a monster divergence between time of possession and length of each possession.

The best, if not the only way to slow down the St. Louis Rams when all their pieces are healthy is to take them out of a rhythm. If Kurt Warner is watching seven minute drives by his opponent from the sidelines, not only can he not develop a groove, but he will not throw too many touchdown passes from the sidelines.

The best defense is not just a great offense; it is a great ball control offense. But yes, long drives punctuated by scores are the best defense because it is a lot easier to play defense with a big lead when the other teamÃƒÂ¢Ã¢Â‚Â¬Ã¢Â„Â¢s options are limited.

Full Article

BrooksMustGo · 05-01-2005, 11:09 PM

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.

saintswhodi · 05-01-2005, 11:32 PM

They gained an average of 5.6 yards per play. Their fourth leading rusher averaged 5.3 yards per carry. The reason their ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢Â‚Â¬Ã…Â“No Name DefenseÃƒÂ¢Ã¢Â‚Â¬? was so successful was because you donÃƒÂ¢Ã¢Â‚Â¬Ã¢Â„Â¢t give up many points or much yardage when you are standing on the sidelines watching your offense meticulously move those yard markers.

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.

WhoDat · 05-02-2005, 09:56 AM

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]

mutineer10 · 05-02-2005, 10:23 AM

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.

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?

Euphoria · 05-02-2005, 10:29 AM

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

baronm · 05-02-2005, 11:35 AM

They gained an average of 5.6 yards per play. Their fourth leading rusher averaged 5.3 yards per carry. The reason their ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢Â‚Â¬Ã…Â“No Name DefenseÃƒÂ¢Ã¢Â‚Â¬? was so successful was because you donÃƒÂ¢Ã¢Â‚Â¬Ã¢Â„Â¢t give up many points or much yardage when you are standing on the sidelines watching your offense meticulously move those yard markers.

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.

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

GumboBC · 05-02-2005, 01:11 PM

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]

saintswhodi · 05-02-2005, 01:13 PM

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!!

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.

WhoDat · 05-02-2005, 01:27 PM

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.

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.

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!!

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.

05-01-2005, 02:49 PM	#1
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616	This Article tends to support Haslett's new (ball control) a One of the biggest reasons that so many gamblers, not to mention football fans have this misconception is that they do not draw a distinction between a great offense and a high powered one. Great offenses are not the ones that can consistently beat a team with a 60-yard bomb, but teams that can over and over again get 15-20 play seven-minute scoring drives. Also, there is no such thing as depth these days, so a few key injuries to skilled position players can literally mean the difference between worst and first. Great offenses keep defenses off of the field. The greatest team of all time was the 1972 Miami Dolphins, who not-so-coincidently had the greatest ball control team ever. They gained an average of 5.6 yards per play. Their fourth leading rusher averaged 5.3 yards per carry. The reason their ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢Â‚Â¬Ã…Â“No Name DefenseÃƒÂ¢Ã¢Â‚Â¬? was so successful was because you donÃƒÂ¢Ã¢Â‚Â¬Ã¢Â„Â¢t give up many points or much yardage when you are standing on the sidelines watching your offense meticulously move those yard markers. Great offenses are not measured by points scored. There are no official statistics, but much like the complicated quarterback ratings, a more accurate formula for measuring a successful offense would take strongly into account points per possession and average length of each possession. There is a colossal difference average points per game and average points per possession. Likewise, there is a monster divergence between time of possession and length of each possession. The best, if not the only way to slow down the St. Louis Rams when all their pieces are healthy is to take them out of a rhythm. If Kurt Warner is watching seven minute drives by his opponent from the sidelines, not only can he not develop a groove, but he will not throw too many touchdown passes from the sidelines. The best defense is not just a great offense; it is a great ball control offense. But yes, long drives punctuated by scores are the best defense because it is a lot easier to play defense with a big lead when the other teamÃƒÂ¢Ã¢Â‚Â¬Ã¢Â„Â¢s options are limited. Full Article
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616

05-01-2005, 11:09 PM	#2
BrooksMustGo 1000 Posts + Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 1,762	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.

05-01-2005, 11:32 PM	#3
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	This Article tends to support Haslett's new (ball control) a They gained an average of 5.6 yards per play. Their fourth leading rusher averaged 5.3 yards per carry. The reason their ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢Â‚Â¬Ã…Â“No Name DefenseÃƒÂ¢Ã¢Â‚Â¬? was so successful was because you donÃƒÂ¢Ã¢Â‚Â¬Ã¢Â„Â¢t give up many points or much yardage when you are standing on the sidelines watching your offense meticulously move those yard markers. 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.

05-02-2005, 09:56 AM	#4
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631	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]
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.\"

05-02-2005, 10:23 AM	#5
mutineer10 Site Donor Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: Baton Rouge, LA Posts: 1,739	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. 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?

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

05-02-2005, 10:29 AM	#6
Euphoria 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Hollywood, CA Posts: 7,601 Blog Entries: 5	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.

05-02-2005, 11:35 AM	#7
baronm 500th Post Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 954	This Article tends to support Haslett's new (ball control) a They gained an average of 5.6 yards per play. Their fourth leading rusher averaged 5.3 yards per carry. The reason their ÃƒÂ¢Ã¢Â‚Â¬Ã…Â“No Name DefenseÃƒÂ¢Ã¢Â‚Â¬? was so successful was because you donÃƒÂ¢Ã¢Â‚Â¬Ã¢Â„Â¢t give up many points or much yardage when you are standing on the sidelines watching your offense meticulously move those yard markers. 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. naw man---it\'s everyone else\'s fault..good one.
baronm 500th Post Join Date: Jan 2005 Posts: 954

05-02-2005, 01:11 PM	#8
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616	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]
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616

05-02-2005, 01:13 PM	#9
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	This Article tends to support Haslett's new (ball control) a 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!! 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.

05-02-2005, 01:27 PM	#10
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631	This Article tends to support Haslett's new (ball control) a 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. 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. 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!! 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.
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.\"