Darren Sharper: Jets Might be One Free Safety Away from Getting a Super Bowl Ring
by Dave Cariello on Apr 14, 2010 6:06 PM CDT
Email
PrintHere is the video that has everyone gossiping today. It's from TMZ and it's obvious the paparazzi had caught Darren Sharper coming out of a restaurant and waiting for valet service. The camera guy tried baiting Darren with lame questions like whether he thought Reggie Bush would play better next season without the distraction of Kim Kardashian.
But Sharper did seem to take the bait when asked about the NY Jets. He had a few complementary things to say about their off-season thus far and finished it off by declaring the Jets "might be one free safety away from getting a Super Bowl ring."
WTF does that mean, Darren? I'm going to pretend like the obvious perceived meaning of that statement was, in fact, misunderstood. Just because I'm in a good mood. But seriously, I honestly wish Sharper would give it a rest with the furtive comments about playing for other teams yet doing it so blatantly through the media. I'm not saying my opinion is completely rational. He has every right to search for a better job and/or better pay. I get it, I really do. But doing it this way just doesn't sit well with me as a fan. Does he really not love New Orleans anymore and want out that badly?
But that's not the best part, of course. Watch Sharper check out the ladies walking by at about the 1:20 minute mark. Too funny.
89 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
whatever
I think he’s trying to drum up a rival for the Saints to have to out-bid for his services, because right now there is NO competition over him. Ho-hum.
Too bad we don’t have a rookie mini-camp fight on the practice field to talk about…
"I have all of the love in the world for Darren Sharper. I just don't have all the money in the world for Darren Sharper." Mickey Loomis
Mariah Carey as his chauffer? DAT'S DA BOMB!
Good luck, Darren. Hope you stay in NOLA.
Fat, dumb, and happy. Hell, two out of three ain't bad!
I Want To Die In My Sleep Like My Grandpa – Not Screaming and Yelling Like His Passengers.
by Just 'Nother Day on Apr 14, 2010 6:27 PM CDT reply actions
“I honestly wish Sharper would give it a rest with the furtive comments about playing for other teams yet doing it so blatantly through the media.”
The guy isn’t under contract. The phrase “other teams” applies equally to all 32, including the Saints. If he wants to speak his mind, especially when asked pointed questions, let him. If the Saints want him back, sit down with him and negotiate a deal. It’s a two way street. Suppose the Saints were taking a proactive approach to the situation, and pursuing SOMEONE to fill the void. Loomis would inevitably be being asked similiar questions by the media: “What can fans expect a guy like Ken Hamlin to bring to the table?” Now, it may be the Saints’ policy not to discuss potential free agents and that’s their prerogative. That doesn’t mean Sharper needs to adopt the same media-unfriendly approach. The bottom line being that IF Loomis was being completely candid about where we stood at the position, I seriously doubt Sharper or any of his family members would be getting butthurt over it, or asking him to button his lip until the dust settles. If they did, he’d probably tell them where to get off and rightfully so. The 2009 Saints season is in the past and Sharper was a part of it. The 2010 Saints season is in the future and Sharper may STILL be a part of it. As of today (the present), the two shouldn’t be associated with one another. Who owes who what? BS. I suppose if Charles Grant was talking about signing with another team, it would be perfectly cool, since no one wants him back anyway and he left on the franchise’s terms, not his. Sorry, I’m not buying into that biased hypocrisy.
"I was not on the boat in question." -Darren Sharper
you can hit me with all the facts you got
but it doesn’t matter. It’s just an unwritten rule in my mind that you don’t do things like this. It just doesn’t sit right with me.
Wanna say something? Sign up! It's free!
by Dave Cariello on Apr 14, 2010 7:29 PM CDT up reply actions
So, if Loomis answered this question "What can fans expect a guy like Ken Hamlin to bring to the table?" candidly, would you be ok with that? Even though it would give the impression that the team was ready to do what was best for the team?
"I was not on the boat in question." -Darren Sharper
The guy isn’t under contract.
True
If he wants to speak his mind, especially when asked pointed questions, let him.True
It’s a two way street.True
That doesn’t mean Sharper needs to adopt the same media-unfriendly approach.True
I suppose if Charles Grant was talking about signing with another team, it would be perfectly coolTrue
Guess what? I don’t give a crap! You keep assuming that I’m looking at this situation rationally. I’m not. I don’t give a crap what the technicalities of the situation are. Sharper helped my favorite football team win a Super Bowl. I like him. And until he puts on another teams jersey, he’s still a Saint in my mind. I don’t give a crap what the details or status of his contract are. He’s allowed to want to play for another team, but I don’t want to hear about it. Call me immature.
By the way…who is Ken Hamlin?
Wanna say something? Sign up! It's free!
by Dave Cariello on Apr 14, 2010 8:31 PM CDT up reply actions 2 recs
An UFA free safety recently released by the Cowboys. Used to play for the Seahawks, made the Pro Bowl in 2007. Known for bringing the wood.
Here he is clearing out Donte Stallworth’s sinuses:
"I was not on the boat in question." -Darren Sharper
Is he available!?!?
j/k
Wanna say something? Sign up! It's free!
by Dave Cariello on Apr 14, 2010 8:41 PM CDT up reply actions
WOW!
That got you really worked up Dave.
Everybody Dave needs a HUG.
LOL
by jeremysherwin on Apr 14, 2010 11:25 PM CDT up reply actions
nah
not really
Wanna say something? Sign up! It's free!
by Dave Cariello on Apr 15, 2010 12:01 AM CDT up reply actions
BOOM DAT! rec'd
I voted “A little bit” because it doesn’t sit well with me either, I guess for irrational reasons too. Sharper’s just trying to use the media, whenever they spring up from the sewers around him, to motivate Mickey or some other team to pay him the $ he thinks he’s worth. He may be a little self-deluded, IMHO. He did deal with a lot of nagging injuries last season and has been on crutches for many weeks of this offseason. Teams aren’t going to overpay when there’s so much risk involved.
Still, I hope he stays with us. I’m thinking today may be the day Mickey marked on his calender for really trying to get our FAs signed because today is the restricted FA deadline. He probably didn’t want to spend too much before now while waiting to see if he might have to match or better an offer sheet from another team for one of our guys. Now he knows that won’t happen so he probably better knows how much he has to work with to sign Evans and PT to long term contracts, give Mr. Super Bowl MVP a raise, and bring Sharper back into the fold.
"As soon as Tony (Dungy) said we had no chance, I knew we had 'em right where we wanted 'em"--Coach Sean Payton right after Super Bowl XLIV with the Lombardi Trophy firmly in hand. WHO DAT!!
by David "Satch" Kelly on Apr 15, 2010 9:30 AM CDT up reply actions
I suppose unwritten rules can apply to unwritten contracts. They have something in common, anyway.
"I was not on the boat in question." -Darren Sharper
Totally agree with Dave
I might feel the same way Sharper does if I were in his situation, but I’m not. I’m in MY situation as a fan of a certain team. The Spock like rationality doesn’t play well with me unless it’s justifying to myself why we lost someone. Even if it’s stupid fan emotions I WANT and EXPECT and Like the idea of the players for my team loving the team as much as I do. In my messed up fanaticism every good player we had would be willing to take pay cuts and such just to remain a Saint because they love the team like I do. Realistic? No. Emotions of a fan? Sure.
Yes
exactly.
Wanna say something? Sign up! It's free!
by Dave Cariello on Apr 14, 2010 8:42 PM CDT up reply actions
“every good player we had would be willing to take pay cuts and such just to remain a Saint”
If every player was that loyal to their team, the only players we’d have would be the ones we acquired straight out of college. Brees would have taken the Chargers lowball offer and re-signed without a guarantee to start, Fujita would have never left KC, much less Dallas, Vilma would have bent over backwards to remain a Jet, Shockey would have never grumbled and quietly competed with Kevin Boss for his spot back … you get the picture. We probably wouldn’t be anywhere close to the team we are today. Discontentment builds teams just as much as it tears them apart.
"I was not on the boat in question." -Darren Sharper
Nope Nope Nope
Brees would be willing to work for minimum wage because he loves the Saints like I do. Fujita would be turning down millions in KC to play for us and bouncing at a club in the quarter to help make ends meet in the off season. Vilma and Shockey…..you get the picture. They all love being a Saint and want to be here as much as I want them to be here. Just count me as monkey 1 and 2.
Brees would be willing to work for minimum wage because he loves the Saints like I do
Sarcasm font?
I'm likin' that Hughes kid.
No sarcasm font
But some “extreme exageration” font. I just want/choose to believe the players love the team like I love the team.
I look at it like this
We all have professions. Most of us I believe love or at least like what we do for a living. If someone comes to me tomorrow and says hey, I’ll pay you 5 grand more a year then what you make now if you come work for me doing the same thing that you do now. If I truly love my profession and what I do, I would take the offer. It would be hard to leave behind the friends/coworkers that I have and to overcome the sense of loyalty that I have or want to have, but to make life easier (financially) for myself I would do it. Plus I still get to do what I love to do. Now, I guess we could say hey, if you’re making millions of dollars a year playing football, do you really need a few more million a year to make life easier for yourself? To poor people like us who work hard for everything we got, that would be the belief. But if one of us got rich tomorrow, I can guarantee our lifestyles and living expenses would eventually become more expensive. I personally can’t imagine how I couldn’t live off of a few million a year salary and not have more than enough left over each year to save but then again, I am a working class guy who will never be in that situation. My point I guess is that Sharper will only be doing his job, playing football, for a short while longer, I guess I could understand why he’d be trying to get every bit more he can right now while he can. But as a fan, I totally agree with Dave, I absolutely want to believe that he loves the Saints and south Louisiana like we do and couldn’t dream of playing anywhere else. If he goes, of course that belief is shattered. If he shows desire to go somewhere else, that belief is tainted. That’s just how it is to fans like us. Its like having a girlfriend and everything she says or shows you leads you to believe that she loves you and wants to be with you; cool, but if she hints around that she would be totally fine being with someone else, you can’t help but care for her a little less. Am I right?
good points
Wanna say something? Sign up! It's free!
by Dave Cariello on Apr 15, 2010 1:16 PM CDT up reply actions
Eh
If he’s not breaking the law or spouting rubbish about the Saints, I don’t mind what he does in the offseason.
He has no contract. So he’s not a Saints player and doesn’t have to show any loyalty to them. He (maybe over-) values his talent and wants to get paid, so he reaches out in whatever clumsy misguided ways he thinks will get attention from other teams. It doesn’t seem to be working whatsoever but I don’t see any harm in it.
He has been pretty much like this for awhile.
What it all boils down to is money on sharper’s end and stability on the saints end.
Saints want a multi-year-end deal which amounts to less money than franchising Sharper.
Sharper having one of the best years of his career wants more money. There is nothing wrong with that.
However, I do believe if he decides to sign with a team other than the saints, you and i will be upset. Do not let that anger be directed towards Sharper, for it is the Mickey L. and other high ranking members that are causing this situation.
by jeremysherwin on Apr 14, 2010 7:17 PM CDT up reply actions
I don’t blame either side. They’re just placing different values on Sharper’s worth and, given the circumstances, that’s perfectly understandable. Seldom do players his age in a new scheme have a season like the one he just had. He wants to cash in on it and I don’t blame him. They’re leery it’s an anomaly and, in all likelihood, it probably is.
"I was not on the boat in question." -Darren Sharper
That comment was probably more directed at the Jets than us. Defense certainly wasn’t what was keeping the Jets away from a championship last year. It looks like he’s made up his mind where he wants to play next season. New York City probably holds a little bit of sway for someone like Sharper if he prefers the glamor of a bigger stage. I think that is an issue just as much as money is. It seemed like he was courting the Jets as soon as he hit the market. It can’t be the quality of the team. The only pieces missing from our champion team are Fujita and him, and we now have a better D-Line. We’re a heck of a lot better than the Jets, so it looks like Sharper is at the point in his career where he is going after fame and fortune. So be it. I thank him for his part in the Saints Super Bowl, but as with all players that go to other teams, I won’t be wishing him any success if it comes at the slightest expense to New Orleans.
"I want to hand this trophy to the MVP of the Super Bowl -- and the MVP of the entire league.''
-- Saints coach Sean Payton, handing the Vince Lombardi Trophy to Drew Brees after Super Bowl 44.
He wants to go to New York
I think he wants a career in broadcasting after he retires. New York is a huge market. My opinion of him hasn’t changed.
“We’re a heck of a lot better than the Jets”
With Sharper we were 14 points better than them. He accounted for 7 of those points however, and also intercepted another pass. They also didn’t have Tomlinson and Holmes back then, though it remains to be seen what they’ll bring to the table. Sanchez will have an entire season under his belt, too. All things considered, I think it’s tough to call us “a heck of a lot” better today. Put it this way … if we squared off this weekend, I think the home team would be slightly favored.
"I was not on the boat in question." -Darren Sharper
I think it's easy to say we're a heck of a lot better than them
because we proved it on the field. Until teams start playing in April, the superbowl champions get to say they’re better than everybody else until the next season starts
"But tonight the Superbowl belongs to the City of New Orleans" - Roger Goodell 2/7/2010
You can't judge the quality of a team based on one game
A 13-3 team that didn’t have much to play for during their last 2 games is a lot better than a 9-7 team that played their started every second of the season. They lost Thomas Jones and LT (at least statistically) isn’t a suitable replacement. And is Santonio Holmes a huge upgrade as a #2 WR over Jericho Cotchery? It is an upgrade, but not a great one. And Sanchez wasn’t all that noticeably better at the end of the season compared to the beginning, so I don’t know if he will be any better at the start of the season. So the upgraded at WR, downgraded at RB, and replaced Lito Sheppard with Antonio Cromartie, which, if you ask a few disgruntled Chargers fans, could turn out to be a wash. Not exactly the kind of improvements that will help them surge past the NFL champs.
"I want to hand this trophy to the MVP of the Super Bowl -- and the MVP of the entire league.''
-- Saints coach Sean Payton, handing the Vince Lombardi Trophy to Drew Brees after Super Bowl 44.
My only contention is the heckuva lot part
you were definitely better, and proved it head to head. But i think Mark Sanchez handed that game on a platter to you guys. And you took advantage of it.
As for the Jets offseason moves, i would say that out of all the teams offseason moves, there’s has improved there team more dramatically than any other team has. on paper of course. but that’s all we have to go on until that first preseason game enlightens us a little more.
I agree on the LdT move(only one LT), they gave him the same money they denied TJ. that said, they’ll still be potent on the ground with Shonn, LT, and maybe Leon Washington back.
Santonio Holmes isn’t being looked at as an upgrade over Cotchery. He’s not replacing him, it just adds depth to the Jets weakest position. Before that move David Clowney was the slot. The who? factor applies there. Now, with Cotchery as your slot, that’s going to really make DC’s adjust there gameplan.
Sanchez was much better at the end of the season, and blossomed in the playoffs. compare his numbers from the 1st 6 games to the 3 playoff games and last 3 games of the season. Sight unseen, i bet you they were better. Although I agree, he is the X factor for this team. how his development goes, how this team goes.
And Lito was horrible for the Jets. Cromartie is a question mark, but the talent is there, it has already been shown, and he’s much younger than an over the hill Lito. He will be thrown into the deep end this year with Revis Island on the other side, it will be up to him whether he sinks or swims.
I don’t see Sharper coming to NY, although i think it’d be a great move on both sides if it happens. if that D has weak spots it’s DEnds bringing pressure, and a good SS. If they pull off a Sharper deal, sign Jason Taylor, and are able to put together a competent draft day(s), they will be a very strong contender coming out the AFC.
My problem with that statement is the same one I have with the Vikings fans griping about the NFC championship game. You don’t understand that turnovers can be forced by the defense and aren’t just careless mistakes by the offense.
By your own admission, the Jets got worse at RB, added depth at WR, and added a “question mark” at CB. Big whoop. Not the kind of moves that take a 9-7 team past a 13-3 team. A 4 game difference over a 16 game season is pretty significant.
Lets look at Sanchez’s performances by week. Weeks 1-3 he had QB ratings of 84.3, 101.1 and 81.4. The last 3 games of the season his QB ratings were 49.7, 78 and 60.2. He did step it up for 2 out of his 3 playoff games (that game against the Chargers was nothing special) but for the most part his play dropped off once he got throttled by the Saints and went downhill from there. I really don’t see any reason to think he was getting better as the season went along.
"I want to hand this trophy to the MVP of the Super Bowl -- and the MVP of the entire league.''
-- Saints coach Sean Payton, handing the Vince Lombardi Trophy to Drew Brees after Super Bowl 44.
“A 4 game difference over a 16 game season is pretty significant.”
A 10 game difference is even more significant and the Saints and Bucs split their series. W-L records mean little when it comes down to who’s the better team on the field.
"I was not on the boat in question." -Darren Sharper
What’s your point? I’ve already said that you can’t judge a team based on one game alone. Splitting a 2 game series doesn’t mean that both teams are on an equal talent level, just as I don’t believe the Saints are a whopping 21 points worth of talent better than the Patriots. That’s just how some games turn out, but over the course of the season, the most talented teams rise to the top.
There is a tendency in sports like football to think that head-to-head matchups are the end all in determining the quality of a team by comparison. That can be tempting because the best teams may only lose 3 or 4 games. But in baseball the best team in the world is still going to lose 60 times a year. You have to reconcile the fact that a team was beaten 60 times with the fact that the team is better than the teams that beat them. In the end, the best teams are the ones with the most wins, and thats the only way to measure a team’s quality.
"I want to hand this trophy to the MVP of the Super Bowl -- and the MVP of the entire league.''
-- Saints coach Sean Payton, handing the Vince Lombardi Trophy to Drew Brees after Super Bowl 44.
by VAsaintsfan on Apr 15, 2010 10:27 AM CDT up reply actions
“In the end, the best teams are the ones with the most wins, and thats the only way to measure a team’s quality.”
If two teams played one another every week, or faced the exact same opponents simultaneously in parallel universes, I would agree that W-L records would be the best indicator as to who was the better team. Neither is the case. Head-to-head is absolutely the best way to judge that. The Cowboys beat the Saints. That means the Cowboys were a better team than the Saints on that particular day. That’s not to say the Saints wouldn’t beat them 9 out of 10 times. But really, what does that even matter? For all we know, if the Saints and Jets played 10 times, the Jets could win 9.
Suppose the Saints had played every team they faced tooth and nail all season and lost every contest by a single point, except one. The one game the won was the season opener against the Lions, and they absolutely destroyed them. Meanwhile the Lions go on to finish the season 5-11, the same incredibly telling 4 game victory margin that lies between the Saints and Jets in real life. All five of the Lions victories are by single point. All five come against teams with less than 5 victories, none of which the Saints faced. All 10 of the Lions other losses were also blowouts. Under this scenario, the Lions are CLEARLY better than the Saints, correct?
“What’s your point?”
Did I stutter? W-L records mean little when it comes down to who’s the better team on the field.
"I was not on the boat in question." -Darren Sharper
So by your standard, the Cowboys were a higher quality team during the 2009 season? And the 2009 Bucs and Panters are equally as talented as the 2009 Saints? And in your scenario, yes, I would say that a 5-11 team is better than any 1-15 team.
"I want to hand this trophy to the MVP of the Super Bowl -- and the MVP of the entire league.''
-- Saints coach Sean Payton, handing the Vince Lombardi Trophy to Drew Brees after Super Bowl 44.
“So by your standard, the Cowboys were a higher quality team during the 2009 season? And the 2009 Bucs and Panters are equally as talented as the 2009 Saints?”
The Cowboys were a better team than the Saints on the day they played the Saints and there is truly nothing to suggest that was a fluke. They outplayed the Saints the vast majority of that game. The Saints destroyed the Bucs once and played them close in the other. They beat the Panthers rather handily, then lost to them without their starters. In summary … yes, no, no. Over the course of the entire season, it’s debatable. The Saints beat the Vikings, who beat the Cowboys, who beat the Saints. You could argue that A > B > C > A loop until you’re blue in the face and never come up with a definitive answer. On a two-team platform, however, there’s no debating A > B.
Your standard is no less debatable. Case in point: were the 2007 Giants a better team than the 2007 Cowboys? They lost to the Cowboys twice in the regular season, by 10 and 11 point margins. They beat them once in the playoffs by 4 points and went on to win the Super Bowl. The Giants accumulated one more win total, but only because they were afforded an extra game as a wild card team. Had the Eagles of Redskins won the division, there’s nothing to suggest the Cowboys WOULDN’T have advanced, especially since the team they swept in the regular season did. In that regular season, the Cowboys won three more games than the Giants. To make this scenario run parallel with the one posed prior, suppose the Giants had finished 9-7 and STILL gone on their post season tear. That’s now a 4 game win differential in the regular season, 13 each total. The 13-3 one-and-done in the playoffs team is still better, right?
"I was not on the boat in question." -Darren Sharper
by coldpizza on Apr 15, 2010 2:31 PM CDT up reply actions 1 recs
I'm not arguing on the basis of that game
You didn’t answer my question. I’m talking about the 2009 Saints compared to the 2009 Cowboys. Not that one game. I agree that any team can beat any team on any Sunday. It doesn’t make them the better team if you look at their entire body of work.
"I want to hand this trophy to the MVP of the Super Bowl -- and the MVP of the entire league.''
-- Saints coach Sean Payton, handing the Vince Lombardi Trophy to Drew Brees after Super Bowl 44.
“You didn’t answer my question.”
Yes, I did. 2009 Cowboys better? Yes, as I have no reason to believe the victory was a fluke. Carolina equal? No. Tampa Bay equal? No. Basically, A > E carries a whole lot of weight with me. A > B > E carries a little less. A > B > C > E carries even less. A > B > C > D > E, still less. The further and further you move away from A vs E, the more skewed the comparison between A and E becomes. That’s not to say that multiple examples of A > B > E can’t override A > E in my mind. All result strings should carry SOME degree of weight. W-L records don’t represent result strings. They’re just a blind tally of wins and losses, one that pays absolutely no regard to the ever-evolving stature of the opponent(s) at hand. If that’s all you’re capable of wrapping your head around, that’s cool by me. All I’m saying is, that’s not the end all/tell all by any stretch of the imagination, imo.
"I was not on the boat in question." -Darren Sharper
“2009 Cowboys better? Yes, as I have no reason to believe the victory was a fluke.”
That’s without breaking out the spreadsheets, btw. There might be a s*** load more examples of “Saints > ______ > Cowboys” than there are examples of “Cowboys > ______ > Saints”. Show me overwhelming indirect evidence among common opponents and I might have a reason to believe differently.
"I was not on the boat in question." -Darren Sharper
Correct. So, let’s look at this in degrees of importance. Being that there are 32 teams in the NFL, A > B should carry a weight of 31, as you could conceivably string together every team in a series of game results. An A > B > C result would thereby carry a weight of 30 and so on.
So, here’s what you’re looking at through Level C:
Level A (one team):
Inconclusive.
Level B (two teams):
Cowboys > Saints. Cowboys 31 pts.
Level C (three teams):
Cowboys > Panthers = Saints. Cowboys 30 pts.
Cowboys > Bucs = Saints. Cowboys 30 pts.
Cowboys > Falcons < Saints. Inconclusive.
Saints > Vikings > Cowboys. Saints 30 pts.
Saints > Giants > Cowboys. Saints 30 pts.
Saints > Eagles < Cowboys. Inconclusive.
Saints > Redskins < Cowboys. Inconclusive.
Running total: Cowboys 91, Saints 60.
Basically, that entire round was a wash. So, now you go to four teams. Did the Saints beat a team, that beat a team, that beat the Cowboys? If so, who? What about vice versa? Remember, these would only be worth 29 pts each. Keep going, until the Saints make up that 31 pt gap. Just don’t hurt yourself digging, because there’s a pretty good chance that swing doesn’t exist. Either that or it’s buried so far down, that it would take a BCS level computer program to unearth it.
I decided to grade divisional splits as ties, btw. There’s definitely merit in stating that the Saints outplayed the Bucs and Panthers over the two-game series … I just don’t think it would be fair to split hairs for one team, when I honestly would have no idea how well the other played, had they happened to split a series. In other words, I feel like I’d be giving the Saints an advantage, just because I happened to watch them play. Regardless, it’s no less uncompassionate a methodology than pointing at a W-L column and saying “there ya go … that’s the better team”.
"I was not on the boat in question." -Darren Sharper
The Cowboys were a better team than the Saints on the day they played the Saints
That’s a critical point that everyone should consider and accept. And not only the day, it might come down to a play or two where one team executed successfully and the other one did not (Wikings, anybody?) and it was enough for the win.
I'm likin' that Hughes kid.
“And in your scenario, yes, I would say that a 5-11 team is better than any 1-15 team.”
And I’d venture to guess that most analytically minded people would disagree with you.
"I was not on the boat in question." -Darren Sharper
Based on what?
I could easily argue that the NFL rules would agree with me. That’s why the draft is set up the way it is. Teams with the fewest wins pick first because they are deemed the worst teams. Teams with the most wins make the playoffs because they are deemed the best teams. If you want to argue against that, then we might as well go to the college system of having experts voting for who gets in to the Super Bowl.
"I want to hand this trophy to the MVP of the Super Bowl -- and the MVP of the entire league.''
-- Saints coach Sean Payton, handing the Vince Lombardi Trophy to Drew Brees after Super Bowl 44.
The teams with the best RECORDS make the playoffs. That doesn’t necessarily make them the best overall teams. Not every team plays every other team, so there’s no definitive way to determine who the true best 12 (or 8, or 4, or even 2) teams are. It’s a system with room for error. That’s all it is. The mere fact that you could conceivably have a 3-13 team win their division should attest to this.
“If you want to argue against that, then we might as well go to the college system of having experts voting for who gets in to the Super Bowl.”
As long as they continued to take more than just W-L records into account, I’d be all for that.
"I was not on the boat in question." -Darren Sharper
If the season were 62 games long (then ST’s would be bloody expensive), with each team playing every other home and away, W-L would be the most important factor in deciding which team was best, right?
Yes, it would. Not 100% ideal, as you’d still have injuries, weather differences, trades/cuts, etc., occur in the interim … but it would be a whole lot closer to “true” than it is today. I think the closest you could ever realistically get to that and still cover roughly the same number of weeks, would be to expand the league to 42 teams, 21 in each conference. No divisional assignment. 20 regular season games, where everyone played everyone else within the conference once. No playoffs. The team with the best record from the AFC would play the team with the best record from the NFC in the Super Bowl. You’d inevitably wind up gaining one week of play, in order to keep the number of regular season games even (i.e., ten home, ten away for each team). Scheduling in subsequent years would be relatively simple. All they’d have to do is flip-flop the host sites and rearrange order so that the marquee matchups were evenly distributed throughout the season. Some people would probably p*** and moan about no playoffs and there’s still the outside chance that the two teams with the best overall records would be from the same conference. Still, you’d practically be guaranteed a phenomenal Super Bowl matchup each season and we’d never have to hear the “weak schedule” or “weak division” post-season excuses again.
"I was not on the boat in question." -Darren Sharper
They could divide it into East and West based conferences like the NBA, in order to save on airfare. Or they could reassign conferences each season, based on the prior year’s records. This would actually avoid the exact same scenario (of the two teams with the best overall records) from repeating itself, while also giving season ticket holders the opportunity to see those other teams play every so often. The AL and NL operated independently for years, as did the NFL and AFL the first three years of the Super Bowl era. I honestly don’t see anything wrong with that, especially if you’re willing to reassign teams from year to year.
"I was not on the boat in question." -Darren Sharper
Then that’s where you and I part ways sir. I favor W-L because it is a measurable metric that is not swayed by emotion. If team A wins 10 games by an average score of 30 and team B wins 10 games by an average score of 14, then the fact that team B chose not to run up the score shouldn’t make a win any less of a win. At the professional level there should be a decent level of parity. Every division has some cream puffs, and every division has some good teams. The difference shouldn’t be such that it produces a noticeable advantage for some teams over others. This isn’t college. You can’t schedule St. Mary’s School for the Blind every other week just to get enough wins to make the playoffs.
"I want to hand this trophy to the MVP of the Super Bowl -- and the MVP of the entire league.''
-- Saints coach Sean Payton, handing the Vince Lombardi Trophy to Drew Brees after Super Bowl 44.
“You can’t schedule St. Mary’s School for the Blind every other week just to get enough wins to make the playoffs.”
You also can’t schedule USC and Ohio State in order to assure yourself a legimate shot at the title game. In fact, you don’t schedule teams at all. It’s all predetermined, based on the prior year’s standings. And you’r eright, there’s definitely a “decent level” of parity in the NFL … just not enough to make W-L records the New Testament of superiority vouchers.
1998 Minnesota Vikings (15-1). 1998 Denver Broncos (14-2). Two great teams from the same year that never played one another. Playoffs: Atlanta (14-2) beats Minnesota. Denver beats Atlanta. Does that make Denver a better team than Minnesota? If so, then why did Minnesota have the better record? If not, then why was Denver able to accomplish something Minnesota couldn’t? Like it or not, it’s wide open to debate. There are hundreds of loopholes like this and the only reason they do is because the NFL is the only major professional sports league in the United States to not play a balanced schedule.
"I was not on the boat in question." -Darren Sharper
No no i do understand that
i guess what you guys missed since you don’t get to see all 16 games of the Jets is the mistakes he made against your team are mistakes he made against other teams too. And these mistakes are 1) due in part to a good defensive scheme yes, but 2) are mistakes that a rookie QB makes more times than a good 5 year QB. Not having that clock in his head that tells him to get rid of the ball when in the pocket too long, reading coverages poorly, that is stuff i’d more put on Sanchez than the D. now when you did what you did to Peyton in the SB, that’s on your D doing there homework. you understand what i’m saying?
i said this all year, i think Sanchez was personally responsible for 2 or 3 losses on his own. Games that the Jets were in thanks to there D, but Sanchez gave up either late or early with turnovers. So i think in a way, that 9-7 record was a mirage and that showed later in there playoff run.
Yes i don’t know what they were thinking with the TJ situation, but i do think LdT will have sort of a bounceback season with a better line that opens up huge holes for there backs. the 2 games i saw of SD last year, one against the Giants and the other the playoff game against the Jets, LdT(and Sproles) basically ran into a wall every time they tried to run it up the middle because that line was not opening up anything. now is he going to have a 1400 yard season? no, those days are behind him. but if he can contribute in the passing game, and goal line stuff, which he is still adept at, he’ll be a fine addition for them. The X factor here is whether or not leon washington comes back to form, or if he’s with the team at all. that is something the Jets didn’t have last season.
I think the Jets are plus 2 this year, i’d be shocked if they went less than 11 wins, barring huge injuries.
I think the jets have a real chance to make some noise in the AFC this year, I love the coach and his kick-ass attitude
The jets can truley take over the AFC because all you have is new england rebuilding and the Saints gave the blue print on how to beat the colts, you do not have a problem with the steelers because they do not have the right coach, Cowars team is gone now and tomlison cannot motivate the team, he proove last year with his kick-but comments he cannot rally the troops, saying that, I think cromartie can be the best D. back in the NFL, his only problem is he loves whores so the jets need to take a page out of the marine corps boot camp playbook and feed him some SOFT PEETER to get his mind off women and he will live up to his potential, but remember the cemetary is full of people that had potential, good luck in 2010
He made the exact same quote on NFL Total Access last week...
I don’t care for it, but I think it’s just him trying to get the Jets to even look at him.
Honestly, it seems a bit desperate to me.
Pigs have flown! Hell has frozen over! The Saints HAVE WON the Superbowl!!
I ain't mad at him
He’s got what one two years left and then he goes into the great abyss of forgotten NFL stars that won a superbowl ring, and he’s one good hit away from early retirement. It ain’t like he was no slouch, he did the damn thang and played a huge part in our success. I hope they work it out, I want to see him back in the easy. “Play fa dat money Sharper, play fa dat mudafukin money.”
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2jnSzAI3gCQ&feature=player_embedded#!
Didn't he say the same thing about the Redskins last week?
That line certainly sounds familiar. And yes, I’m getting sick of hearing it. If he’s looking for another “job”, I don’t want to hear about it. I agree with all of Dave’s points. It ticks me off that he’s saying this stuff and changing my opinion of him. I don’t want to change my opinion. I want to continue the rosy glow of the Super Bowl. But it’s getting difficult.
"It's better to burn out than fade away."
I've no issue with his trying to get the best deal for himself
As has been said, he’s getting up there in age and is a play away from a broadcasting career. If he ends up going elsewhere, I’ll be disappointed but I’ll wish him luck. It’s a business and in the end, he has to do what’s best for himself.
I do have a little bit of an issue with his whining about the Saints not showing him enough “love.” If I recall, we were the only team showing him love last year. Because we’re not breaking the bank for him doesn’t mean the Saints don’t “love” him, just that our love has some monetary limits.
"But tonight the Superbowl belongs to the City of New Orleans" - Roger Goodell 2/7/2010
He's playing his side . . .
. . . of the same game the Saints’ office is playing. He is absolutely entitled to play the market in any way he sees fit as that’s exactly what the Saints encouraged him to do, both explicitly and implicitly.
I don’t begrudge him one single thing he’s said. He hasn’t really said anything negative about the team. The “not enough love” comment was just a subtle way of putting pressure on Mickey Loomis. Loomis, for his part, called his bluff and burned him back with the “all the love/not all the money” comment, which probably cost Sharper a few hundred grand.
This is EXACTLY what testing the market is about. Your market value is based ENTIRELY on perception and it’s your job as a market player to influence it. Sharper and Loomis are both doing that and both will profit when they reach an agreement on the price of Sharper’s services.
"Why would I even consider taking the ball out of Drew Brees’ hands?’’
job change
I’m in the process of getting a new job offer. It is dragging out a bit and if the process slows too much, I might accept another interview. I know exactly what Darren is feeling. If you have only one offer, it is take it or leave it. If you have two, you have much more leverage. He’s doing the right thing. My opinon of him hasn’t changed.
nice teeth
That is one good looking man. Does Chick in the Huddle like a little bit of Sharper? Yeah she does:
I mean, if he’s gonna continue to piss me off by openly courting other teams, he could at least have the decency to do it with his shirt off.
I'm likin' that Hughes kid.
and it'd probably be better for her if he'd get Lance Moore AND Matthew McConaghey to stand beside him with their shirts off, too
you know…united front and all that
"I have all of the love in the world for Darren Sharper. I just don't have all the money in the world for Darren Sharper." Mickey Loomis
by Hans Petersen on Apr 15, 2010 6:33 AM CDT up reply actions
Not that there's anything wrong with that.
That is one good looking man.
:)
"As soon as Tony (Dungy) said we had no chance, I knew we had 'em right where we wanted 'em"--Coach Sean Payton right after Super Bowl XLIV with the Lombardi Trophy firmly in hand. WHO DAT!!
by David "Satch" Kelly on Apr 15, 2010 9:32 AM CDT up reply actions
Sharper
Is totally within his rights as a UFA, but I don’t agree with his classlessness on the matter. He is trying to force a hand and I think he should be careful for what he asks. He just might get his opportunity to play for another team, if they are willing to pick him up. His knack for burning bridges is at an all time high and if he continues at this pace, the Saints just might not want him back in Black and Gold. He might end up beside Gruden in a booth if he keeps bumping his gums.
Underestimate No One, Take Nothing For Granted
by SaintsFanInIraq on Apr 15, 2010 3:03 AM CDT reply actions
Sharper would like NY
because it would probably be the easiest FS job in the league given that Revis Island needs less help than anyone else in the league (CB) and their other corner is good and their entire defense is good and puts pressure on the QB on passing plays. What FS wouldn’t want to be a part of that?
"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
i gotta agree with coldpizza on this one.
i like sharper a lot as obviously he was a big help in getting us a super bowl win last year. however, he’s a free agent now and the guy is just trying to drum up some interest for himself so he can get paid. it’s annoying, sure but he isn’t under contract to the saints and can say anything he wants about other teams signing him.
"I want to hand this trophy to the MVP of the Super Bowl -- and the MVP of the entire league, Drew Brees.''
-- Sean Payton
by DeuceisLoose926 on Apr 15, 2010 7:28 AM CDT reply actions
"i gotta agree with coldpizza on this one." FINALLY SOMEBODY GETS IT.
When CP goes into one of his “War and Peace” tirades to browbeat dissenters into submission, the best thing to do is say, “I gotta agree with coldpizza on this one.” and go on with your life.
Remember the original TV Star Trek series when Captain Kirk would lecture someone on the history of warfare?
“Yes, Bones, we’ve been through this before. The Revolutionary War, World Wars I and II, Korea, Vietnam, the Middle East War, the Zorg Uprising, the Romulan Civil Conflict, the Intergalatic Incursions, and the Cyberrobotic Revolution. We must learn from our past.”
The fact that Kirk was obviously the only one who anything of our past had the proper “Shut up and agree with me or I’ll keep talking.” effect on the weary crew.
Kirk made his point, the crew would roll their eyes, and the lower ranking Sulu still had the ship’s helm in his hands. Steady as she goes.
Whatever happened to, “Let’s agree to disagree?”
Jeeeeeeez, y’all. Life’s too short.
Fat, dumb, and happy. Hell, two out of three ain't bad!
I Want To Die In My Sleep Like My Grandpa – Not Screaming and Yelling Like His Passengers.
by Just 'Nother Day on Apr 15, 2010 5:34 PM CDT up reply actions
My god we have some paranoid, over-dramatic, drama queens as fans
What he said is possibly true
It isn’t an insult towards us
If you think otherwise, you are a woman or acting too much like one
I gotta agree with Alious on this one.
(See how it works?)
Fat, dumb, and happy. Hell, two out of three ain't bad!
I Want To Die In My Sleep Like My Grandpa – Not Screaming and Yelling Like His Passengers.
by Just 'Nother Day on Apr 15, 2010 6:43 PM CDT up reply actions
You KNOW there are several women on this blog, right? You know that? You do? Ok.
I'm likin' that Hughes kid.
You Go Get 'Im, Stuj!
Not at all correct what he said (, politically)!
If an actual woman read that rude comment, she’d probably go hysterical, burst out into tears, and have to smooth out watching soap operas and gorging on Haagen-Dazs for a few days.
"Why would I even consider taking the ball out of Drew Brees’ hands?’’
You know what's really hysterical?
Misogynists trying desperately to conceal the fear of their suspected homosexuality.
I'm likin' that Hughes kid.
Yes! That is!
But you know what’s even hystericaler? And ironical? When the self-appointed champion of politically correct dogma essentially calls someone a “fag.”
"Why would I even consider taking the ball out of Drew Brees’ hands?’’
OMG! Those are DISGUSTING!
When you said “shoes” I thought it was a link to this vid.
Pigs have flown! Hell has frozen over! The Saints HAVE WON the Superbowl!!
It is what it is
He’s a free agent he’s trying to look out for himself I dont blame him for promoting himself to other teams but in the end I believe he will be back
World Champions at last
by mississippisaintsfan on Apr 16, 2010 1:21 AM CDT reply actions
Meh...
I believe he will be back as well. But he might want to consider how the rest of the Saints organization will feel about him at that point. Maybe they’ll think his running of the mouth was no big deal but maybe not. It’s just getting kind of old…
"The Saints made the right decision signing Drew Brees-not just in terms of his arm, but because of his heart and mind." - Marshall Faulk
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on Canal Street Chronicles
Related FanShots on Canal Street Chronicles
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Former high-school star Brian Banks does serious time on trumped-up charge, now hopes for an NFL shot
- Former ‘idiot kicker’ Mike Vanderjagt in trouble after accosting junior-high heckler
- Adrian Peterson blows teammates away in footraces; appears to be on the mend
- UPDATE: Charlie Sheen didn’t buy Lawrence Taylor’s Super Bowl ring
- Alex Smith gets blown up by Jon Beason over Cam Newton comments
