Jump to content

Saints vs Chiefs


Recommended Posts

On 12/23/2020 at 9:17 AM, Saint_James said:

I went back and looked at the numbers and you're just flat wrong.   The Saints pass percentage this season is the lowest in the Payton era.  We're one of the top rushing teams in the NFL on first down.  I don't know where this "run the ball" narrative is coming from, but we ARE running the ball a lot this season.

Against the Chiefs our first three series we ran 4 times and passed 5.   That's pretty balanced!   We just fell behind 14 points so, duh, you have to pass more in that scenario.

Have all the opinions you want about Paytons's coaching, fine.  But this narrative is absurd, and flat wrong.

Well hell, nothing to look at here then. I guess we'll just all catch up together after we win the Super Bowl, again and again, make no roster moves, create a dynasty behind Payton & Hill, and ultimately get kicked out of the league because we're just too good for other teams to compete with.

It's interesting, you just jump in here and call everybody wrong. So let us know why we're 10-4, not 14-0, and we'll all just sit back and let you educate us on this foot balls thingy.

Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, Saint_James said:

 Taysom IS distributing the ball at over 70% efficiency.  Nice try.  The fumbles are a result of these stupid read option plays that get called for him.   Those don't work anymore.

Not true. He fumbles on all types of plays including read options. 

22 hours ago, Saint_James said:

If he was throwing lots of Int's you would have a point, but you don't.  He should only have runs called for him when we're in a goal-line situation where he's proven to be unstoppable. 

Problem with looking at stats black and white. His deep ball accuracy has been poor and there have been several that easily could have been picked. He can thank his WR's for bailing him out multiple times. 

22 hours ago, Saint_James said:

Also franchise QB's aren't born, they are made.  So what exactly do you mean he can't be a franchise QB?  Who decides that if not for coach Payton?   He certainly has the skillset and arm talent.  The rest will come with coaching and practice. 

Not true. Franchise QB's are undoubtedly born. There are traits that you either have or you don't. Sure players can improve in some regards, but that only gets you so far..

Perfect example is one of my all time favorite college QB's RG3. He had all the talent in the world athletically and possesses a great arm, even his accuracy was good. Problem being didn't have the mental traits needed to be a franchise QB. His internal clock was awful (much like Hill actually), he just couldn't feel pressure in the pocket and took way too many sacks, he also couldn't process the field quickly (much like Hill). Sure he got hurt his rookie year, but his knee was fine from a health point after that. Everything I've ever read on RG3 was that he was a very hard worker, but even despite all that talent (far more than Hill), he couldn't develop into a franchise QB as he simply didn't have the mental traits needed to be a franchise QB. 

22 hours ago, Saint_James said:

Yes we both like Hill but there's this air of elitism some have about this situation that's very off-putting.   You might feel that nobody can replace Brees...but someone will have to.  Life has to go on.   Nobody knows the future but we know he's already an efficient passer and he's 3-1 as a starter.  

Falcons ×2, Broncos (without a QB), and the Eagles. I sure as heck would hope we win at least 3 of those teams with possibly the most talented roster in the league. We know those defenses had zero game film to defend Hill. I don't have much confidence that he can sustain success at QB.

Obviously someone has to replace Brees, but I'm hoping to see Winston get a chance as I think his flaws are more likely to be corrected. 

22 hours ago, Saint_James said:

We're 8-1 without Brees as a starter in recent years.  Maybe that should be a clue to some people that Payton knows a thing or two about quarterbacks.

Teddy Bridgewater looked like a real QB, far more confident in him sustaining success in our offense over Taysom Hill. Teddy also played legit teams last year. I don't view outcome of these situations nearly the same.

Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, tyler735 said:

Falcons ×2, Broncos (without a QB), and the Eagles. I sure as heck would hope we win at least 3 of those teams with possibly the most talented roster in the league. We know those defenses had zero game film to defend Hill. I don't have much confidence that he can sustain success at QB.

 

Drew Brees has struggled mightily against good teams, losing to the Raiders the Packers and the Chiefs.  Hell we barely beat the Panthers and Bears by three points each.  And he's had to pull off comeback wins against trash like the Lions and the Chargers (in overtime no less).   But nobody seems to mention that, it's always that Taysom's opponents weren't that good.   If you judge Taysom for the difficulty of opponents, you HAVE to do the same for Brees. 

Also news flash:  The Eagles are a good team.  They are a good team that has been utterly sabotaged from historically bad QB play from Carson Wentz.   Now that Wentz is on the bench, we see they can be competitive with anyone.  The offensive line and the defense lost that game for us, not Taysom Hill. 

Quote

Obviously someone has to replace Brees, but I'm hoping to see Winston get a chance as I think his flaws are more likely to be corrected. 

Like low IQ and emotional immaturity?  Umm no you typically can't correct those.  Like the other guy said, QB is 90% from the neck up.  So Winston ain't the guy.

Quote

His deep ball accuracy has been poor and there have been several that easily could have been picked. He can thank his WR's for bailing him out multiple times. 

This is such horse**** I'm getting tired of seeing it repeated.  Taysom Hill's QBR on passes of 15+ yards is higher than Drew Brees!  His average air yards completion is 7.7 yards, they are pushing the ball downfield big time with Hill under center.   I'm sorry if I'm being rude, but I'm tired of people repeating flat out lies that aren't backed by any statistics at all.   Please find me some statistical evidence for what you are claiming, it's nowhere to be found!

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mid Iowa said:

Well hell, nothing to look at here then. I guess we'll just all catch up together after we win the Super Bowl, again and again, make no roster moves, create a dynasty behind Payton & Hill, and ultimately get kicked out of the league because we're just too good for other teams to compete with.

It's interesting, you just jump in here and call everybody wrong. So let us know why we're 10-4, not 14-0, and we'll all just sit back and let you educate us on this foot balls thingy.

What team do you know that could go 10-4 with their best playmaker out basically all season, their #2 WR getting covid, scores of other injuries and oh yeah - their franchise QB missing 4 games on top of all that.

Seriously? 

As far as our dynasty, that was derailed by the Bountygate witchhunt of Roger Goodell and if you were any kind of a Saints fan I wouldn't have to remind you of that fact.   That set back Payton's program at least 3-5 seasons. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, JohnCena said:

Yeah come back when Taysom Hill has a season where he throws for 30+ touchdowns and under 6 interceptions.  LOL!!

I meant to say most of those guys are elite throwers I was going to point out minus Lamar and Tannehill but those guys are still lightyears ahead of Taysom Hill when it comes to throwing the football, and that was the discussion at hand so I didn't find it necessary.

You don't know what you are even talking about.  Lamar Jackson is a career 64% passer.  He's Cam Newton.   He is not "light years" ahead of most QB's when it comes to throwing the football.  His mechanics and footwork in the pocket are garbage, and he can only beat you with his legs. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Saint_James said:

What team do you know that could go 10-4 with their best playmaker out basically all season, their #2 WR getting covid, scores of other injuries and oh yeah - their franchise QB missing 4 games on top of all that.

Seriously? 

I watched Kurt Warner come out of a grocery store and win a Super Bowl. Nick Foles went out & stole a Super Bowl as a back up. Hell, even Brad Johnson and Trent Dilfer won Super Bowls.

So what about last season when our team had all of these things, and went undefeated with a backup? I suppose you'll pull out an already familiar "yeah but" here.

But that's cool, we'll talk about excuses next.

1 hour ago, Saint_James said:

As far as our dynasty, that was derailed by the Bountygate witchhunt of Roger Goodell and if you were any kind of a Saints fan I wouldn't have to remind you of that fact.   That set back Payton's program at least 3-5 seasons. 

Bountygate was nearly a decade ago, get over it! So as for the 3-5 seasons....it's been what, 8-9 years, and we've got one of the most talented teams in the NFL now what?

In the time frame that you're giving Payton to gather his mess; 
Doug Peterson won a Superbowl with a backup QB in his 2nd season as a head coach in 2018
Gary Kubiak won a Superbowl with a broken QB in his 2nd season with the Broncos in 2016
I could talk about Baltimore winning one in 2013 with Joe Flacco but I'd rather bring up who they beat, the 49ers, who beat us at home with with a 2nd year head coach and a backup QB.
I won't talk about the 3 Superbowls New England won in that time frame with Tom Brady and....whoever else they could sign from other teams practice squads.

But go ahead, keep making excuses and calling other people idiots, ignorant, and absurd. It really brings the spirit of these boards way up....
 

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/23/2020 at 9:17 AM, Saint_James said:

I went back and looked at the numbers and you're just flat wrong.   The Saints pass percentage this season is the lowest in the Payton era.  We're one of the top rushing teams in the NFL on first down.  I don't know where this "run the ball" narrative is coming from, but we ARE running the ball a lot this season.

Against the Chiefs our first three series we ran 4 times and passed 5.   That's pretty balanced!   We just fell behind 14 points so, duh, you have to pass more in that scenario.

Have all the opinions you want about Paytons's coaching, fine.  But this narrative is absurd, and flat wrong.

So on a serious note, EVERY defense knows Payton's MO. Payton starts out balance, whether it's working or not, and ultimately abandons the run. So all you have to to is play lights out defense for a few series, and Payton's stripes will show. He'll go run heavy or balanced, and then done!

In an earlier post you mentioned that you have to pass to open up the run game. I'm not sure where this school of thought comes from. Any time you have a strong running game, as you've said we do, you use that run to wear down defenses, and it opens up play action passes that hurt.

Let's look at some history:
Week 1, we're balanced, go UP 14 POINTS, and then Payton calls 9 passing plays in a row, the drive resulted in a FG. Got balanced out, and we were 31-31 passes rushing and won!

Week 2, we come out balanced, go up 10-0. 1st quarter, we're 9pass, 13 runs. 2nd QTR, Payton goes pass happy (9-2) and tie ballgame. 3rd QTR, starts out with 8 straight passing plays and a punt. Yeah... that worked. We lost 34-24 after being up 17-7 on the road. 15 running plays in the 1st half, we're up. 4 running plays in the entire 2nd half, we lose. Started out balanced, ended up 38 passing, 19 running.

Week 3, come out with 5-1 running, gain a lead over the #1 seed in the NFL.
2nd QTR, come out 7-7 and what... we go in at the half with the lead. Right before half, although the run is working, Payton call 12 pass plays in a row. 12!! We did score, so that's fun. We're up 17-13.
3rd QTR, balanced and hanging well, until the golden boy Taysom Hill loses the fumble. Green Bay stacks up 10 points on us and lookout, the run game is gone. We got cute in the 4th, as Payton tends to do, and ran 1 time vs 13 passes, and a garbage time drive after the defense was gassed.

Payton gets antsy and abandons the run. Don't just look at game stats, go look at 1st QTR, 2nd QTR etc... you'll see balance, and then out the window with balance, he'll get pass happy, and it kills our defense.
 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Saint_James said:

  The offensive line and the defense lost that game for us, not Taysom Hill.

I actually agree with you here... Hill's slow start, indecisiveness and ball security only attributed to the loss vs Phiilly and yes the O-Line and Defense bares much of the blame.

 

However... If were to say that then its only fair to also say that during Hills 3-0 run prior when the defense was ranked #1 in every statistical catoregy and the offensive line was playing lights out they they were also the reason we won and went 3-0, not Taysom Hill.

 

Same logic right?

 

This is getting old... Look I actually agree with you on many points but I also disagree with you on many others, however i fully understand we all wont agree all the time and thats ok. Then we can have healthy debates about why we have certain views. The truth is none of us truly know anything its all just guess work because none of us can predict the future but I feel you take opinions that differ from your own far to personal as if you believe that your opinion is writen in stone somewhere. Maybe a persons opinion isnt based on statistics, maybe that person is camparing a particualr situation to a similar one they have seen in the past. Maybe there opinion iis simply based on a hunch or a gut feeling, maybe it is stats based. The point is were all just guessing here and only time is gonna determine who was right and who was wrong but how you go about discussing your opinions and how you handle other opinions determines if others even wannt to have conversations with you in the first place and in the future.

 

That is why your here right?

 

To express your opinions and to be heard?

 

Opinions don't mean a dam thing if ain't nobody listening.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Saint_James said:

Drew Brees has struggled mightily against good teams, losing to the Raiders the Packers and the Chiefs.  Hell we barely beat the Panthers and Bears by three points each.  And he's had to pull off comeback wins against trash like the Lions and the Chargers (in overtime no less).   But nobody seems to mention that, it's always that Taysom's opponents weren't that good.   If you judge Taysom for the difficulty of opponents, you HAVE to do the same for Brees. 

Apples and Oranges. Brees has a proven track record both over the course of his legendary career and has continued to be great the past few years despite some of his arm "limitations".

The Saints offense was top 5 in PPG with Brees this year with over 30 points per game.

With Hill at QB we averaged 24 points per game about 16th best in the league (against 4 bad teams)

This doesn't even factor in Brees played almost the entire season without Michael Thomas...and had games without Emmanuel Sanders as well in there.

Simply put Hill played trash opponents and the defense stepped up. I find it interesting you bring up the Green Bay game considering they are likely a top 2 NFC team, and we had a legitimate shot to win that game until Payton put the game in Hills hands on a critical play and he managed to fumble the ball (definitely a theme with him at QB)

Quote

Also news flash:  The Eagles are a good team.  They are a good team that has been utterly sabotaged from historically bad QB play from Carson Wentz.   Now that Wentz is on the bench, we see they can be competitive with anyone.  The offensive line and the defense lost that game for us, not Taysom Hill. 

No the Eagles really aren't a good team. average at best, but that's generous. Or maybe they are finding some early success with a QB that has no prior NFL film for teams to gameplan against.

Quote

Like low IQ and emotional immaturity?  Umm no you typically can't correct those.  Like the other guy said, QB is 90% from the neck up.  So Winston ain't the guy.

Winston might not be, but his odds are higher than Hill. Winston probably threw for more passing yards than Hill has in his entire college and pro career last season. In all seriousness though, low IQ isn't that important Marino and Aikman are dumb as a box of rocks, but they did just fine in the NFL.

Football IQ on the other hand is important. Winston forces plays too often and has struggled because of it. He at least has shown he can get through reads quickly, put some touch on passes,, and maneuver in the pocket/sense pressure. He also won't be 31 next year still trying to learn the position and looking eerily similar to a guy like Tim Tebow, which is essentially what Hill has looked like early on.

Quote

This is such horse**** I'm getting tired of seeing it repeated.  Taysom Hill's QBR on passes of 15+ yards is higher than Drew Brees!  His average air yards completion is 7.7 yards, they are pushing the ball downfield big time with Hill under center.  

Okay what's Hill's QBR in general then? For the record I don't love QBR as a stat:

Brees has a QBR of 75.4

Hill has a QBR of 56.1

Brees has a QB Rating of 107.4

Hill has a QB Rating of 98.7

Hill has 10 fumbles and 2 interceptions on the year

Brees has 5 fumbles and 4 interceptions with significantly more snaps

Quote

I'm sorry if I'm being rude, but I'm tired of people repeating flat out lies that aren't backed by any statistics at all.   Please find me some statistical evidence for what you are claiming, it's nowhere to be found!

No lies here, just providing some accurate info on the matter of Hill. 

For example, you mentioned Hills fumbles are a result of the read option plays...Not true

Also how does a QB not even look at Michael Thomas in this situation...especially when he's wide open.

This one was a read option, but included for emphasis of him playing a huge role in our loss to the Packers

 

Edited by tyler735
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Saint_James said:

You don't know what you are even talking about.  Lamar Jackson is a career 64% passer.  He's Cam Newton.   He is not "light years" ahead of most QB's when it comes to throwing the football.  His mechanics and footwork in the pocket are garbage, and he can only beat you with his legs. 

 

When did I say most qbs? I said he's light years ahead of a 30 year old wide receiver/running back/tight end/punt returner/wildcat QB who Saints fans think is the next Steve Young lmao. I think it is you who doesn't know what you're talking about Lamar Jackson just won an MVP last season throwing for 36 touchdowns to just 6 interceptions at a 66% completion percentage. He's also doing that with the second worst receiving core in the league. Come back when your boy Taysom Hill has done anything close to what Lamar's accomplished already at 23. Last I checked Lamar had 63 TDs to 17 ints in his career and a 102 passer rating, as I already said he's doing that with the second worst receiving core in the league. You want to sit here and say I don't know what I'm talking about but you're really showing your intellectual level by stating Lamar is Cam Newton lmao, Cam's playstyle was a whole lot different to Lamar's, Lamar is a much more elusive and quicker runner compared to Cam, and he's also a much more polished passer than Cam was. Cam had 64tds to 42 ints in his first 3 years as a starter in his 48 games his completion percentage was also about 58-60% Lamar's stats I already mentioned and he already has as many touchdowns as Cam did in 48 games in 35 games. Also last I checked there's no QB in the league who can do what Lamar can do with his legs 1200 yards rushing in a single season last year. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, JohnCena said:

Saints fans think is the next Steve Young lmao.

Don't lump us Saints fans with this sort of thinking. Most of us think he's a dumpster fire of a QB...Not Steve Young. Think the guy your arguing with is the only big Taysom Hill fan (as a QB) on this forum. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, tyler735 said:

Apples and Oranges. Brees has a proven track record both over the course of his legendary career and has continued to be great the past few years despite some of his arm "limitations".

The Saints offense was top 5 in PPG with Brees this year with over 30 points per game.

With Hill at QB we averaged 24 points per game about 16th best in the league (against 4 bad teams)

This doesn't even factor in Brees played almost the entire season without Michael Thomas...and had games without Emmanuel Sanders as well in there.

Simply put Hill played trash opponents and the defense stepped up. I find it interesting you bring up the Green Bay game considering they are likely a top 2 NFC team, and we had a legitimate shot to win that game until Payton put the game in Hills hands on a critical play and he managed to fumble the ball (definitely a theme with him at QB)

 

 

I was about to bring up this exact point.  The offense over the course of the season had been better with Brees than with Hill, and that's despite Hill playing garbage teams and having a healthy Mike Thomas for every game.

A similar thing was true last year, the offense with Teddy statistically was average-to above average, while it was top 3 points per drive with Brees.  That doesn't mean Brees never played a bad game, but the average of all of his games was better.

It also doesn't mean Teddy was terrible or Hill was terrible.  Teddy was a good bit better than Hill, and didn't turn the ball over nearly as much.  But Hill still did a decent job for a backup.  My position is that while he was a decent backup, he has way too many flaws to be a long term starter, as of now anyway.

What has been true in Brees absence however, is absolutely elite defensive play.  We could have won almost all of those games with just about anybody at QB.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
28 minutes ago, Jlowe22 said:

I was about to bring up this exact point.  The offense over the course of the season had been better with Brees than with Hill, and that's despite Hill playing garbage teams and having a healthy Mike Thomas for every game.

A similar thing was true last year, the offense with Teddy statistically was average-to above average, while it was top 3 points per drive with Brees.  That doesn't mean Brees never played a bad game, but the average of all of his games was better.

It also doesn't mean Teddy was terrible or Hill was terrible.  Teddy was a good bit better than Hill, and didn't turn the ball over nearly as much.  But Hill still did a decent job for a backup.  My position is that while he was a decent backup, he has way too many flaws to be a long term starter, as of now anyway.

What has been true in Brees absence however, is absolutely elite defensive play.  We could have won almost all of those games with just about anybody at QB.

Agreed, I don't mind him as a back up, but I think we waste a team that has super bowl caliber talent on it if we view him as our QB of the future. This is a roster that if we keep it (mostly) together, can compete in the next several seasons.

I really like our defense (seems most of our players are just hitting their prime years) and think we can be competitive with a somewhat average QB that can get the ball to guys like Kamara and Thomas and limit sacks/turnovers. Essentially just be a game manager and let our playmakers/defense take care of the rest. I just dont trust Hill to be a guy that can limit turnovers/sacks.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, tyler735 said:

Agreed, I don't mind him as a back up, but I think we waste a team that has super bowl caliber talent on it if we view him as our QB of the future. This is a roster that if we keep it (mostly) together, can compete in the next several seasons.

I really like our defense (seems most of our players are just hitting their prime years) and think we can be competitive with a somewhat average QB that can get the ball to guys like Kamara and Thomas and limit sacks/turnovers. Essentially just be a game manager and let our playmakers/defense take care of the rest. I just dont trust Hill to be a guy that can limit turnovers/sacks.

Im one that believes Winston is playing the good guy role until the day he can get out. I dont think Winston buys for a second that he has a legit shot at starting next year, the money itself says Hill will get the first crack at the job. I think other oppertunities will be more attractive to Winston this go around in FA.

 

Having said that... No way Loomis and Payton put all thier eggs in Hills basket without bringing in some sort of insurance in the event Hill falls flat. The question is how do they do that? They will have limited resources this offseason between cap space and draft picks. This is why Payton is so desperate to try and convince Winston to take another bargin basement deal with illusions of being the Saints starter.

 

Would the Saints pull the trigger on a QB in the first round? It sure would solve alot of cap issues moving forward. Imagine Mac Jones or Kyle Trask in the back end of round 1. That basically puts your QB on a 4 year deal worth about 12-15 million total then a 5th year option. The Saints then could invest in all their core players heading into their 2nd contracts and maybe hang on to a few others that they would likley lose. They could build and maintain a superbowl roster and if the QB hits they could be in contention for at least the next 4-5 years.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...