New Orleans Saints' Defensive and Special Teams Player Grades @ Redskins
by saints-nation on Dec 8, 2009 1:00 PM CST
40 comments
Brace yourselves because it isn't pretty. I know I sometimes get criticized for being too harsh in my grading of certain players, and if you're one of the people that generally complains about that you will not be happy with some of these grades. As always I'm interested and looking forward to your feedback. Below are the player grades for defense and special teams at Washington. The letter grade represents the player's performance in the game and the GPA represents the player's cumulative effort on the season.
Will Smith: B- (2.86) Smith fought through constant double teams and struggled to put much pressure on Campbell. He was very helpful against the run and did a good job there, finishing with 4 tackles. He was able to hit Campbell hard twice as the ball was released, but he saved his grade mostly for his performance against the run.
Charles Grant: D (2.14) Charles Grant finished with 2 tackles, both coming late in the contest. Otherwise, he was utterly and completely invisible. On most running plays, he was either blown completely off the ball and out of the play, or he overpursued the edge leaving massive running lanes for the Redskins to take advantage of. He really had a horrible, horrible game and at one point I considered giving him an F. If he hadn't registered a tackle, I would have given it to him. Grant has been undisciplined in his play, lazy, and overall bad as of late. I'd rather Bobby McCray get more snaps at the position at this point.
Bobby McCray: B- (2.06) McCray's lone tackle was on a running play where he blew the Redskins up for a big loss. Once again he surprised me by playing the run better and I think that part of his game has come a long way. His pass rushing skills have suffered a little from that improvement, but I can deal. He did get upfield a couple of times and force a quick release, but the bottom line is Campbell was getting the ball out too fast to wide open targets to get much of a pass rush. McCray doesn't get nearly enough playing time, and based on Grant's recent performances I'd like to see him start at Atlanta. Who knows if that'll happen, but a man can hope.
Anthony Hargrove: C- (2.36) The love affair with Hargrove for most continues despite him struggling to do much of anything in games. I'd say at this point he's played 2-3 good games, but the guy is a defensive end to me. The switch to defensive tackle hasn't worked out that well and he hasn't played the run with any inspiration. He finished with 1 tackle and was seen knocked off the ball repeatedly.
Sedrick Ellis: B- (2.71) Ellis finished with 6 tackles, including 1 for a loss. He's slowly getting back to his pre-injury level of play. He did allow a few players to slip out of his grasp by not wrapping up properly and showing poor tackling technique, but the effort and pursuit was always there. The Redskins only rushed for 88 yards and a 3.5 average per carry, so while it would seem like everything the Redskins did worked, the Saints were actually very good against the run.
Remi Ayodele: B+ (2.24) BY FAR, in my opinion, Ayodele's best game as a Saint. For me this was his coming out party. I've been hard on this guy all season and I've constantly complained about how this guy can be in the mix, but now I understand why. He was pushing the pile constantly, FANTASTIC against the run, and came up big on several third and short plays. The Redskins had no answer for his push up front, and as the game wore on the Redskins essentially gave up on running the ball because it wasn't really working and the pass yardage was coming so easy. He finished with 6 tackles, including one for a loss, and anytime a player was in his grasp he wasn't getting away.
Scott Shanle: B- (2.67) I heard rumblings that some fans were unhappy with Shanle's play, but I actually thought he was ok. On one running play he absorbed a strong block, opened his shoulder and was able to stop a run for no gain dead in it's tracks. Impressive play there, and overall Shanle used the lanes Ayodele and Ellis provided him to be effective stopping the run. He finished with 4 tackles, but he did miss a tackle or two. The major liability, for me, came in his pass coverage. He did a poor job on Fred Davis. Suprising because Shanle usually does a good job covering but he just couldn't run with Davis. Shanle got good pressure on the Vilma interception blitzing, forcing a quick release and bad pass from Campbell.
Jonathan Vilma: B- (2.92) Vilma finished with 5 tackles, but I thought he had a mediocre game overall. He wasn't aggressive and shooting gaps like he normally does. As I screamed at the TV for the defense to make a play, every time I'd notice Vilma pursue a play and get blocked out of contention. He saved his grade with a BIG interception with about 30 seconds left in regulation. That pick stopped a Redskins drive that could have given them a shot at a game winning field goal.
Malcolm Jenkins: D (2.76) The good: he had 9 tackles and was able to knock Campbell down on a blitz from the edge. The bad: those 9 tackles were a product of him getting beat repeatedly, and he dropped the easiest interception he'll ever get which would have killed a Redskins drive late in the red zone. The ugly: he looked like a rookie that was completely lost out there. He took horrendous angles on ball carriers, he bit badly on any fakes and double moves, he was often beat deep, and the "lack of speed" that many pre-draft gurus warned teams about before selecting Jenkins was exposed BIG TIME. He still tackled well, and he's just learning so I don't feel like we should all take the sky is falling approach by any means. Jenkins is still a good young player that will only get better... but this was a really bad showing for him. Hopefully he'll learn from it.
Roman Harper: D (3.03) Harper played his worst game of the season, hands down. We all know he's usually terrific in the box in run support, and we all know he's somewhat of a liability in coverage (especially downfield). Well, in this game he was bad in the box, and he was laughable against the pass. ESPN currently claims he had 4 tackles, whereas NFL.com has him listed as having as 2 tackles. So I don't know which one is accurate. What I did see was that Harper missed a repeated amount of opportunities to tackle someone, and his help over the top on pass plays downfield was late and pathetic. He gets a D instead of a D- for saving a touchdown on a kick return by Devin Thomas.
Darren Sharper: C (3.09) Sharper finished with 5 tackles. His lack of speed was an issue. On Fred Davis' first touchdown he took a bad angle and was beat to the corner. He was late bringing help over the top, like Harper. That said, Sharper was many times the security blanket, and he at least did a good job of limiting the damage. I felt like there were a few plays that were just "bad" instead of "disastrous" because Sharper was there to end them. Give him credit for coming up with a HUGE stop on 3rd and short right before Shaun Suisham's miracle miss.
Troy Evans: D+ (1.55) Evans did finish with 5 tackles, but he was bad in pass coverage and bad in run defense. Twice I caught Sean Payton laying into him on the sidelines for missing assignments. He was third in line to play the position, but had to play with the starting unit once Scott Fujita was made inactive and Jo-Lonn Dunbar got injured early (looked like a hamstring pull). I hear Fujita may be out for a while after he had emergency surgery following a bursa sac rupture in his knee that caused a staph infection. I don't know if that means he's out for the year or what, but we're in MASSIVE trouble if we can't get Fujita back. Too bad, he was playing at a high level. Evans, however, was not. Hopefully Dunbar can get back on the field because he's a much more palatable option.
Pierson Prioleau: C- (2.50) He was ok in coverage, actually, except for one play where he played too far off his receiver and allowed a first down in front of him. He finished with 3 tackles. He'd get a better grade, but he came up with a real boneheaded facemask penalty late that gave the Redskins a chance to win the game.
Usama Young: B- (3.00) He got some reps again at corner in dime packages after McKenzie went out with an injury. His coverage was good and he handled himself fine. He didn't really have anything memorable to write about, but no mistakes either. His biggest play came on special teams when he recovered a fumble right before halftime to give the Saints good field position after they had been stopped down 17-10.
Mike McKenzie: D- (2.17) As good as he was last week, it was back down to earth for Mike McKenzie. McKenzie just couldn't seem to do anything right whatsoever. He was beat deep routinely. He blew just about every open field tackle he had a chance at making. He gave receivers way too much cushion, and yet they would still blow right past him. At one point he took a terrible angle, and Sharper made the tackle behind him and gave him a death stare and screamed letting him not it's not ok to mess up plays like that. At times he seemed disinterested in being out there. At one point he was beat deep, the receiver then fell down, and McKenzie didn't even bother hustling to touch him down. He did finished with 4 tackles, but probably could have had about 10-15 with the number of plays being run right at him. The injury he suffered in the game is unknown, but I was glad it took him out of the game. He flirted with an F for large portions of the game.
Chris McAlister: C+ (2.50) McAlister, like Jenkins and McKenzie, was getting beat routinely and did a poor job of tackling the screen receiver pass the Redskins ran all day. He gave a lot of cushion to his man as well, inciting the Redskins to continuously use that play. He finished with 3 tackles. McAlister, though, came up with arguably the biggest play of the game. He hit Mike Sellers and managed to jar the ball loose in overtime, and had the good sense to recover the fumble as the whistle was being blown and Sellers was called down. The replay showed the head referee that it was indeed a fumble (not sure about that call, but I'll take it), and McAlister single handedly got the Saints the ball in overtime. Ultimately, they would turn that turnover into the game winning 3 points.
Garrett Hartley: A- (3.67) Surprise move to see Sean Payton go with Hartley for this game instead of John Carney. Chris Berman on ESPN said at one point that Carney was hurt, but I think he's misinformed. I think this move was strictly performance based, though I could be wrong. Regardless, Hartley was excellent. All of his kicks were right down the middle. He was 4 for 5 on field goals with a long of 34 yards. His miss was a 58 yarder as time expired, so it's hard to blame him for that miss. Extra points might not be a big deal, either, but Carney has been shaky on that all season long and Hartley did tie the game at 30 with his PAT after Meachem's touchdown. He also hit the game winning 18 yarder, twice, as the first was called back by a Zorn timeout. I don't think there's any way Carney kicks next week and this could mean the end of the veteran's reunion run with the Saints. Hartley was impressive with his accuracy.
Thomas Morstead: C (3.00) Morstead's kickoff depth was much shorter than usual. To be expected given the weather and field temperatue. He did manage to get one about half way into the end zone in overtime, which was an important time to do so. His punts were largely poor, as he averaged 33.3 yards on 3 punts. He did manage to pin one inside the 20, though. One of his punts was so short, it hit an unsuspecting Redskins' blocker in the back, resulting in a turnover for the Saints. The punt was bad, but the end result was magnificent.
Courtney Roby: B+ (3.00) Roby was routinely getting past the 30 on kickoff returns, and almost broke one big on a couple of occassions. Per usual his returns were impressive. He also made a nice tackle on special teams as a gunner.
My Defensive Player of the Game: Remi Ayodele
My Special Teams Player of the Game: Garrett Hartley
0 recs |
40 comments
|
Email
Print
Comments
Now
would Mechams play be considered a fumble or an interception?
by KilnBill on Dec 8, 2009 1:26 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Offensive fumble return. Unless you dabble in FF. Then, it’s entirely open for debate.
"I was not on the boat in question." -Darren Sharper
by coldpizza on Dec 8, 2009 1:36 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
It depends
If you’re looking at a stat sheet it’s forced fumble but in this context I believe he means fantasy football.
by WhoDat_OH on Dec 8, 2009 4:07 PM CST via mobile up reply actions 0 recs
Fantasyland
The way the SAINTS have been playing,I think I’m there already!
by KilnBill on Dec 8, 2009 5:31 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
fumble because it wasn't a pass
that was a crazy play that he made and arguably saved the game for the saints. i wish i could see that punt turnover. i live in georgia and i didn’t get to see anything but i got some bonus coverage and i saw the suisham (i learned how to spell his name from all the publicity) miss and the meachem touchdown to tie it but it cut off before overtime
by superbowl bound on Dec 8, 2009 1:38 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
defensive grades
Anytime this year’s defense (the one that stiffeled the Pats) looks like last year’s defense (the one that made BAD and/or MEDIOCRE PLAYERS/TEAMS look GREAT) the entire defense gets an “F” grade. That said, the only saving grace was (unlike last year) we created some HUGE turnovers, Meachum’s play included.
I, like others have thought you have been too critical of singular performances in the past, but this week I think you were too light on some of the grading. I thought the entire LB corps and Malcolm Jenkins deserved a “F” grades for all the reasons you stated above. Vilma’s INT would have only made the LB play palatable if he had run it back for the GW TD. Jenkins’ play notwithstanding, our secondary play was still HORRENDOUS!!!! The only grade i agreed with was McCallister’s for casuing that fumble. D-Line, uhhhh?!??! I thought it was the best overall, but our pash rush was grossly inefficient and frankly I expected more out of Greg Williams seeing how he coahed this team for three years. I think you should start giving him a grade, as well. As much as he’s done for the Saints this season this should have been one of his signature games, but alas it morphed into his worst effort this season. If injuries are what caused his unimaginitive defensive playcalling, I sincerely hope we get healthy. GREGG WILLIAMS grade?…“F”.
by jray2000 on Dec 8, 2009 1:49 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
This was a complete and utter let down
Washington has a good defense but their offense has been really bad this year
We completely screwed the pooch on that game
I think our offense did well considering we were playing one of the best defences in the league and put up 30 points in 4 quarters
by simone219 on Dec 8, 2009 1:56 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
It's hard to vote here
The defense was awful but they did make some great plays every now and then. They got to 3rd down numerous times and just couldn’t prevent Campbell from completing a pass. How many times did that toss out to the flat work for the ‘skins? They ran the same 4 plays all game…or at least that’s how it looked to my uneducated eyes (which frankly were trying to not look sometimes just because of the carnage of my beloved team.) I don’t know why Williams’s blitz schemes didn’t work. I don’t know why the players couldn’t seem to tackle. I don’t know why EVERY play went for positive yards for the ‘skins…even when we hit people behind the line of scrimmage. I don’t know why this game was as close as it was. And I definitely put some blame on the offense for screwing around in the first few drives and not getting it done.
by xen-cuts on Dec 8, 2009 2:02 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
and if the offense did better in the red zone and exchanged a few of those FGs for TDs, then we actually have a lead late
and the D can play a whole different kind of game. They held Wash to FGs numerous times..
"In the end, the bread was in the pudding." -- Bobby McCray
Shop as usual, and avoid panic buying.
by HansDat on Dec 8, 2009 6:35 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Man I have to laugh — Meach has over HALF the vote at this point in time. That’s just hilarious.
Seriously, this is about the only time I didn’t have something to disagree with you on the grades. Or at least not truly disagree. I might nitpick a + or a – or something but otherwise our guys were not very good Sunday. Fortunately they were good enough that they didn’t give the game away completely and the offense could bail them out.
by FriarBob on Dec 8, 2009 2:17 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I soberly watched every play and...
The player grades may be misleading, because the Skins offensively just had the Saints number all game until the very end. Whether by luck or skill, the Skins almost always had the perfect playcall for the scheme thrown at them. I thought Gregg Williams mixed up his blitzes well like always, throwing in all out blitzes with zone blitzes and faking blitzes all on random downs and situations. But the Redskins almost always had the perfect playcall for what was coming, and on the few times they didn’t, Campbell made perfect throws and the Skins receivers caught almost everything. It was like the Skins had morphed into the Colts. I even toyed with the idea that the Skins were somehow intercepting the defensive calls. Give the Skins coaches and players credit, they were pumped up and wanted this game. The Saints were incredibly lucky to win. Hopefully Atlanta is ready to mail it in after Vick rubbed their nose in it last week….
by howarjo1943 on Dec 8, 2009 2:29 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
problem with this statement
you watched it soberly. Big mistake.
by saints-nation on Dec 8, 2009 3:00 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
"Gold Pants" should be an option
You wanna know why we were able to fight back and ultimately win this game? I’ll tell you why—gold pants. M-E can back me up on this. At first, I thought the mystical powers of the gold pants had abandoned us, but it turns out it was just toying with us. If they had been wearing the black pants, we lose. All hail the pants of gold! We can’t lose in those things.
"I said this early on that this was a good football team, they just maybe had to have a stick put in certain parts of their body to play a little harder in certain places to where we’re able to take interceptions and score touchdowns."--Gregg Williams
by satchmo26 on Dec 8, 2009 2:48 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
At what point do the comparisons to Chuck Norris begin for Robert Meachem?
by saints-nation on Dec 8, 2009 2:54 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
After the awesome show....
After the awesome he put one I say we start now:
Robert Meachem doesn’t cut his grass he dares it to grow!
Here's to a fresh Brees blowing in NOLA!!!
by ValientC on Dec 8, 2009 3:47 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
I thought this was a pretty good assessment
But I, like you, have been incredibly disappointed by Charles Grant. His # plays should go way down. His GPA for the season (2.14), while not very good, is way closer to some other players than it should be. I think he is the largest disappointment of the year. You would think with all the success we have had he would be doing better
"I think we agree, the past is over" - George W Bush
"The greatest enemy of knowlege is not ignorance; it is the illusion of knowledge" Stephen Hawking
by Philinwood on Dec 8, 2009 2:56 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
his GPA
is actually worse than any other full time starter. 2.14 is basically C material. Considering that I’ve yet to give out an F, and I save the D’s for pitiful showings, that GPA is an embarrassment. And honestly, if he didn’t have two monster games that scored him A’s, his GPA would be much worse.
by saints-nation on Dec 8, 2009 2:59 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Meachem
my inside source with the Saints told me that Meachem drinks a gasoline with shards of glass and razorblades tonic before each game.
by saints-nation on Dec 8, 2009 2:57 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Stripping
What happened to the beginning of the season when everybody was looking to strip the ball at every opportunity? Seems like the Saints (other than Bobby Meachem) have forgotten GWs strip to win techniques that looked so good in the early season. We did recover a couple of fumbles on defense and special teams, but neither of them were the results of active strips but rather stupidity (kick-off) and falling on your head (overtime). When I watch the great defenses like the Packers, the Vikings, the Steelers and Ravens when they are not sucking etc, every player is punching at the ball every down. I hate to see someone tackle a runner from behind without going for the ball. Its a waste of a turnover opportunity which is the equivalent of giving away the ball.
Also, Charles Grant needs to go. He gives up on plays all the time and is one of the slowest runners I have ever seen. He, Reggie, Troy Evans and John Carney could make a CFL team very very happy this winter.
by jamaican drew brees on Dec 8, 2009 2:59 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I don't remember Grant playing well enough to get an A
in any game, but I wish I could tape these games to better evaluate. I remember that he had some good plays this season, a few, but I don’t remember whole games. It is a long season, so probably I forgot, but it just seems he is a weak link. He is not going to be any help to whoever has to fill in for Fujita as a sub.
"I think we agree, the past is over" - George W Bush
"The greatest enemy of knowlege is not ignorance; it is the illusion of knowledge" Stephen Hawking
by Philinwood on Dec 8, 2009 3:05 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
looking back at his grades
he actually never scored an A. He got a B+ against Buffalo and St. Louis, and a B against Carolina. I think the difference between him and Will Smith is a “bad game” for Will Smith is an active game with a few bad plays and missed tackles, whereas a “bad game” for Grant is turning virtually invisible. He needs to get his weight down. The money he got turned him into a lazy player that gets motivated only on occasion. At least Smith has fire in his belly and the contract hasn’t buried his will, no pun intended.
by saints-nation on Dec 8, 2009 3:13 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Phil drive north on the pkwy
I have the Jets, Giants, Panthers & the Pats game on DVR we can watch them over together
by N_O_1saintfan on Dec 8, 2009 10:58 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Our defense is now looking scary bad
but I think it was the field/refs/injuries that attributed to that but we were in a horrible funk. I blame it mostly on GW’s playcalling. We should grade that. So far this season I haven’t had a problem with it but this game was poorly called by GW imo.
Superbowl bound!!!...I know! do you?! Go Saints!!
by skinnykinney on Dec 8, 2009 3:15 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
injuries
I have to disagree about the play-calling, since I agree with an earlier post that the Redskins just seemed to have our number defensively. Also, I agree with s-n that our defense as a whole played really poorly. I’m glad they’re running it on NFL Network tonight, so I’ll be able to re-watch it and have more concrete opinions (watching a game you think you’re losing while at a sports bar = not so clear picture of the game).
by jful on Dec 8, 2009 4:41 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
had our number?
The skins have not had anybody’s number all year. We are/were arguably the best defense in footbal. I sincerely doubt “it all came together” so to speak last sunday. The defense did not play well because they were never put in any position to make plays…thus, the PLAYCALLING SUCKED!!!!!!!!!!!
by jray2000 on Dec 9, 2009 1:34 AM CST up reply actions 0 recs
I'd certainly like some updates on Scott Fujita's status
We’re definitely in trouble without Scott Fujita. Are they playing this situation by ear? I haven’t seen any indications that he’d be done for the season. At best, I hope we have him back for the playoffs.
And the eighth and final rule: if this is your first time at Fight Club, you have to fight.
by Ace Venom on Dec 8, 2009 3:31 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I said it before
I like Pressley and I would love to see more rotation of the D-line with the majority of reps going to Hargrove (at DE) , Pressley, Ellis, and Will Smith. Maybe Mc Cray in for Hargrove. I would take my chances on that. Grant has earned more time on the sidelines and Pressley, Hargrove and Mc Cray have earned more time on the field. Possibly some 3-4 defense also. With Grant and a sub for Fujita in the game, if they are on the same side of the field it’s a recipe for disaster.
"I think we agree, the past is over" - George W Bush
"The greatest enemy of knowlege is not ignorance; it is the illusion of knowledge" Stephen Hawking
by Philinwood on Dec 8, 2009 3:56 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
I'm not so sure Hartley wouldn't have made that 68 yarder...
Go back and check the replay or if you guys have a DVR like me, skip to that kick and see that when Hartley plants his front foot as he coming forward with his kicking leg, his plant foot slips forward. I played soccer all my years growing up and a little kicking along with wide receiver in High School so I know that that plant foot will F_ck you up if it slips. Hartley’s toes on his kicking foot got enough of the ground when he was bringing that kicking foot forward for the kick that it took a lot of power out of the kick. The ball was short but mostly straight so I believe that with a firm plant, he may have probably nailed that one. The kicking game suffered a lot due to the weather and field conditions, i.e. Moresteads not so great punts and shorter than usual kick-offs.
by narco301 on Dec 8, 2009 4:13 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
Chuckwagon Grant
has to be benched or sent to special teams only. It’s hard to play solid defense when you’re playing ten against eleven.
by WhoDat_OH on Dec 8, 2009 4:30 PM CST via mobile reply actions 0 recs
Chris McCalister cut per ESPN's Adam Schefter
They also signed another younger corner, can’t remember his name.
by howarjo1943 on Dec 8, 2009 5:10 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
The field
was our worst enemy. It looked like they were playing in slush. Being the dome-oriented team that we are, it was easily discernible throughout most of the game that their strides and plays were in line w/a dome type of field. They couldn’t hit full stride or make the usual spot-on acrobatics that would be the extra extension needed to make a major play. They had to stutter-step a lot not because of technique, but because of running in slush. The Redskins are used to this type of field so it didn’t impact their athleticism as much and served as a counterpoise to make them look better than they actually were.
We need a Plan B for when we play on fields like this because the usual dome scheme doesn’t translate well on this type of field. Just look at why/how the Bears were able to trounce us in the 2006 NFC championship game. We walked out on to the field like we were in the dome and proceeded to slip and slide to defeat.
They need to take the ugliest high school practice field, spray that SOB down until it is a mudslide and practice on that, just in case.
by Recondite on Dec 8, 2009 5:22 PM CST reply actions 0 recs
or
just get home field and stomp all over everybody
I see what you got...Lets rock - Al Bundy
by knucklesmalone on Dec 9, 2009 12:05 PM CST up reply actions 0 recs
Great job
You armchair sycophant. The Saints played on sloppy, horrible field conditions. Therein lies your context as to why they were tackling poorly and taking bad angles on assignments. On several occassions I saw players slipping and sliding, only to miss their target.
Give the field a bad grade for this one, not the players.
by J of the F on Dec 9, 2009 10:58 AM CST reply actions 0 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Canal Street Chronicles
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2010 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
