Why we need to get T.O. for draft picks (or Reggie) now.
While not a popular idea on the surface, the recent T.O. to Chicago rumors (which have been debunked) made me think we should make an effort to get him here. Reasons below:
1) We have an organization with strong sidelines and on-the-field leadership with Drew Brees and Sean Payton. Having these two elements would be critical in corralling any blow ups from the famously combustible one.
2) Sean Payton also knows T.O. from his Dallas days too I think.
3) Teams have adjusted to the Saints passing attack limiting Drew to Zero touchdowns in the last two games. Yes, the running game has been good, in spots, making up for the passing problems, however we need to give Brees a tall, veteran receiver that can take some of the burden off Colston - who can't break double-team coverage and has struggled staying healthy.
4) Owens has remained healthy over the last three years while averaging at least 1,000 yards of receiving yards and over 10 Td's per season.
5) My preference would be to trade draft picks for him, however, if it takes parting with Reggie Bush and the Kardashian vixen, then so be it. The Bills need a shot in the arm and a way to fill seats to avoid blackouts as this season spirals out of control for them. We are a playoff bound team that has Super Bowl aspirations. It's time to push more chips into the middle and take some risks.
6) Heartburn aside from welcoming T.O. into the Saints family. A Brees to Colston-Owens-Shockey-Henderson-Moore constellation of receivers looks awfully good and balanced. I know Owens is a human freak-show but if you remember the playoff games he's been involved in you know he does have a hyper-competitive streak any team would like to have once the post-season begins..
This FanPost was written by a reader and member of Canal Street Chronicles. It does not necessarily reflect the views of CSC and its staff or editors.
0 recs |
65 comments
Comments
You're nucking futz!
TO in NOLA will never happen, we don’t need him for anything, we’ve got plenty of receivers that are MORE talented already. Then there’s the whole “locker room cancer” aspect – no prima donnas in NOLA!
Irony: An atheist Saints fan.
by GSO Saints Fan on Oct 16, 2009 5:11 PM CDT reply actions 8 recs
Boom!
Super Bowl 44: "If you play in this league and it's not your goal, there's something wrong with you." -- Marques Colston
by MtnExile on Oct 16, 2009 7:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Third it. And if I could, I’d cube it as well!
by FriarBob on Oct 17, 2009 12:10 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
rec'd
Superbowl bound!!!...I know! do you?! Go Saints!!
by skinnykinney on Oct 16, 2009 9:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
The idea is crazy
but the Saints don’t have one receiver as talented as T.O. Whatever you think of his personality, there is no denying the man’s skills. There’s a very good reason he has more TDs catches than everyone except Rice. For all the trouble he’s caused, every team he played for was worse without him.
by HB-NOLA on Oct 16, 2009 11:33 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
"we’ve got plenty of receivers that are MORE talented already."
LOL!
"Paralyze resistance with persistence" -Woody Hayes
by coldpizza on Oct 17, 2009 3:37 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
At least they CATCH the ball, eh?
:-)
Fact is that TO is well past his prime, and will bring nothing positive to the Saints right now, so trying to get him would be worse that pointless, it would be a negative.
Oh, and as you yourself point out, if he were worth getting, why didn’t they go after him when he was a FA?
Because they don’t NEED him.
Irony: An atheist Saints fan.
by GSO Saints Fan on Oct 17, 2009 9:03 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That wasn’t my point, at all. Any team could use a WR as talented as T.O., even at this stage of career. The only reason I pointed that out is to illustrate the unlikelihood of such a move transpiring. There’s definitely logic in him coming here, in a hypothetical “if I/you were the boss” type scenario. There’s very little likelihood of it, given the current regime, based on how they recently handled a more favorable path to acquiring Owens. That’s not to say people can’t change their minds, but what has he done over the last five games to trigger than change of heart? Not just to the point of wanting him, but to the point of GIVING SOMETHING UP for him. It’s just not a realistic wish. I’d like to trade Sedrick Ellis for Albert Haynesworth. Any chance of that happening? Same thing, pretty much.
"Paralyze resistance with persistence" -Woody Hayes
by coldpizza on Oct 17, 2009 1:08 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
As an Eagles fan, no. Bad idea. The Saints don't need him. His talent isn't worth the headache.
The only way it would work is if you sign him mid-season then release him into the wild at the end of the year. Otherwise, forget it. He would never be happy in NOLA because there are too many other weapons to take away from his production. After this weekend I think it’s pretty clear that the Saints are in a good spot without him.
by NOLACuse on Oct 19, 2009 11:26 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
by your logic, we should just go after Rice instead
You are crediting TO w/ being so good b/c he has a great track record. However, he is definitely past his prime.
Even if he weren’t the costs far outweigh the benefit. He is a cancer in the locker room. How much more of a “cancer track record” do you want? No way.
by Zandor435 on Oct 19, 2009 7:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
No Way!
Really? I don’t get it. T.O. is way past his prime and would not be worth the headache. He’s locker room poison as far as I can see. It’s too early to deal Reggie too. The offense is fine as is. No need to worry about Drew getting shut down. With a solid run game and defense now, there’s no need for him to pass for 5,000 yards. We’re 4-0, so dealing for a washed-up WR with possible mental issues is the last thing they need to do.
"He has got a good ol' boy sense of humor, but he has also got a good ol' boy sense of kick you in the ass, too,"--Gregg Williams describing Bill Johnson. The D WILL ROCK THIS YEAR!
by satchmo26 on Oct 16, 2009 5:14 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
People said the same thing about Randy Moss...
…when he was out in Oakland playing pitch and catch with their lousy QB’s.
The toughest QB we faced so far is probably Kolb, and he had a week to prepare. The other QB’s; Stafford, Sanchez and Edwards, rank just above JaMarcus Russell and Derek Anderson at the bottom of the NFL QB rating index.
In other words, don’t count on the defense to bail out the offense as the season matures.
by TigerPaw on Oct 16, 2009 5:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Since when
is it a foregone conclusion that the offense will need a lot of bailing out? Two games where the running game secured the win instead of Drew, and all of a sudden we need an over-the-hill television personality/part-time football player to keep us in the hunt? And for Reggie?! He may not be great, but I’d argue he’s a better receiver this year than Owens is.
"Brees will kill you, but he lets you decide how fast he tightens the garrote." -Chris Brown
by FuSoYa on Oct 16, 2009 6:47 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You must mean “based on production”. He sure as hell isn’t a better receiver than T.O. based on talent. I agree that such a trade would be pretty pointless at this stage, though. Why would the Saints give up anything for T.O., when they could have had him for no compensation whatsoever just a few months back and didn’t lift a finger?
"Paralyze resistance with persistence" -Woody Hayes
by coldpizza on Oct 17, 2009 3:41 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That being said, I have a harder time envisioning Reggie Bush’s role in the current Bills’ offense — even over the long haul — than I do with Owens making an immediate impact on the Saints’. Basically, I don’t think either team would entertain, nor benefit greatly from such a trade, but if it WERE to go down (hypothetically), we would have gotten the better end of it. At least, based on the current season, which is all we’d be guaranteed out of Owens anyway (he only signed a one year deal with Buffalo).
"Paralyze resistance with persistence" -Woody Hayes
by coldpizza on Oct 17, 2009 3:55 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
What exactly
would Owens bring to our offense that we need? A new kind of decoy? A deep threat that is more effective than the two we already have? A route runner that’s better than the three(including Bush) we already have? It would be a terrible trade for us, unless there were some draft picks included with Owens. (Not even) one year with an aging receiver(he’s no Jerry Rice, so don’t bring that up) for an overexposed and underachieving scatback in his prime. At least Bush still has potential. We’d be trading media headaches, and getting the short end of the stick on production.
That said, it’ll never happen, so it is a pointless hypothetical argument.
"Brees will kill you, but he lets you decide how fast he tightens the garrote." -Chris Brown
by FuSoYa on Oct 17, 2009 12:23 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
“What exactly would Owens bring to our offense that we need? A new kind of decoy? A deep threat that is more effective than the two we already have? A route runner that’s better than the three(including Bush) we already have?”
All of the above.
“At least Bush still has potential. We’d be trading media headaches, and getting the short end of the stick on production.”
I agree with roughly 33% of that.
“That said, it’ll never happen, so it is a pointless hypothetical argument.”
And 100% of that.
"Paralyze resistance with persistence" -Woody Hayes
by coldpizza on Oct 17, 2009 1:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Eh, I'm bored already
Obviously we have different opinions on the value of T.O. and Bush, real or apparent. But at least we found common ground at the end.
"Brees will kill you, but he lets you decide how fast he tightens the garrote." -Chris Brown
by FuSoYa on Oct 17, 2009 1:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
media headaches?
When did Reggie become a headache?
Don't worry I got your back cuz...
by TAYDIGGA on Oct 17, 2009 7:44 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oooh oooh
Was the 33% Bush still has potential?
The people who say, "Winning isn't everything," don't win very often.
by Hooahsaint on Oct 18, 2009 1:09 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I mean it any way you want to read it
as long as you keep in mind the words this and year.
"Brees will kill you, but he lets you decide how fast he tightens the garrote." -Chris Brown
by FuSoYa on Oct 17, 2009 12:13 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
That’s all I had in mind. I don’t like either player long term. I just more bang for your questionably earmarked buck with T.O. Not based on his Buffalo production, obviously. Based on talent alone, would you not want Larry Johnson for Lynell Hamilton, given the opportunity? All overblown lip and money factors aside, he’d bring a hell of a lot more to the table THIS YEAR. That being said, we don’t NEED Larry Johnson. It would be a luxury swap, bring us even more name-recognition among casual football fans, probably push the Super Bowl hype to epic proportions … but is it something to rush out pursue? Of course not. Mainly because the Chiefs would laugh in your face, if you even proposed such a trade. I think the Bills would do the same. They already have Roscoe Parrish to return punts, get injured two or three times a season and make little to no contributions on offense. Why would they want Bush? Aside from the name-recognition among casual football fans, I mean.
"Paralyze resistance with persistence" -Woody Hayes
by coldpizza on Oct 17, 2009 1:33 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I just envision more bang <- real talk
"Paralyze resistance with persistence" -Woody Hayes
by coldpizza on Oct 17, 2009 1:34 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'd say he isn't a better receiver based on skill...
Talent? Reggie blow T.O. out the water. And by skill I mean, TO is a receiver and knows how to run routes and etc., Reggie doesn’t and thus isn’t as skilled at it…but that’s it buddy!
Don't worry I got your back cuz...
by TAYDIGGA on Oct 17, 2009 7:42 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
You're comparing apples to amoebas!
Moss was still in his prime when he went from Oakland to NE! Heck, TO is almost MY age now!
Getting TO a better QB won’t improve his play, he’s just past his expiration date and hasn’t realized it yet.
Irony: An atheist Saints fan.
by GSO Saints Fan on Oct 17, 2009 9:05 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Totally disagree. The man can still ball, but he has a crap quarterback.
The people who say, "Winning isn't everything," don't win very often.
by Hooahsaint on Oct 18, 2009 1:11 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
overreaction much?
so brees gasp throws for only 150 yrds with 0 TDS or INTS for two games and suddenly our passing attack has been “figured out”? as saints fans we’ve become to spoiled on brees throwing for a gazillion yards every game that after two average weeks the offense must be dead?
even Jesus had a few off days, cut the second coming of Christ a break.
It is better to fail historical, than the live in mediocrity- Unknown
by Silo10 on Oct 16, 2009 6:01 PM CDT reply actions 1 recs
d
Chief Stalker/ Lead Paparazzi of the official Matty I Fan Club
Knowshon Moreno is actually the illegitimate chocolate son of Dan Marino. Its true!!! I have pictures!!!
by Farorefox on Oct 16, 2009 9:28 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
pass that stuff over here
b/c it must be good lol. i don’t even do weed or anything but i’d try some of that if it’s that good.
Brees is fine with what we have. Wow, the world comes to the end b/c he has had two games where he hasn’t thrown for 400 yards and 4 tds a piece. The offense is fine. Point 1: The run game was effective and working well in the last 2 games. Point 2: The defense was shutting them down. I mean, we pretty much shut out the Bills barring the trick special teams play. Point 3: High completion % for Brees. Point 4: We don’t need a shootout where we need to score at least every other time to win.
I understand you’re concern. Brees hasn’t hit a big play or anything the past 2 games. They look a little out of sync but our running game has been working so we’ve done more clock management running with good defense. We haven’t trailed this season so Drew doesn’t need to have a lot of tds to keep us even in the game. We are fine as a team. Plus, we don’t know how long TO will still be around. He will probably be like Favre but we don’t need him. Maybe we could take him if we could trade Henderson for him.
Superbowl bound!!!...I know! do you?! Go Saints!!
by skinnykinney on Oct 16, 2009 9:50 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
He's got
the drop-sees, I seen him drop more, than catch more,in the last two years. Looked to me like Romo (last yr.) lost his trust in him, threw else where, TE,Craytom,Austen. TO is going somewhere this yr. but not the Saints. Now if Denver was 0-5 and Brandon Marshall was still in the dog-house, Reggie for him and a pick I’m sure thats a better deal. I’d be interested. But they’re 5-0, he ain’t going anywhere.,winning cures everything.
You think you know, and you don't know, and you never, ever will.-Jim Mora Sr.
by metryman on Oct 17, 2009 12:32 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Atmosphere
The Saints are where they are at right now due to the types of players and atmoshere that Sean Payton and the Saints organization has created. They’ve prided themselves on eliminating problem children and only inviting or signing quality players both on and off the field. That in turn has led more such players to come to New Orleans that want to play in that kind of environment.
No fingers are pointed during losses, no questioning the coaching, nothing. The players feel they are a part of something and genuinely want to win as a team, not individuals. Bringing in anything that would or could disrupt that atmosphere goes completely against all the work that has been put in over the last 3 years. They are trying to create a dynasty. Anything that is contrary to that is ridiculous to even consider.
Even moreso when you are speaking of a player who isn’t really needed or necessary. Our top 4 wide receivers could go to nearly any other team and start as either a number one or number two.
The people who say, "Winning isn't everything," don't win very often.
by Hooahsaint on Oct 17, 2009 2:02 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
“They’ve prided themselves on eliminating problem children and only inviting or signing quality players both on and off the field.”
coughJeremyShockeycoughJonathanCasillascoughPJHillcough
Sorry, had a Frito go down the wrong way.
"Paralyze resistance with persistence" -Woody Hayes
by coldpizza on Oct 17, 2009 4:02 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
C'mon
Shockey is hardly a problem child. There isn’t a player on the team that has anything but good to say about him.
I’ll give you Casillas, but Hill is young. I chalk his problems up to maturity.
My feelings are Casillas and Hill are decent people who made boneheaded decisions. It is due to the strength of the lockerroom, and SP’s faith in his players showing Casillas and Hill the way, that they are in NO right now.
You can’t argue that if they stepped even remotely wrong, they would be gone.
The people who say, "Winning isn't everything," don't win very often.
by Hooahsaint on Oct 17, 2009 5:18 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
"You can’t argue that if they stepped even remotely wrong, they would be gone."
You can’t argue that the same exact same approach could be taken with any player.
"Paralyze resistance with persistence" -Woody Hayes
by coldpizza on Oct 17, 2009 1:37 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Er, couldn’t. You get the gist.
"Paralyze resistance with persistence" -Woody Hayes
by coldpizza on Oct 17, 2009 1:38 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm lost, so are we in agreement . . .
Screw it, you’re right. There. Now I have closure.
The people who say, "Winning isn't everything," don't win very often.
by Hooahsaint on Oct 18, 2009 1:13 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
what's up with PJ Hill and Casillas- haven't heard of any problems.....
"Indecision may or may not be my biggest problem" - Jimmy Buffett
by Philinwood on Oct 17, 2009 7:23 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
No problems since the Saints signed them, as far as I know.
PJ Hill — Twice arrested for DUI, and to me, his offenses are the worst. Crashed his car fleeing from police.
Casillas — This one is actually pretty comincal, IMHO. Busted for “DUI” on a freakin’ scooter. I could be wrong, but if memory serves, it was on campus. Now hey, I don’t condone DUI, even on a scooter. You could still hurt somebody, and there are plenty of pedestrians on campus. I’m not saying it was nothing, but I am saying it was probably next-to-nothing.
Carl Nicks mouthed off to a cop at a frat party one night and got arrested. He’s been fine ever since.
Shockey just mouths off to everybody.
Now I want to be very clear that I don’t condone DUI, especially given the specifics of Hill’s case. I’m as morally opposed to that kind of thing as the next guy. BUT, while the act is unquestionably bad, it doesn’t necessarily follow that the person is a bad person. It doesn’t mean they’re trouble, and it doesn’t even mean they’ll continue to make trouble in the ways they have in the past. I think all three of those guys (Hill, Casillas, Nicks) so far are living proof of that. You don’t have to forgive the past actions, but there are in fact cases of people straightening up and flying right.
In fact, given INTENSE due diligence re: the other three, I might even go so far as to say that Shockey’s mouth would give me more pause than the other three’s transgressions, in terms of the potential for negatively affecting the team. While (to my knowledge) there’s never been the slightest indication that Shockey thinks the law doesn’t aply to him, there have been plenty of indications in the past that Shockey sometimes thinks he’s bigger than the team. To me, that CAN in some cases be a bigger worry than the other stuff, as far as the team goes anyway.
I’m rambling, but my point is that I don’t think these guys’ pasts mean that they’re necessarily not “good players on and off the field.” In fact, all indications so far dispute that notion. That the Saints have so far been right (as far as we know) on all four calls tells me that they did do their due diligence and established to a high degree of certainty that these guys weren’t gonna be problems going forward. And that they wouldn’t have been brought onto the team otherwise.
by Grandmaster Wang on Oct 17, 2009 9:16 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
I'm glad something made sense in this post
Just because people make dumb decisions does not mean they are selfish, or bad teamates. The main downside of these sorts of problems is the reliability aspect of it. Investing money in someone prone to put themselves in a position that could lead to a suspension is dumb. It’s pretty apparent to me that they have at least a decent ability to determine “good character” people. I think that has more to do with the Saint’s current and future success than most people give it credit for. I believe that TO’s transgressions are more of a problem for an NFL team than any of the previously listed offenses.
P.S. I got a buck that says TO and Kayne West eventually commit suicide. I know it’s generally wrong to discuss something like that, not to mention morbid, but I mean, hey they really they both seem to have that kind of personality? I’m just sayin’…..
Bringing families together through incorrect grammar and incoherent thoughts, don't mention it. It's what I do.
by asaint on Oct 17, 2009 12:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
“I think that has more to do with the Saint’s current and future success than most people give it credit for. I believe that TO’s transgressions are more of a problem for an NFL team than any of the previously listed offenses.”
I agree with this, though while I believe character assessment to be underrated in general, I also think Owens’s character issues are blown way out of proportion, compared to what he brings to the table as a WR. Or at least, what he HAS brought to the table. It’s kind of difficult to make any type of assessment on him in Buffalo, as seldom as they’ve thrown in his direction (only 27 times, so far). Some of that may be attributable to age catching up with him (inability to gain seperation in coverage), some of it may be due to double teaming by opponents. My guess would be it has more to do with the heat Trent Edwards has been taking, more than anything else. That and the Bills affinity for using their RBs as primary weapons.
"Paralyze resistance with persistence" -Woody Hayes
by coldpizza on Oct 17, 2009 2:00 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
“… I also think Owens’s character issues are blown way out of proportion, compared to what he brings to the table as a WR.
…
It’s kind of difficult to make any type of assessment on him in Buffalo, as seldom as they’ve thrown in his direction (only 27 times, so far)."
While I think your points here are reasonable, I respectfully disagree.
Owens is the absolute worst. He’s the very definition of “locker room cancer.” Even back when he was legitimately the best wideout in the whole damn league, he was throwing his coaches and (Pro Bowl) QBs under the bus at every opportunity, as publicly as possible.
And he’s STILL doing that, as recently as a couple weeks ago. AFTER being released by THE Dallas Cowboys and having to tuck his tail and sign a 1-year contract with freakin’ Buffalo. THREE teams now have told this particular Top 10 wideout to not let the door hit him on the way out. And it sure wasn’t because he wasn’t making plays. That’s about as damning as it gets. How big a jerk must you be for Jerry Freakin’ Jones to get fed up with your antics?
Talk about a guy who’s never, ever gonna mellow out and shut the hell up. He just doesn’t have it in him. It’ll always be everybody’s fault but his. I’d rather have Ricky Williams on my team than that guy.
by Grandmaster Wang on Oct 17, 2009 2:45 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If it makes you feel any better, I never had much of a problem with Ricky either.
"Paralyze resistance with persistence" -Woody Hayes
by coldpizza on Oct 17, 2009 2:54 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Did it ever occur to anyone that maybe T.O. was right about McNabb and Romo? Hmm?
The people who say, "Winning isn't everything," don't win very often.
by Hooahsaint on Oct 18, 2009 1:16 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's pretty obvious he was right abuot Garcia.
The people who say, "Winning isn't everything," don't win very often.
by Hooahsaint on Oct 18, 2009 1:17 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
How was he right about McNabb? McNabb has had great seasons without TO.
Garcia needs a West Coast system to be effective, but when he’s given the chance he excels. Look at his play in Philly a couple years back after McNabb got hurt. I don’t think it’s obvious he was right about Garcia at all. Garcia might not have it in him to be a starter anymore, but he’s still got value as a QB.
by NOLACuse on Oct 19, 2009 11:34 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
“I’m rambling, but my point is that I don’t think these guys’ pasts mean that they’re necessarily not "good players on and off the field." In fact, all indications so far dispute that notion.”
I wouldn’t say it disputes it. More like it doesn’t support it. The same can be said of T.O. What has he done or said wrong, since signing with the Bills? I do agree with you that the perceived problems he would bring (if any) would be more comparable to Shockey than the other two mentioned. The only reason I mentioned them at all is to shoot down this silly notion that the Saints roster is a hollowed haven for choir boys. Payton and Loomis don’t just simply RULE OUT problem children; they WEIGH OUT the good versus the bad. What they could potentially bring to the table, versus the problems and/or distractions they might pose. Just like any other diligent HC/GM in the league. Just as I’m sure they’ve already done in discussing T.O.‘s availability earlier in the year. Owens aside, you can dance around stories like this all day. It doesn’t mean they don’t happen.
"Paralyze resistance with persistence" -Woody Hayes
by coldpizza on Oct 17, 2009 2:24 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Share What Your Smok'n
Are you crazy!! For me T.O. stands for TOO OLD. He’s 35, 2 years older than anybody else on the Bills, and drops too many balls. My guess is after this horriffic year he’s having he’ll call it quits and focus on his “reality” TV career.
Will this be the year I finally get to pop this cork?
by dicecar18 on Oct 17, 2009 8:24 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
After TO's actions in SF w/Garcia,
then in Phila, w/Mc Nabb, then in Dallas w/ Romo, don’t you think a team would want him to show a “success story” getting along with a team and QB AND being productive before they acquire him? And what receiver would we put him in front of in NO, I like all our receivers. I’m looking for a way to get Arrington in the mix without taking time away from anyone else, not looking to reduce anyone’s role…..
"Indecision may or may not be my biggest problem" - Jimmy Buffett
by Philinwood on Oct 17, 2009 2:58 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
“I’m looking for a way to get Arrington in the mix without taking time away from anyone else, not looking to reduce anyone’s role…..”
I wouldn’t mind if they reduced Jamar Nesbit’s role as a receiver. :)
Then again, if they wanted to send Nesbit on a Devery route in week 17, I’m pretty sure that would amuse the hell out of me. I’m sure Chase Daniel could hit him in stride.
by Grandmaster Wang on Oct 17, 2009 3:18 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
Nesbit has that deceptive game speed that most teams covet. You think he’s walking, when he’s actually running. I’d like to see Payton work him in as a decoy on 3rd and long. I mean, if you’re going to throw short of the sticks anyway, why not have a guy big enough to drag defenders those extra 13 or 14 yards?
"Paralyze resistance with persistence" -Woody Hayes
by coldpizza on Oct 17, 2009 4:07 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
and don't forget the WR screens
i’d bet he’d be gold as a blocker in those plays. Actually, it’d be kind of interesting to see what happens if they did line him up as a WR. lol. They might be able to get a TD if they faked the screen pass to someone fast such as Reggie Meachem or Henderson. But hey, just the thought of him trying to dive for a catch or jumping to catch a pass is enough to make me cry for mercy. Or we could use him to injure someone by jumping on them. Heck, let’s play him at FS, i bet he could hit hard
Superbowl bound!!!...I know! do you?! Go Saints!!
by skinnykinney on Oct 17, 2009 4:22 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
If all else fails, he could lie on his back and block field goals.
"Paralyze resistance with persistence" -Woody Hayes
by coldpizza on Oct 17, 2009 4:27 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
What about Punt Returns?
The people who say, "Winning isn't everything," don't win very often.
by Hooahsaint on Oct 18, 2009 1:18 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
TO
is done! Stick a fork in that dude, he’s a cancer and he’s old. Not to mention he’s Bart Simpsoning it the last couple years.
Don't worry I got your back cuz...
by TAYDIGGA on Oct 17, 2009 7:50 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
TO not a good fit here
Tigerpaw, originator of this post, I’d have to jump on the bandwagon and disagree with you on this. A lot of TO’s problems in the past has been due to foolishness, I think a lot of TOs problems now are due to his competitive nature. Although, I’d have to admit, he’s dropped balls lately (past 3 years) that he shouldn’t have, he’s a darn good reciever and has an outstanding work ethic. However, the reason that I disagree with having him here is that, as some has alluded to, this offense is effective partly because of the sheer number of options AND the fact that the options are not selfish but content to be a part of the final result (winning) and not THE reason for the result.
To be clear: I don’t think TO would sit back and be quiet if for two weeks he’s not getting a ball thrown his way because his teammates are getting the ball instead. TO is sort of a microcosm of the culture of team sports these days – selfishness. However, in magnanimity, I think TO’s ‘selfishness’ is motivated out of a desire to win vs a Michael Jordan – wanting to shine.
by JAHson on Oct 17, 2009 9:14 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs
Excellent excellent point at the end.
The people who say, "Winning isn't everything," don't win very often.
by Hooahsaint on Oct 18, 2009 3:59 PM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
“However, in magnanimity, I think TO’s ‘selfishness’ is motivated out of a desire to win vs a Michael Jordan – wanting to shine.”
I wholeheartedly agree with this.
"Paralyze resistance with persistence" -Woody Hayes
by coldpizza on Oct 18, 2009 6:02 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
DO you still think we need TO after the Giants game?????
"Indecision may or may not be my biggest problem" - Jimmy Buffett
by Philinwood on Oct 19, 2009 1:39 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
No more than we need Reggie Bush.
"Paralyze resistance with persistence" -Woody Hayes
by coldpizza on Oct 19, 2009 1:50 AM CDT up reply actions 0 recs
no way
although i’m not against the idea of shipping reggie somewhere i dont think we need more offense i do think we can use another linebacker for greg williams to more effectivly utilize the 3-4 defense he has been mixing in so i say the on;ly way we ship off bush is for a quality linebacker
by simone219 on Oct 19, 2009 10:38 AM CDT reply actions 0 recs
T.O.
becomes lazy, and gets DIS-interested when the ball doesn’t come his way. I don’t think Reggie will become that person on/off the field. He’s been hurt and also frustrated in his NFL years and I see no sign of a T.O. personality. No T.O. no way.
You think you know, and you don't know, and you never, ever will.-Jim Mora Sr.
by metryman on Oct 19, 2009 9:38 PM CDT reply actions 0 recs

by 

















