Coleman gets opportunity

Houma Today

about 2 years ago Dave Cariello 6 comments 0 recs |

Comments

Another good Detillier article

And it’s not just about Coleman, but Ingram & Porter too. IMO Coleman has good potential, but I guess we’ll just have to wait & see if he makes the final roster

"Dang! The Saints won the Super Bowl!" - my wife, Meso "Happy" Hu Dat.

by Dang Hu Dat on May 23, 2010 2:32 PM CDT reply actions

IMO, Coleman is going to come out of no where and get significant playing time. I think he’s a great pickup and will play 2nd and long or 3rd and medium situations where a nickel would be inappropriate.

by Andrew Tessier on May 24, 2010 4:07 PM CDT reply actions

ok I can't stand it anymore

I’ve been TRYING to resist and I just can’t.

NFL combine

:Played up near the line of scrimmage in college and does not have the agility to stick in man coverage. Lacks initial burst and speed, which may limit him to special teams at the next level. Does not consistently deliver good shots when tackling.

Detillier:

I told my radio partner Bobby Hebert that I was very disappointed the Saints chose Oregon State quarterback Sean Canfield instead of Coleman. This was no bias pick for me, my opinion was based on talent and the ability to help the Saints on special teams.

That’s where I stopped reading. I don’t think much of Canfield, but Coleman didn’t deserve a pick because the Saints figured they could pick him up off the street. And they did. Honestly, I know he is pretty well regarded around CSC and Louisiana, I guess, but I don’t think I’ve ever read anything worthwhile by Detillier. Maybe because I see his byline and skip it.

Camp fodder. To all you homers, LSU!! LSU!!! And, grudge list!!

BP, on the size of the leak: "Now that we are collecting 5,000 barrels a day, it might be a little more than that."

by stujo4 on May 24, 2010 4:22 PM CDT reply actions

I just realized that by posting grudge list declarations, I may be suppressing the free expression of opinions here. Or not. But on the outside chance that the less aggressive members might not want to post a comment … oh hell, never mind. No more public grudge listing. Unless I’m really mad. Then I can’t promise anything.

BP, on the size of the leak: "Now that we are collecting 5,000 barrels a day, it might be a little more than that."

by stujo4 on May 24, 2010 4:34 PM CDT up reply actions

Please reconsider

No more public grudge listing.

IMO public listings are actually more honorable than having a private grudge list to spring on people later. With a public list you are in effect saying, “Bet you’re wrong” in advance, and it allows the other person to say, “Oh yeah? We’ll see.” and it can be a grudge list for them too. Both parties might discuss the eventual outcome later, if they feel like it. With a private list you could be, in effect, ambushing others and it might be like saying, “Hey! I remember you saying (whatever) way back when. Boy, were you wrong! What a moron!”, leading to profane responses (truncated, of course) from others, and probably no decent discussions. Besides, your lists seem to be well-established & important traditions at CSC; keep ’em public.

"Dang! The Saints won the Super Bowl!" - my wife, Meso "Happy" Hu Dat.

by Dang Hu Dat on May 24, 2010 7:21 PM CDT up reply actions

Agree with Dang Hu Dat. If you’re going to collate people’s opinions and gloriously throw them in their faces when they turn out to be wrong, you should call them on it to begin with. And maybe even post your opinions on some players, sometime.

Public grudge listing is now a great part of CSC.

If I am good I could add years to my life / I would rather add some life to my years.

by Jay Preece on May 27, 2010 12:56 PM CDT up reply actions