Saints Point of View

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

    Re: Saints Point of View

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:

    I addressed some of it in the other thread. Please read there. Fact is, you're a raging homer, which all Saints fans are.  But, you're good fans who have been through a lot, so Pats fan can relate to you.   Nothing wrong with being a raging homer because at least you;'re a fan and support your team through and through.

    But, enough with your cocky behavior on our board. You act like the game is in the bag for the Saints tomorrow, which is VERY arrogant.

    And yes, you said Patrick Robinson did not make your team. It's on the "Next Week" thread and we saw many witnesses in there wondering how much you really knew about your team.

    Regardless of Wil Smith being hurt, I am right on both counts. Vince Wilfork is "aging" too, but we'd still like to have a known commodity here like you would with Smith. You don't have it.

    Losing him as a starter affects your depth and he sucked in the 3-4, which compromises Ryan's preferred 3-4.  That means he has to run a 4-3 all year, which will fade in quality as the year goes. You'll see. You just don't like me prediction because it paints less glowing picture for you as a fan.

    Curtis Lofton? Solid player, but nothing special. Atlanta walked from him for that reason.  Hawthorne? Same thing. Solid player but you act he's some kind of a Pro Bowler or gamechanger and he's not.  Sort of an undersized LB with some speed, poor vs the run, and solid in pass coverage.

    Believe it or not, this is Boston based sports board and you won't find more educated sports fans anywhere. Some of us follow the league closely and know our material.

    If you can't take it, then you should probably move on.

     



    Oh, I can take it and haven't seen or read anything "special" about football knowledge, at least from you.  I didn't say that Robinson didn't make the team.  I said he wasn't a factor and no significant loss at all.  And no, I never said that Lofton or Hawthorne were god's gift to ILB's, all I said was that they were far better than you implied with your limited knowledge of the Saints' roster.

    Oh, and I read through the "Next Week" thread quite thoroughly and it was only you that implied I didn't didn't know about my own team.  That doesn't surprise me as you come across as your classic know-it-all the whole while being full of kaka.  Yes, you know what virtually any average person with a minimal amount of effort can ascertain from the world wide web, but you are nothing special.  I'm sorry.  At least when it comes to the New Orleans Saints.

    As for Wilfork versus Smith, Wilfork, while aging, was still a significant cog in your defense.  On the other hand, Smith was an underperforming round peg that was not fitting into the square hole of the Ryan defense and was not much of a loss at all.

    Finally, reread that convoluted attempt that I bolded earlier in your post of this reply.  You state that losing Smith, who you correctly stated sucked in the 3-4, would compromise Ryan's ability to run the 3-4 (??? what the ...?) and would force Ryan to run the 4-3 all year.

    Sorry, Harv.  Major fail there.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from AsylumGuido. Show AsylumGuido's posts

    Re: Saints Point of View

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:

    No, no.  3-4 wouldn't be the base, but they could still run some 3-4 when the match up prevented itself.

    There is a difference between a base offense and strategically using another scheme for gameplannign purposes.

    He can't use it AT ALL, even if Smith was not going to thrive in it.  Fact is, you lost your starting 4-3 DE which obviously weakens your depth.

    For example, BB here will run his 4-3, but he's always looking for creative ways with his personnel to run 3-4. 

    Rob Ryan has NO confidence that the personnel he acquired can run ANY 3-4.

    Get it? Ryan is a 3-4 guy and would prefer to run that 3-4 as his base. He cannot do that in NOs this year.  If Coleman ALSO did not go down, he may have been able to use some of it at times. I mentioned this in my original response to you in the "Next Week" thread, where you kinda ignored that point, too. 

    You have very limited in house system depth developed by Loomis in the last few years, which is why you've been swapping out FAs every year out of desperation.  Overpayments to players, etc.  Brees's new deal also caused problems once Brady got paid.

    Flat cap in 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014.

     



    The 3-4 IS the base.  Have you even watch the Saints play a game?  The Saints have been using a variety of alignments, 4-3 as one of them, but Ryan has not been married to any in particular.  But, if forced to play base for any extended period it is by all means the 3-4.  I am once again sorry to let you know that you do not know what you are talking about.

    What!!?  Very little in house depth?  Are you crazy?  

    And what relevance does the cap have to do with tomorrow's game?  

    The Saints have the coaching, the schemes and the personnel to defeat the Patriots tomorrow.  Looking at your huge post rate, I am sure you will be around after the game tomorrow.  I will "see" you then.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from AsylumGuido. Show AsylumGuido's posts

    Re: Saints Point of View

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:

    In response to AsylumGuido's comment:

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:

    No, no.  3-4 wouldn't be the base, but they could still run some 3-4 when the match up prevented itself.

    There is a difference between a base offense and strategically using another scheme for gameplannign purposes.

    He can't use it AT ALL, even if Smith was not going to thrive in it.  Fact is, you lost your starting 4-3 DE which obviously weakens your depth.

    For example, BB here will run his 4-3, but he's always looking for creative ways with his personnel to run 3-4. 

    Rob Ryan has NO confidence that the personnel he acquired can run ANY 3-4.

    Get it? Ryan is a 3-4 guy and would prefer to run that 3-4 as his base. He cannot do that in NOs this year.  If Coleman ALSO did not go down, he may have been able to use some of it at times. I mentioned this in my original response to you in the "Next Week" thread, where you kinda ignored that point, too. 

    You have very limited in house system depth developed by Loomis in the last few years, which is why you've been swapping out FAs every year out of desperation.  Overpayments to players, etc.  Brees's new deal also caused problems once Brady got paid.

    Flat cap in 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014.

     



    The 3-4 IS the base.  Have you even watch the Saints play a game?  The Saints have been using a variety of alignments, 4-3 as one of them, but Ryan has not been married to any in particular.  But, if forced to play base for any extended period it is by all means the 3-4.  I am once again sorry to let you know that you do not know what you are talking about.

    What!!?  Very little in house depth?  Are you crazy?  

    And what relevance does the cap have to do with tomorrow's game?  

    The Saints have the coaching, the schemes and the personnel to defeat the Patriots tomorrow.  Looking at your huge post rate, I am sure you will be around after the game tomorrow.  I will "see" you then.



    It's not the base. They aren't using a base right now.  They're mixing and matching which might confuse crappy or average QBs, sure.

    Again, your team has not played a coach or a QB of this caliber yet.

    I never said a word about the Saints not having the parts to beat the Pats. YOU are the one on here discounting everything about the Pats and overrating your team because you haven't realized yet that they really haven't played a quality team yet.

    Miami, Arizona, what seems to be a subpar Falcons team, aren't NE level teams.

    Your taking what you've seen and thinking it will look as strong at Gillette tomorrow, which I already said you have every right to do as a homer.

    Your problem is, you just don't like my analysis of certain elements of your team.

    I even referenced Rob Ryan Ds in Cleveland, Oakland or Dallas so you could see how his Ds start hot and then burn out because he asks his players to go like their hair is on fire on every down. That is hard to do after 16 games. It's why he's been fired so many times.

    In fact, there is an article in the Times-Picayune that has Rob Ryan saying how much he learned from BB when Ryan as our LB coach here from 2001-2003.

    He talked about BB mastering the concept of "situational football" and how went to Defense School when BB hired him in 2001.  Apparently, Buddy Ryan forgot to teach his son more about the game of football.  Rob Ryan apparently didn't learn very well, did he?

    http://www.nola.com/saints/index.ssf/2013/10/new_orleans_saints_defensive_c_49.html

     



    Smith was not going to be a starter.  Throughout training camp he was being schooled.  But, of course, you are once again uninformed.

    When Ryan was in Cleveland and Oakland he did not have the talent to work with that he does now.  More importantly, he did not have an offense to help.  Both offenses were horrible and constantly hamstringed the defense.  There was no way to succeed.  In Dallas his offense was a top five defense last season until he lost more than half of his starters to the IR.  He was fired because, as anyone knows, Jerry Jones is an idiot when it come to football operations.

    Their loss, Saints' gain.

     

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from AsylumGuido. Show AsylumGuido's posts

    Re: Saints Point of View

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:

    In response to AsylumGuido's comment:

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:

    In response to AsylumGuido's comment:

    In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:

    No, no.  3-4 wouldn't be the base, but they could still run some 3-4 when the match up prevented itself.

    There is a difference between a base offense and strategically using another scheme for gameplannign purposes.

    He can't use it AT ALL, even if Smith was not going to thrive in it.  Fact is, you lost your starting 4-3 DE which obviously weakens your depth.

    For example, BB here will run his 4-3, but he's always looking for creative ways with his personnel to run 3-4. 

    Rob Ryan has NO confidence that the personnel he acquired can run ANY 3-4.

    Get it? Ryan is a 3-4 guy and would prefer to run that 3-4 as his base. He cannot do that in NOs this year.  If Coleman ALSO did not go down, he may have been able to use some of it at times. I mentioned this in my original response to you in the "Next Week" thread, where you kinda ignored that point, too. 

    You have very limited in house system depth developed by Loomis in the last few years, which is why you've been swapping out FAs every year out of desperation.  Overpayments to players, etc.  Brees's new deal also caused problems once Brady got paid.

    Flat cap in 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014.

     



    The 3-4 IS the base.  Have you even watch the Saints play a game?  The Saints have been using a variety of alignments, 4-3 as one of them, but Ryan has not been married to any in particular.  But, if forced to play base for any extended period it is by all means the 3-4.  I am once again sorry to let you know that you do not know what you are talking about.

    What!!?  Very little in house depth?  Are you crazy?  

    And what relevance does the cap have to do with tomorrow's game?  

    The Saints have the coaching, the schemes and the personnel to defeat the Patriots tomorrow.  Looking at your huge post rate, I am sure you will be around after the game tomorrow.  I will "see" you then.



    It's not the base. They aren't using a base right now.  They're mixing and matching which might confuse crappy or average QBs, sure.

    Again, your team has not played a coach or a QB of this caliber yet.

    I never said a word about the Saints not having the parts to beat the Pats. YOU are the one on here discounting everything about the Pats and overrating your team because you haven't realized yet that they really haven't played a quality team yet.

    Miami, Arizona, what seems to be a subpar Falcons team, aren't NE level teams.

    Your taking what you've seen and thinking it will look as strong at Gillette tomorrow, which I already said you have every right to do as a homer.

    Your problem is, you just don't like my analysis of certain elements of your team.

    I even referenced Rob Ryan Ds in Cleveland, Oakland or Dallas so you could see how his Ds start hot and then burn out because he asks his players to go like their hair is on fire on every down. That is hard to do after 16 games. It's why he's been fired so many times.

    In fact, there is an article in the Times-Picayune that has Rob Ryan saying how much he learned from BB when Ryan as our LB coach here from 2001-2003.

    He talked about BB mastering the concept of "situational football" and how went to Defense School when BB hired him in 2001.  Apparently, Buddy Ryan forgot to teach his son more about the game of football.  Rob Ryan apparently didn't learn very well, did he?

    http://www.nola.com/saints/index.ssf/2013/10/new_orleans_saints_defensive_c_49.html

     



    Smith was not going to be a starter.  Throughout training camp he was being schooled.  But, of course, you are once again uninformed.

    When Ryan was in Cleveland and Oakland he did not have the talent to work with that he does now.  More importantly, he did not have an offense to help.  Both offenses were horrible and constantly hamstringed the defense.  There was no way to succeed.  In Dallas his offense was a top five defense last season until he lost more than half of his starters to the IR.  He was fired because, as anyone knows, Jerry Jones is an idiot when it come to football operations.

    Their loss, Saints' gain.

     



    That's a lot of excuses. First of all, he had a lot of talent at point in Oakland when he was there.  Secondly, in Cleveland, he had good talent there as well back in 2010 when he was there. When you have a Charles Woodson or a Asmougha and CBs like that, Tommy Kelly up front, people like that, you have some good talent. Kirk Morrison was a very good LB there as well.

    Are you telling me Warren Sapp, Derrick Burgess in his prime, say in 2005, even older players like Ted Washington and Bobby Hamilton left him with little talent there? 

    Looks like you got caught lying.

    In fact, our team lost to Cleveland that year in 2010 when he was there. It was around Week 7 or 8.   Shaun Rogers, Matt Roth, DQwell JAckson, Kenyon Coleman, Cliff Geathers, Robaire Smith, Chris Gocong, Macurs Benard (pre car accident) rookie phenom Haden, Eric Wright, TJ Ward (pick 6 last week)?  

    You act like he had nothing which is patently false.

    Last year, it had nothing to do with talent to IR in Dallas, it had to do with his players not really being coached up well to adjust to the 3-4 responsibilities.

    I just posted an article that explained to you what he said about a 3-4 D and Belichick teaching about situational players.

    I can guarantee you right now if BB had Andrew Ware or Sean Lee in here, each would be a superstar in the 3-4. Lee would be another Bruschi and Ware a McGinest, or maybe even better, so don't give me this talent argument.

    Ryan's flaw is he doesn't believe or understand in the cerebral aspects of defense, especially when he uses the 3-4.

    A 4-3 is a traditional and one dimensional D, which is easier to run and find bodies for. 

     



    Believe what you may.  You obviously ignore fact and love listening to your own verbiage.  You have been consistantly misinformed throughout this conversation and a total watse of time.  Good day and I'll check in to hear your pathetic excuses tomorrow.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from rkarp. Show rkarp's posts

    Re: Saints Point of View

    Guido, looks like your new here, unless you are simply using a new handle. In case you haven't realized, you are wasting your breath. You are having a discussion with an imbecile. 

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from BostonTrollSpanker. Show BostonTrollSpanker's posts

    Re: Saints Point of View

    "The Dolphins, Cardinals, Falcons, Buccaneers are not in any top 10.   Falcons are cooked, Dolphins obviously overrated as Sept Paper Champions off trendy FA moves, Palmer in Arizona is not top 10, and obviously we know what happened with Freeman and TB."

    righto. That's a fair point and we definitely have a puncher's chance for sure. This is a big early season yard stick game for both teams. 

    But again, as I have said, we can lose this game and stil wind up with a great season. The upcoming divisional games are going to be key.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share