First Play from Scrimmage
 

Toss Right to Duece. Karney pops Ray Lewis and makes him realize how old he is. Jammal Brown goes to the second level and buries Ed Reed 6 feet below the Superdome rug. Duece breaks free and stiff arms Primetime right in the mug on his way to the endzone.
Pittsburg showed the way on how to beat these guys, run right at them.

The other option is Haslett calls the Hail Mary and Brooks throws the ball to the wrong endzone for a safety.

I wouldn't be suprised with either.

RE: First Play from Scrimmage
 

Funny.

I was wondering about the first play myself. My serious guess is a run between the guards. If McCarthy was still here, I would definitely say it would be a pass with all the run emphasis this offseason because Mike would think he was being sneaky even though the rest of the world would have seen it coming.

With Shep, I think he is committed to the run in such a way that he isn't worried about being sneaky. He wants to come out announce that were going to run right-guard and then cram it down their throat.

RE: First Play from Scrimmage
 

Funny.

I was wondering about the first play myself. My serious guess is a run between the guards. If McCarthy was still here, I would definitely say it would be a pass with all the run emphasis this offseason because Mike would think he was being sneaky even though the rest of the world would have seen it coming.

With Shep, I think he is committed to the run in such a way that he isn't worried about being sneaky. He wants to come out announce that were going to run right-guard and then cram it down their throat.

RE: First Play from Scrimmage
 

I really like going with a play action... pro-set, fb and deuce going up middle then Deuce going to the flats for a dump off while Stallworth fly right and Horn on a post.

Play action pass over the middle to Stallworth with secondary receiver, Duece in the flat. Then a good dose of Duece for good measure after that one!

.. .burp...

.. I think is gong to be either a run or a pass...

<.. I think is gong to be either a run or a pass...>

You have a 50/50 chance at being right, but then again we have AB at QB, which means a fumble from snap is in the mix.

OK, let the bashing begin! LMFAO

Superdome game .

Bentley steps back on Brooks foot and Brooks fumbles the exchange .

Duece recovers .

Up the 1 or the 3 hole..........
EVERY PLAY!!!!
OUR LINE IS THE @#$%!!!!

Brooks will not fumble the opening snap.

Might drop it on his first pass......

It's not the opening snaps I worry about with Brooks. It's the ones on the two yard line that keeps us from scoring any points.

You guys are funny :mrgreen:

Reminded me of Mike McCarthy. Let's look at what HE would do.

1st down. Out route, nobody is open. AB dumps to Deuce with 2 LBs covering. Deuce gets smeared and almost fumbles. No gain. (Speaking of that...how bout that awesome throw to Conwell last week where AB absolutely teed him up for Harrison.)

2nd and 10. They'll never expect an off tackle run, and we probably should have run on 1st down. 3 yard gain.

3rd and 7. Brooks take an 8 step drop and fires a laser (wow what an arm) to Horn in triple coverage. The ball sails by and Horn takes a mean hit from the SS.

4th and 7. Punt :(

On that note, isn't there some sort of unecessary roughness penalty that's supposed to be called when a defender tackles a WR head high? Harrison pretty much made helmet to helmet contact with conwell and looked to be trying to closeline him, too. Both deserved penalties.

Agreed, but let's not let that distract us from the fact AB led him into that hit. :lol:

..merciless... :)

Just clowning. Overall, I did think AB played decent in that game, but couldn't miss an opportunity to crack a funny on him. :banana:

How many times did that occur last year?

If we lose, one is too many, cause we needed one more win to make the playoffs. But he did lead the league in red zone turnovers. So he was an equal opportunity fumbles and INT thrower in that area.

OK...he lost 2 fumbles in the entire year of 2004....

Did both occur in the red zone?

He must have thrown a lot of red-zone Interceptions LAST YEAR to lead the league LAST YEAR in total red-zone turnovers, given only 2 lost fumbles (which may, or may not, have occured in the red zone).

A link from you would be most helpful....

I am sure a link would be most helpful, and were you here 6-8 months ago, I provided one repeatedly. As it stands now, since it is 6-8 months later, I have no idea where to find it. I'll give you a search area though. ESPN did their own QB ranking week 16 of the reg season, and as ESPN always does, there's a write up before they give you the numbers. In that write up, it stated Aaron Brooks led the league in red zone INTs. Peyton Manning was second in that number, but of course he threw 49 Tds so I think he probably would get a little more slack. So if you look back on this site to the Brooks debates from around week 16 of the reg season, I am sure you can find it. Happy hunting. :D

Also, one of the lost fumbles DEFINITELY occured in the red zone. Arizona, week four. That's a fact. So yes LAST YEAR AB led the league in red zone turnovers LAST YEAR. Sorry to burst your bubble. I am sure he won't repeat that feat this year. He seems to go from one dilemma to the next. double digit INTs in 2001 and 2002 and fumbles. Only 8 INTs in 2003 but 14 lost fumbles. Only 2 lost fumbles in 2004, but 16 INTs, and double digit total fumbles, he just learned how to recover them better, along with being the league leader in red zone turnovers. I wonder what new and exciting way he will stand out this year. :roll:

leads the league in safeties allowed? That would be a feat.

hahaha. Now THAT would be funny, but I am sure that the offensive line would just get the blame. Or maybe Brooks was afraid to throw cause his receivers dropped so many balls(even though they were nowhere near the league leaders, which was Jacksonville, and Leftwich still completed over 60% of his passes) so he just laid down in the endzone. Too funny.

So if 1 fumble occured in the Red Zone....do you remember how many INTs occured there? You said earlier he was an "equal opportunist" when it came to turning the ball over in the red zone. If 1 fumble occured, then that means 1, 2, or no more than 3 INTs should have occured in the red zone. Thanks in advance for your help.

I've never seen anything in past history that would indicate Aaron Brooks would lay down in end zone. If you'd said "stepped on the out of bounds line in back of the end zone trying to escape a blitz", then I could go with that, perhaps..

By the way, what exactly would be funny about it? Do you enjoy seeing the Saints lose?

According to the guys on ESPN last night, the Jags lead the league in dropped passes last season. The team dropped 13% of its passes. Byron Leftwich had an 82.5 QB Rating. AB had a 79.5.

:awe:

I guess that dispells the WR excuse as the reason AB isn't a top 10 QB... unless of course you believe Leftwich to be a top 10 QB too. Must be all the line's fault. And Deuce's fault. And the coaches' faults. And the defense's fault. Don't worry, those excuses are still intact.

Oh boy here we go :duel:

Wow, welcome Captain Literal. If you are gonna hang on my every word as if it's the gospel, let me say first, I am flattered, but second, it's annoying. So what if I said he was an equal opportunity red zone turneroverer? Does it matter? HE led the league in red zone turnovers. Period. And the INT number was more towards 5 or more, cause Peyton had 4. Does that somehow justify your questioning of the stat cause I joked he was an equal opportunity turnover machine in the red zone, when in reality he had more INTs than fumbles? Whatever justifies your blind faith I guess. :roll:

Why would I enjoy seeing the team I love lose? I think the mediocre QB we have is part of the reason, and I don't think we can win with him. The more he goofs up, the sooner he is gone. The ends justifies the means to me.

What was this thread about again?

I think we should make it about you. LOL

You know, this "dropped ball" excuse seems to be brought up mockingly pretty often. Maybe we should look at the timing of the dropped balls. If the Saints had been dropping balls on 1st and 2nd down........and yet the drives continued moving forward as a result of converting on 3rd down, then I guess there really coudln't be anything said. But how many times last year did we see Joe Horn (great as he is), Donte', Jerome Pathon, Boo Williams, and whomever else drop potential first-down catches and absolutely kill a drive?

If he doesn't goof up, we stand a great chance of winning...

You said you are happy when we win...

Therefore, by the transitive property, if he doesn't goof up, you should be happy.

In conclusion, to bring more joy in your life and to bring your blood pressure down, maybe you should root for him not to goof up. However, you don't seem to be doing so.

That's like saying if medical school was easy, we'd all be doctors. Medical school isn't easy, and AB will goof up. Thus, my we will not be able to win WITH HIM stance.

Absotively.

Refer back to first response: and AB will goof up. Thus, my we will not be able to win WITH HIM stance.

See above.

I hear he had a great camp. :poke:

If he proves me wrong, we'll all be dancing come January. :banana:

And I'll come to New Orleans and join you.

Timing? Well, they usually arrive a split second before the safety creams our receiver. :p

But if that happens, we won't be here. We'll all be in Detroit.

I will be in Detroit....regardless of cost. It will never happen. But if it does, I will be there and I will be naked and drinking purple haze.....oh, glory day.

:patos:

Guess I'll have someone to drink with.

I've always said that if the Saints make it to the Super Bowl, I would go, regardless of the cost or location. My friends agree, it would be a once in a lifetime opportunity :crying: