So here is the question

[FishFreak]

The Bengals Chris Henry alone has more weapons (357, switchblade, Escalade) than most other teams offenses.

 

Saints are definitely up there in terms of football weapons.

 

 

I'm surprised Bengal mania didn't say the Bengals. I'll take the Bengal offense over the Saints. Just because the Saints looked awesome last night doesn't give them the most weapons. Cincy has a better O-line and better WR's but the Saints have the edge at RB.

[Bill Swerski]

Are you freaking serious?

 

Colts: Peyton, Marvin, Reggie, Dallas, Addai

Bengals: Carson, Ocho Cinco, Houshmenwhata, Rudi, Henry

Chargers: Rivers, LT, Neal, Gates, McCardell

cowboys: Homo, T.O., Glenn, Witten, Julius, Barber

Seahags: Hasselbeck, SA, D-Jax, Branch, Burleson, Engram, Stevens

 

The Saints are absolutely rolling on offense right now, but come on...

Edited December 11, 2006 by Bill Swerski

[alexgaddis]

Are you freaking serious?

 

Colts: Peyton, Marvin, Reggie, Dallas, Addai

Bengals: Carson, Ocho Cinco, Houshmenwhata, Rudi, Henry

Chargers: Rivers, LT, Neal, Gates, McCardell

cowboys: Homo, T.O., Glenn, Witten, Julius, Barber

Seahags: Hasselbeck, SA, D-Jax, Branch, Burleson, Engram, Stevens

 

The Saints are absolutely rolling on offense right now, but come on...

 

Fixed

[Bill Swerski]

Fixed

 

 

Given that Burleson is stuck behind D-Jax and Branch on the depth chart and Engram and Stevens have been banged up all year, I have to disagree with that.

[alexgaddis]

Given that Burleson is stuck behind D-Jax and Branch on the depth chart and Engram and Stevens have been banged up all year, I have to disagree with that.

 

Stevens has to be the biggest bust at TE I have seen in a while...he drops EVERYTHING...and Burleson is an average receiver AT BEST...there's a reason Seattle went and got Branch...

[Bill Swerski]

Stevens has to be the biggest bust at TE I have seen in a while...he drops EVERYTHING...and Burleson is an average receiver AT BEST...there's a reason Seattle went and got Branch...

 

 

Seattle went out and got Branch because they didn't want to re-sign D-Jax and his never-ending injuries.

 

Burleson has a 1,000-yd season under his belt and signed a $49 million contract, so I think that qualifies him as a "weapon."

 

Agreed that Steves drops a ton of passes and I'll add that he's an obnoxious ret@rd on top of it, but his numbers last year (554 yds, 5 TDs) made him one of the better receiving TEs in the league.

Edited December 11, 2006 by Bill Swerski

[Riffraff]

yeah, I forgot about SD- they aren't as explosive is the only difference IMO but definitely in the mix.

 

Not sure I get your definition of explosive.

 

Chargers have scored 40+ points 4 times.

Chargers have scored 30+ points 7 times.

Chargers have scored under 20 points 1 time.

 

Compared to the "explosive" Saints?

 

Saints have scored 40+ points 1 time.

Saints have scored 30+ points 6 times.

Saints have scored under 20 points 3 times.

 

Even if you meant "time of possession" to mean they can strike in small time intervals.

New Orleans = 31.50

San Diego = 32.06

 

Not much difference I'd say. The Chargers hold on to the ball 16 more seconds a game.

Which can be explained away with offensive turnovers:

SD = 12

NO = 20

 

Maybe I'm just not seeing the logic.

[wildcat2334]

thats fine-- whatever, I would label SD as efficient, consistant- explosive, no. As good as SD is offensively, they really only have 2 playmakers- LT & Gates, no deep threat- other teams have more pop, more explosiveness IMO-

 

Seattle led the league in scoring last year with virtually no vertical passing threat at all. Where they an excellent overall offense- yeah, where they explosive??

 

I would say no.

[51Butkus]

DA BEARS!!!!!!!!!

[MikesVikes]

I'm surprised Bengal mania didn't say the Bengals. I'll take the Bengal offense over the Saints. Just because the Saints looked awesome last night doesn't give them the most weapons. Cincy has a better O-line and better WR's but the Saints have the edge at RB.

 

 

Cincy would be in the running if it was for last year.

[Bier Meister]

 

Seattle led the league in scoring last year with virtually no vertical passing threat at all. Where they an excellent overall offense- yeah, where they explosive??

 

I would say no.

 

 

 

hass:

65% ...... 3, 455 ..... 24 td's (+1 rushing) ...... 9 int's

 

 

doesn't look anemic by any means.

 

 

 

do you think about anything you post?

[wildcat2334]

hass:

65% ...... 3, 455 ..... 24 td's (+1 rushing) ...... 9 int's

doesn't look anemic by any means.

do you think about anything you post?

 

 

Nice stats. Jake Plummer had a nice year as well- was Den O explosive?

 

Spit out numbers all you want, Hass had a nice year. Please do not call me out on my own squad, thanks. I would not call the offense explosive, when the reality is they had zero deep threat or real playmakers. I guess I have a different interpretation of explosive. All you need to do is watch the SB- if they had another playmaker on O, who knows- there is a reason they signed Branch -

 

since when does "not anemic" = explosive. .

[Bengal Mania]

I'm surprised Bengal mania didn't say the Bengals. I'll take the Bengal offense over the Saints. Just because the Saints looked awesome last night doesn't give them the most weapons. Cincy has a better O-line and better WR's but the Saints have the edge at RB.

 

I would've, I preferred to make a joke about the seldom talked about problem the Bengals have had w/ the law instead.

 

Cincy would be in the running if it was for last year.

 

Take a look at the stats at the end of the year and see if last years stats are better. Palmer is gonna come close to the league-leading TD total he had last year. Chad is gonna lead the AFC in yardage for the 4th straight year (NFL record!). TJ is gonna break 1000 yds as a #2 WR for the first time in his career, after missing the first 2 games. Rudi is gonna run for his typical 1400 yards (or close).

[Bier Meister]

Nice stats. Jake Plummer had a nice year as well- was Den O explosive?

 

Spit out numbers all you want, Hass had a nice year. Please do not call me out on my own squad, thanks. I would not call the offense explosive, when the reality is they had zero deep threat or real playmakers. I guess I have a different interpretation of explosive. All you need to do is watch the SB- if they had another playmaker on O, who knows- there is a reason they signed Branch -

 

since when does "not anemic" = explosive. .

 

you are making a lot of statements in this thread that are proving to be incorrect. the one i responded to stated that the hawks virtually had no vertical game. to say that they had no passing game is incorrect. i did not bring up denver or plummer, nor did i mention explosiveness. basically, if it's your team you should know it better than to make inacurrate statements about them. if you are wrong... you will get called out.. and i bet i've followed "your" hawks longer than you.

 

and plummer:

 

60% ....... 3,366 ..... 18 td's (plus 1 rushing)...... 7 int's.

Edited December 11, 2006 by Bier Meister

[wildcat2334]

you are making a lot of statements in this thread that are proving to be incorrect. the one i responded to stated that the hawks virtually had no vertical game. to say that they had no passing game is incorrect. i did not bring up denver or plummer, nor did i mention explosiveness. basically, if it's your team you should know it better than to make inacurrate statements about them. if you are wrong... you will get called out.. and i bet i've followed "your" hawks longer than you.

 

and plummer:

 

60% ....... 3,366 ..... 18 td's (plus 1 rushing)...... 7 int's.

 

 

Did Bronco Billy hijack yer account?

 

I have no problem being called out- and no idea why you actually did, and not really sure where I have been proven to be incorrect. Sea has had a lack of playmakers on offense, and they have had no deep passing game as well. Hass had a nice year, but the O was not really explosive, more efficient and did not have playmakers. See overpaying for Burleson, and trading for Branch. Innacurate statements- whatever. Thanks for the stats on Plummer, which are kinda similar to Hass, so not sure on yer point, to be honest.

 

As for "following my Hawks" longer than me, please save the comical, stupid statements. IF following them longer means, growing up with the O line coach's kid, and playing football with the players kids on the Kingdome turf on walkthru Saturdays, then yes, I guess you have. If you went to summer camp and hung out all day long helping out, then, ok, Bier, well done. If not, then save it.

[tbimm]

Are you freaking serious?

 

Colts: Peyton, Marvin, Reggie, Dallas, Addai

Bengals: Carson, Ocho Cinco, Houshmenwhata, Rudi, Henry

Chargers: Rivers, LT, Neal, Gates, McCardell

cowboys: Homo, T.O., Glenn, Witten, Julius, Barber

Seahags: Hasselbeck, SA, D-Jax, Branch, Burleson, Engram, Stevens

 

The Saints are absolutely rolling on offense right now, but come on...

 

Saints have be rolling for a while now and are peaking at the right time. As far as weapons lets make a list.

Colston

McCallister

Bush

Henderson

Horn

Copper

Campbell

Jamal Jones? What are you kidding me?

Karney

Oh yeah and the guy everyone gave up on BREES

 

 

Good luck stopping this offense!

[Bier Meister]

Not sure I get your definition of explosive.

 

Chargers have scored 40+ points 4 times.

Chargers have scored 30+ points 7 times.

Chargers have scored under 20 points 1 time.

 

Compared to the "explosive" Saints?

 

Saints have scored 40+ points 1 time.

Saints have scored 30+ points 6 times.

Saints have scored under 20 points 3 times.

 

Even if you meant "time of possession" to mean they can strike in small time intervals.

New Orleans = 31.50

San Diego = 32.06

 

Not much difference I'd say. The Chargers hold on to the ball 16 more seconds a game.

Which can be explained away with offensive turnovers:

SD = 12

NO = 20

 

Maybe I'm just not seeing the logic.

 

 

 

thats fine-- whatever, I would label SD as efficient, consistant- explosive, no. As good as SD is offensively, they really only have 2 playmakers- LT & Gates, no deep threat- other teams have more pop, more explosiveness IMO-

 

Seattle led the league in scoring last year with virtually no vertical passing threat at all. Where they an excellent overall offense- yeah, where they explosive??

 

I would say no.

 

 

 

hass:

65% ...... 3, 455 ..... 24 td's (+1 rushing) ...... 9 int's

doesn't look anemic by any means.

do you think about anything you post?

 

 

 

Nice stats. Jake Plummer had a nice year as well- was Den O explosive?

 

Spit out numbers all you want, Hass had a nice year. Please do not call me out on my own squad, thanks. I would not call the offense explosive, when the reality is they had zero deep threat or real playmakers. I guess I have a different interpretation of explosive. All you need to do is watch the SB- if they had another playmaker on O, who knows- there is a reason they signed Branch -

 

since when does "not anemic" = explosive. .

 

 

 

you are making a lot of statements in this thread that are proving to be incorrect. the one i responded to stated that the hawks virtually had no vertical game. to say that they had no passing game is incorrect. i did not bring up denver or plummer, nor did i mention explosiveness. basically, if it's your team you should know it better than to make inacurrate statements about them. if you are wrong... you will get called out.. and i bet i've followed "your" hawks longer than you.

 

and plummer:

 

60% ....... 3,366 ..... 18 td's (plus 1 rushing)...... 7 int's.

 

 

 

Did Bronco Billy hijack yer account?

 

I have no problem being called out- and no idea why you actually did, and not really sure where I have been proven to be incorrect. Sea has had a lack of playmakers on offense, and they have had no deep passing game as well. Hass had a nice year, but the O was not really explosive, more efficient and did not have playmakers. See overpaying for Burleson, and trading for Branch. Innacurate statements- whatever. Thanks for the stats on Plummer, which are kinda similar to Hass, so not sure on yer point, to be honest.

 

As for "following my Hawks" longer than me, please save the comical, stupid statements. IF following them longer means, growing up with the O line coach's kid, and playing football with the players kids on the Kingdome turf on walkthru Saturdays, then yes, I guess you have. If you went to summer camp and hung out all day long helping out, then, ok, Bier, well done. If not, then save it.

 

 

learn how to read or double check what you say. to insist that hasselbeck and co hasn't/doesn't present a passing attack is absurd.

 

Pass attempts: 2003-10

Completions: 2003-7, 2005-9t

Passing yards: 2003-4, 2005-10

Passing TDs: 2003-3t, 2004-10, 2005-4t, 2006-10t

Adjusted yards per pass: 2002-7, 2003-5, 2005-4

 

additionally... it seems to me that if needed, that passing game can attack a defense, but having a back capable of alexander's numbers, to go too pass heavy makes little sense to me. and let's not forget all of those dropped balls by koren and djax. i've never been high on either burleson or brach so that means nothing to me. the plummer numbers were strickly for referrence..... matt was more efficient and had more td's.

 

as for your second paragraph... i think it's pretty insulting to other sea fans. all i can counter with is that holmgren was my hs rival's head coach and i have follow him for quite a while (9er fan). how old are you? how many years ago were you that kid? i'm not sure that you have the market cornered on time.

[Avernus]

they could very well end up being a copycat of the 99 Rams...IMo of course..that's who they remind me of..

[wildcat2334]

learn how to read or double check what you say. to insist that hasselbeck and co hasn't/doesn't present a passing attack is absurd.

 

Pass attempts: 2003-10

Completions: 2003-7, 2005-9t

Passing yards: 2003-4, 2005-10

Passing TDs: 2003-3t, 2004-10, 2005-4t, 2006-10t

Adjusted yards per pass: 2002-7, 2003-5, 2005-4

 

additionally... it seems to me that if needed, that passing game can attack a defense, but having a back capable of alexander's numbers, to go too pass heavy makes little sense to me. and let's not forget all of those dropped balls by koren and djax. i've never been high on either burleson or brach so that means nothing to me. the plummer numbers were strickly for referrence..... matt was more efficient and had more td's.

 

as for your second paragraph... i think it's pretty insulting to other sea fans. all i can counter with is that holmgren was my hs rival's head coach and i have follow him for quite a while (9er fan). how old are you? how many years ago were you that kid? i'm not sure that you have the market cornered on time.

 

 

You done? I make 1 comment unrelated to the Saints offense and the topic, and get Hass stats thrown at me?? Someone popping off about making incorrect statements about the Hawks?- complete bchit. Don't tell me about my hometown team, and that my opinion is wrong based off Hass throwing 24 td passes. I am aware of Matt's numbers last year, thanks Bier. There is a reason they wnet after Burleson and Branch, and probably overpaid for both - to try and upgrade the WR position with guys who can make plays and get vertical once in a while more than Djax/Engram. My only real comment was that the O is more of an efficient, move the chains, intermediate passing attack team, Which they are, and it is a product of the west coast offense.

 

Not even gonna comment on my level of being a Hawks fan, or that you have followed them longer than I have......... I mean, having a bad day Bier?? beat it, go bug someone else with trivial bchit

 

Back to the topic- love the Saints O, and I love the game Payton calls on O, fun to watch with some serius talent.

[DemonKnight]

Um, dallas has more weapons. TO, Julius, Barber, Glenn, Witten. Somehow I think that trumps deuce, Bush, Colston and whoever else you want to line up at WR or TE. NO has a good game, and beat up on a team clearly looking past them, as all the talk here was Atlanta was going to be a trap game next week. Well, the trap game was New Orleans.

 

 

Puh-fuggin-leaze. Dallas got thier arses handed to them on a platter and it wasnt because they were looking past N.O. How in the world could they? Fighting for possibly a first round bye and they were looking past N.O? If so Parcel is the werst coach ever!

[gasface]

Its not the talent of the players as much as it is brees

 

hes making them all better, kind of like what farve did with his teams int he 90s

[Bier Meister]

You done? I make 1 comment unrelated to the Saints offense and the topic, and get Hass stats thrown at me?? Someone popping off about making incorrect statements about the Hawks?- complete bchit. Don't tell me about my hometown team, and that my opinion is wrong based off Hass throwing 24 td passes. I am aware of Matt's numbers last year, thanks Bier. There is a reason they wnet after Burleson and Branch, and probably overpaid for both - to try and upgrade the WR position with guys who can make plays and get vertical once in a while more than Djax/Engram. My only real comment was that the O is more of an efficient, move the chains, intermediate passing attack team, Which they are, and it is a product of the west coast offense.

 

Not even gonna comment on my level of being a Hawks fan, or that you have followed them longer than I have......... I mean, having a bad day Bier?? beat it, go bug someone else with trivial bchit

 

Back to the topic- love the Saints O, and I love the game Payton calls on O, fun to watch with some serius talent.

 

 

you make comments...back it up. after off-field antics and consistant dropped passes, sea wanted to rid themselves of the koren headache. engram is a fine possession reciever, and when healthy djax has top 10 potential. they definititely needed a fast wr to stretch d's and help provide gaps in short and intermediate routes. you think becuase you live there, that you have a monoploy on following a team? again, how old are you... i still maintain that i've followed them longer than you have. with a dominant rb, and holmgren bring the wco over... there are there is going to be dink and dunk, but i remember long td's as well. in a year where a rb is setting td records, 3466/24/9 are stout numbers. last year he only had 2 games with 3 or more td's this year he has 4 in 9 . seems directly related to a slowish start and injury to SA ...... the "i don't need someone to tell me about my team" is laughable. give a call when you get a clue.

[Bier Meister]

Its not the talent of the players as much as it is brees

 

hes making them all better, kind of like what farve did with his teams int he 90s

 

 

 

i agree.

 

 

i liked him coming out of college and was disappointed with his early development... loved his "comeback" in SD, and they way payton is using all of his players. certainly COY material.

[Randall]

Oh yeah and the guy everyone gave up on BREES

Good luck stopping this offense!

 

 

 

Everyone gave up on Brees? If he hadn't been injured he may have been the one they kept. Miami's doctors thought Culpepper had better odds of making it because of the rotattor cuff issue, but think he was highly thought of.

 

He seems to be stronger now after the surgery though.