Saints @ Pats: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat. Show TexasPat's posts

    Saints @ Pats: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

         I was about to lay out for you, in a "the good, the bad, and the ugly" format,  what I thought about last night's truly tough to watch Patriots' exhibition game. But, after reading the following superb article by Mike Reiss, there's no need. He covered it all, splendidly. Great job, Mike!: http://espn.go.com/boston/nfl/story/_/id/8254530/new-england-patriots-sometimes-good-often-bad-mostly-ugly-preseason-opening-win-new-orleans-saints

         Thoughts about last nights' "game"? Here are the game stats: http://scores.espn.go.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=320809017 
     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: Saints @ Pats: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

    I thought Chandler looked really good, he seamed to be physical and used a combination of his athleticism and those long arms he has. I was surprised to see Hightower do more hitting than tackling. Of course Vareen looked great going against scrubs...as he should.

    The line is a problem right now, but we all knew that was the case. I'm assuming they can fix that with some time and people coming back. I've got say I was surprised they had Brady going long last night behind that line, I thought they would just try and pound the ball...it didn't help that they could barely execute a screen either.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat. Show TexasPat's posts

    Re: Saints @ Pats: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

    In Response to Re: Saints @ Pats: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly:
    [QUOTE]I thought Chandler looked really good, he seamed to be physical and used a combination of his athleticism and those long arms he has. I was surprised to see Hightower do more hitting than tackling. Of course Vareen looked great going against scrubs...as he should. The line is a problem right now, but we all knew that was the case. I'm assuming they can fix that with some time and people coming back. I've got say I was surprised they had Brady going long last night behind that line, I thought they would just try and pound the ball...it didn't help that they could barely execute a screen either.
    Posted by mthurl[/QUOTE]

         I agree regarding the play of Jones and Vereen. Ridley also ran well...and there were no fumbles.

         But, last nights' game is yet another testiment to the fact that, no matter who the QB is, or how good his RBs and receivers are, poor OL play chokes off an offense. This is a problem that needs to get fixed, and get fixed immediately. The Pats can't have Tom Brady getting hit like he did last night. 

         Nate Solder needs to step up, and show that he was worthy of being a #1 draft choice. With C-Bass's back acting up yet again, and Marcus Cannon looking as if he's better suited to play OG, is it time to consider bringing aboard another veteran OT, like a Chad Clifton?   
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Saints @ Pats: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

    In Response to Re: Saints @ Pats: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly:
    [QUOTE]I thought Chandler looked really good, he seamed to be physical and used a combination of his athleticism and those long arms he has. I was surprised to see Hightower do more hitting than tackling. Of course Vareen looked great going against scrubs...as he should. The line is a problem right now, but we all knew that was the case. I'm assuming they can fix that with some time and people coming back. I've got say I was surprised they had Brady going long last night behind that line, I thought they would just try and pound the ball...it didn't help that they could barely execute a screen either.
    Posted by mthurl[/QUOTE]

    +1

    When watching Hightower the first thing I thought was, learn how to wrap up kid.

    With Vereen, I'm not sure how much you can really take from it last night. He was hit but like Hightower the tacklers didn't either wrap up or were weak arm grabs. I hope that Vereen can carry it forward to better competition but not sure I'm going to proclaim him as the next great RB from last night

    Bolden did not look at all like the camp reports. He looked slow and didn't have great vision. He looked like a 09' version of BJGE. Bolden definitely needs time to develop
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from agcsbill. Show agcsbill's posts

    Re: Saints @ Pats: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

    It's pre-season football folks...   BB will tinker for all 4 games and for those fans who are looking for 56 - 0 blowouts, or some sort of dominating performances from the Pats, will be mightily disappointed!  What I hope to see the most is no injuries to any of the major players on the team as the regular season approaches.  Fletcher's ACL injury hurts, though.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from jedinate. Show jedinate's posts

    Re: Saints @ Pats: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

    Regardless of who he was up against Vereen made some nice cuts and showed decisiveness. A good start at least. I would like to see him get some snaps with the 1st team.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from ctredsoxfanhugh. Show ctredsoxfanhugh's posts

    Re: Saints @ Pats: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

    D-line looked good, Running backs looked good.  Little disappointed in the O-Line, nothing more to say there without repeating what everyone else was saying.  I don't think the O-Line would looked as bad if Solder and Cannon didn't have such bad days.  They have shown much better performances last year, and I expect they will step it up.  The O-line may be a problem this year but I don't think it will be as bad as it was last night. 

    Chandler looked good yesterday BEFORE the Saints pulled their starters.  I know we all expected Hightower to contribute more than Jones off the bat and for him to have to develop a little bit, But he may force right off the bat.


     
  8. This post has been removed.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Saints @ Pats: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

    The O-line almost looked as if it had 4 bench guy playing together for the 1st time in the 1st preseason game.....with very little previous experience between them. D line looked very good, and it was great to see actually talented football players playing together in the secondary(Chung,Gregory,DMC,Kyle,Ras) a lot different then sergio,Barrett,Diggler,Moore, and Edelman. Perhaps that 2nd group had something to do with giving up the most passing yards last year?
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat3. Show TexasPat3's posts

    Re: Saints @ Pats: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

         What has to be considered in evaluating this game is the quality of the opposition, as well. The Saints are the Patriots of the NFC.   
     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Paul_K. Show Paul_K's posts

    Re: Saints @ Pats: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

    Qualifiers:

    New Orleans won its last 8 games of the regular season, was 13-3 overall, and didn't look too bad in the playoffs.  As opponents go, that's about as good as they come.  The team is pretty intact from last year.  So, they should have their act together. 

    New England is a young team, especially as they are starting rookies Chandler Jones and Dont'a Hightower.  They'll get better.  For now, keep it vanilla.  A bonus for Hightower, kid we're switching you over to Dane Fletcher's spot next play. 

    Worse, New England is missing Logan Mankins (probably good to go in a month, more probably good in November), Waters (he sits out August to save his body) and Vollmer (questionable is better than zero).  Cannon is not far from being a rookie; he recovered from chemo during the first part of the 2011 season.  Solder is all the way into his second training camp.  BB had to play Dan Koppen (he'll get cut maybe) at center because Connolly had to slide to guard.  Excuse me, but what a mess!  The O-line can be seriously improved by November and moderately improved by September. 

    I'd love to see the Patriots slaughter a top team's first stringers as they did last preseason, and with one hand tied behind their back, but at least it wasn't too far from a tie.

    Note that I don't expect New Orleans to hand over first downs on two punts in a game.  My baloney radar says that the Saints planned both of them, to make their team look worse.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from portfolio1. Show portfolio1's posts

    Re: Saints @ Pats: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

    So Solder looked bad in the FIRST preseason game. Big deal. He actually played a good amount last year as a rookie and was good, especially for a rookie.

    Miss Light? Well, Light was a very good player. But Solder will be a better player. YOu will be loving him this year. Solder is not someone to be worried about.

    I do expect the O line to be a strength of this team. We have no reason to think otherwise. I expect Mankins and Waters back in some reasonable time. I don't know how long Vollmer will ahve troubles. Backs are ticky. But Cannon is a decent player. I continue to think he is a better guard than tackle but BB willl use him where he helps the team best. And this year it might be tackle.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from ATJ. Show ATJ's posts

    Re: Saints @ Pats: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

    I, too, seem to recall Solder getting some snaps at LT last year and doing well.  First preseason game after the first full off-season/training camp.  Not surprised at anything because, to be honest, I didn't really know what to expect under this format.  Matt Light's not walking through that door any time soon.

    Agree the O-line play was not what we'd want to see but it's early.  

    Liked Ridley, Vereen, Chandler Jones, secondary play.  Liked seeing screen plays back in the plan.  


     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from Davedsone. Show Davedsone's posts

    Re: Saints @ Pats: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

    Saints were playing their second game, so that was an advantage for them.  I didn't like the line play, but I know Scar will get them in shape, and getting Brady knocked down will be GREAT motivation.  Coverage looked iffy at times, safties seemed better but secondary still getting beat too often.  LBs looked solid, D line was great, receivers and TE's just average.  RBs were good.  ST was about like last year, guys seemed to get there 3/4 of the time, but holes at times for big gains.  Hoyer had his moments, Mallet could be great but was obviously SO uptight and struggling with that.  Jones will be getting doubled up, I'm sure.  He seems beastly if he can keep it up and not get hurt.  Still, Carter would be nice to have back in the fold.  
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat. Show TexasPat's posts

    Re: Saints @ Pats: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

    In Response to Re: Saints @ Pats: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly:
    [QUOTE]Saints were playing their second game, so that was an advantage for them.
     
    RESPONSE: The Saints were playing their second game in 4 days. Not sure that's an advantage.

    I didn't like the line play, but I know Scar will get them in shape, and getting Brady knocked down will be GREAT motivation.
     
    RESPONSE: Amen...the pass protection was terrible. Nate Solder in particular was awful. But, as you correctly point out, Scarnecchia is an outstanding coach. On the bright side, the run blocking was pretty good...even if it was against the Saints' 2nd and 3rd teammers.   

    Coverage looked iffy at times, safties seemed better but secondary still getting beat too often.
     
    RESPONSE: Watch out...Rusty will brand you as a troll for such blaspheme!! LOL!!!

    LBs looked solid, D line was great, receivers and TE's just average.
     
    RESPONSE: Agreed. The receivers and QBs need to get their timing down. Plus, as mentioned above, the OL needs to do a much better job of protecting the QBs.

    RBs were good.  ST was about like last year, guys seemed to get there 3/4 of the time, but holes at times for big gains.
     
    RESPONSE: The fine play of Chandler Jones and the play of the young RBs. Vereen, Ridley, and Bolden, were positives. Vereen especially looked good.

    Hoyer had his moments, Mallet could be great but was obviously SO uptight and struggling with that.
     
    RESPONSE: Poor pass protection, and lack of reps hurt them. They'll be better next time out.

    Jones will be getting doubled up, I'm sure.  He seems beastly if he can keep it up and not get hurt.  Still, Carter would be nice to have back in the fold.
     
    RESPONSE: Welcoming back Carter wouldn't hurt...if he's healthy.
    Posted by Davedsone[/QUOTE]
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from bredbru. Show bredbru's posts

    Re: Saints @ Pats: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

    In Response to Re: Saints @ Pats: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Saints @ Pats: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly : +1 When watching Hightower the first thing I thought was, learn how to wrap up kid. With Vereen, I'm not sure how much you can really take from it last night. He was hit but like Hightower the tacklers didn't either wrap up or were weak arm grabs. I hope that Vereen can carry it forward to better competition but not sure I'm going to proclaim him as the next great RB from last night Bolden did not look at all like the camp reports. He looked slow and didn't have great vision. He looked like a 09' version of BJGE. Bolden definitely needs time to develop
    Posted by PatsEng[/QUOTE]

    i havent done a complete wrapup (someone started positives thread and i shared some there) but for folk who want to, i shared a bunch of observations during the game on the game thread.from  what i could makeout with the streaming that is :)
    was pretty crappy
    was pissed it froze during the saints first off/our first defensive series
    after the first run or so i saw promise in bolden. my first viewings of him. i saw power and the speed to get to the corner.
    wiht you on hightower, happened several times. as did being out of position in the middle. 
    hope spikes scomes back
    the three look good in my minds eye. hightower seems better at the strong side at this point.
    carpenter seems promising though.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from bredbru. Show bredbru's posts

    Re: Saints @ Pats: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

    In Response to Re: Saints @ Pats: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly:
    [QUOTE]I thought Chandler looked really good, he seamed to be physical and used a combination of his athleticism and those long arms he has. I was surprised to see Hightower do more hitting than tackling. Of course Vareen looked great going against scrubs...as he should. The line is a problem right now, but we all knew that was the case. I'm assuming they can fix that with some time and people coming back. I've got say I was surprised they had Brady going long last night behind that line, I thought they would just try and pound the ball...it didn't help that they could barely execute a screen either.
    Posted by mthurl[/QUOTE]

    agreed on your points
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from bredbru. Show bredbru's posts

    Re: Saints @ Pats: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

    In Response to Re: Saints @ Pats: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly:
    [QUOTE]Regardless of who he was up against Vereen made some nice cuts and showed decisiveness. A good start at least. I would like to see him get some snaps with the 1st team.
    Posted by jedinate[/QUOTE]

    +1
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from bredbru. Show bredbru's posts

    Re: Saints @ Pats: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

    In Response to Re: Saints @ Pats: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly:
    [QUOTE]Saints were playing their second game, so that was an advantage for them.  I didn't like the line play, but I know Scar will get them in shape, and getting Brady knocked down will be GREAT motivation.  Coverage looked iffy at times, safties seemed better but secondary still getting beat too often.  LBs looked solid, D line was great, receivers and TE's just average.  RBs were good.  ST was about like last year, guys seemed to get there 3/4 of the time, but holes at times for big gains.  Hoyer had his moments, Mallet could be great but was obviously SO uptight and struggling with that.  Jones will be getting doubled up, I'm sure.  He seems beastly if he can keep it up and not get hurt.  Still, Carter would be nice to have back in the fold.  
    Posted by Davedsone[/QUOTE]

    " Coverage looked iffy at times, safties seemed better but secondary still getting beat too often "

    and as hard as it is to belive, still not turning their heads on the ball.

     
  21. This post has been removed.

     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from gr82bme. Show gr82bme's posts

    Re: Saints @ Pats: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

    Yes, some good, some bad, some ugly, but it is only the first pre-season game, and I'm thinking BB will have plenty to lean on his team about.  Think is, with the Sox season going the way it's going, even a pre-season Pats game is uplifting - LOL :O).  I'm itching/Jonesing so bad for the season to start September 9 can't get here quick enough.  GO PATS!
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share