Chaing Gang: A Boner-Inducing Rushing Attack!

Each week here at Hakim we bring together a group of Saints bloggers to discuss all things Saints during the week. Here is their email chain. This week we had Grandmaster Wang from moosedenied, Dave Cariello and Andrew Juge from Canal Street Chronicles, and Ralph Malbrough from WWLTV.com. And the boss man, Kevin Held.

RALPH:
At this point I'm not sure what's left to say. The Saints have rushed for 200 yards the last two home games. They didn't create any turnovers but they really only let Blount get loose on one long run.

I still don't trust them on the road.

I know we all had Ingramania and were pumped to get him but looking at how awful that front 7 on defense is maybe the Saints should have traded back up to get another defender.
I get they were worried about Ivory's foot and all the running back injuries

But at this point I think I'd rather have Sproles, Thomas Ivory and a 2012 #1 pick than Ingram.

This defense is going to have to be rebuilt AGAIN. New DT, new linebackers. All of it. I asked the question on the podcast and I'll ask it again, "What does this defense do well?" I think the answer is NOTHING so the question becomes what is realistic for it to do well the rest of 2011?

Maybe create turnovers or stop the run? If you could pick one what would it be?

I think I'd go turnovers and just try to ride Breesus far as you can.


WANG:
I just finished the podcast and I agree that the answer is "not a goddamn thing." Not consistently, anyway. I will say that I thought both Will Smith and Cam Jordan were killing it yesterday. Especially 91, especially in the second half. For a while there it seemed like Smith was about a half inch away from Freeman on every single snap. He was straight abusing Tampa's LT. Which was nice, but like you and Kevin were talking about, the middle was wide open all damn day. Roman Harper had a pretty decent game too.

But I still come back to the nagging feeling that yesterday was at least as much about Tampa shitting the bed like the Saints did down in Tampa, as it was about the Saints playing a particularly strong game on defense. And Blount being in his first game back off an injury explains a lot of him rushing for "only" 72 yards. Tampa looks like they might be getting dangerously close to imploding. And I do mean imploding, as in from within.

Ralph, seems you were right on about that whole home vs. away thing. Or at least other people are now coming to that conclusion too. I still think it's mostly about the Saints half-assing it a lot of the time, but that does seem to happen a lot more on the road than at home. I don't see any other explanation for the difference in the performance of both lines from week to week aside from just sometimes they half-ass it and other times they use their whole asses. I mean, you can't convince me the return of Zach Strief makes THAT big a difference. The d-line also looked like a whole different line than they usually look like, and it can't be just because Tampa was missing Jeremy Zuttah.

It still disturbs the hell out of me that these guys seem to need stupid motivational shit like the baseball bats to get it through their skulls that they can do better. The bats were cool that one time in the playoff game against Arizona, but doing it several times a year is retarded, and SHOULD be unnecessary.

Good win though. I just wonder how much of it was due to the "fact" that Tampa might very well be circling the drain at this point. They're still better than the Rams though, so we've got that going for us. I look at the rest of the schedule and I don't see an "easy" one left. Not a single one. Maybe that's a good thing, maybe they'll be able to stay "motivated" now without the need for souvenir baseball bats and shit.

Ralph, I hear you about "did we really need Ingram?" but with all due respect, hindsight. And hell, for that matter, we're still just about halfway through (assuming playoffs.) How much money are you putting down that Pierre and/or Ivory are gonna stay healthy for the next 7+ games? I suppose it could happen, and that would be great. Until yesterday, Ingram was the Saints' leading rusher, and he still leads the team in rushing TDs. We're gonna need him again before it's all over.

But, sheesh, what a thing of beauty it is when the Saints' rushing game is working like it was yesterday. Huge throbbing boner.

You're right about the defense needing to be rebuilt (again) though. And that's gonna be a tall order.


RALPH:
I think everyone underestimates how playing on the road affects the o-line. Crowd noise, snap count, etc. Plus the Saints were way behind in Tampa and St. Louis and that means teams can just tee off and forget the run. To me the best things to have on the road is good lines and the Saints have neither.

As for the Saints not needed to be motivated. NFL players need it because while Brees might be a freak and want to be the best, hall of famer, etc the majority of NFL players are just like most of us. They show up to their job, do the best the can, but do they really give a shit? Yes they want to do a good job and keep their job but they simply aren't going to be geeked every week. It's a huge part of Sean Payton's job to get them focused and motivated every week. I think overall Payton has done a fairly good job and the Saints haven't laid many turds in his 5 and a half years.

Also I think part of the Saints completely sucking in St. Louis is they didn't make any plays to build any sort of momentum until the fumble recovery. I think especially on the road somebody has to make a play to sort of get things started. A team can't get emotional unless they start playing well. If a team is flat or sleep walking the only thing that snaps them out of it is a big play.

This week will tell me everything I need to know about the Saints. Three straight road duds and it's official; 2011 is a one and done playoff game at best.

I'll be interested to see how Gregg Williams schemes to stop Michael Turner and without Porter I wonder if the CBs can hold up against Jones/White.


KEVIN:
Just so we're clear...This season is a failure if the Saints don't make the postseason. Am I correct in this?

As for the running game, I'm glad we've got Ingram. Yeah, hindsight being 20-20, etc., maybe we should've taken a LB or some other help in the secondary.

Like I said in an earlier thread, I think the Saints need to be defense specific in this draft. And yes, that means, GET A LINEBACKER. Vilma isn't going to be around forever and is already showing cracks. And Scott Shanle is Scott Shanle. Shaun Rodgers is done after this year, right? Please say "yes," somebody.

PS - Boner-inducing running games are a great thing.


ANDREW:
Yes, Rogers has a 1 year deal.

The bye week isn't necessarily coming at a great time because the Saints are fairly healthy at the moment, but it'll be nice to recharge. Show good intensity at Atlanta and then get a little break. This Atlanta game is huge. The winner of this game has a really good chance to take the division. The Saints come back from the bye to host the Giants and Lions. Those are brutal matchups. They need some leeway with a division lead and a tie breaker as insurance going up against those teams... which is why this Falcons game is a must win. They need to scratch, fight and claw like they did in Atlanta last year. This may be week 10 but it has the feel of week 17, plus it's the hated Falcons. We're not amped and hyped on it yet because of the emotion of this past weekend with LSU and the Bucs game... but trust me, by mid week this will hit all Saints fans across the head with a "holy shit, wait a minute, this game is HUGE". It's 6-3 vs. 5-3 for the division lead. If the Saints lose, they can recover. If the Falcons lose, at home, they're toast. This is the Saints' chance to bury them. I hope they take it.


RALPH:
Andrew, just saw your defensive grades. Will the Saints be better off playing Dunbar again this week and give Vilma even more rest? My initial thought was yes because Falcons have Turner but can Vilma help on Gonzales? Or I'm I completely wrong though because Gonzo will be covered by Shanle or Casillas not the middle linebacker.


ANDREW:
Vilma is typically covering backs out of the backfield. The tight end is either Shanle or Harper's responsibility depending on the coverage assignment/blitz package. Part of the reason why Dunbar fared ok against the Bucs is they didn't really have a receiving back threat with Earnest Graham injured. And still, Lumpkin was wide open a few times including once for a touchdown and Freeman missed him. Jacquizz Rodgers is a threat, but overall I think this is another favorable matchup to have Dunbar in there because you're facing a physical in between the tackles back in Turner. So overall, yes, I think the Saints are better off with Dunbar this week. Tuner isn't a big threat receiving at all. They do throw to Ovie Mughelli in short yardage and the red zone, though, so the Saints will need to keep an eye on that. I would say that Vilma is a MUCH better option when the Saints are playing backs like Matt Forte, for example. That's a horrible matchup for Dunbar.

Is it just me or is the buzz surrounding this game at a flat line? WTF? This is the Atlanta Falcons for F's sake! 6-3 @ 5-3 with the winner taking over the division lead. I mean, do games get any bigger? Can we all please start spitting fire and get more motivated? I'm not blaming us for the lack of fire, but as Saints bloggers it's on us to get the hype started. Have we forgotten what Roddy White said? Have we forgotten they signed Brett Maxie, Bobby Hebert, Morten Andersen, Joe Horn etc etc etc... Or Aaron Stecker the week of the matchup to get intel on the Saints? Have we forgotten that for 44 years this rivalry has been for the pride of the South? Have we forgotten that UNACCEPTABLE face Jerry Glanville had every time they scored points on us that to this day makes me what to take an axe to everything in my house? (ok that was psycho, sorry.) I know the LSU game last weekend took all of our collective focus but it's time to move on. This is Saints vs. Falcons baby! The most underrated rivalry in all of sports. Come on, someone give me something. Dave, tell me you're semi hard for Dave the Falconer and the Falcons "aren't that bad" to at least get my blood boiling. Wang, come up with some witty piece about how Roddy White is a crime against humanity. Kevin, rant about how Deion Sanders high stepping on the fleur de lis is forever etched into your brain akin to that time you were picked last in touch football after a girl with down syndrome. Ralph, bitch about how Olin Kreutz belongs on the Falcons. Hans, give me a hot read post about how Matt Ryan enjoys feeding strawberries naked to Joey Harrington. Come on guys. Give me something. THIS IS SAINTS-FALCONS. Is no one fired up???


RALPH:
I agree that the buzz hasn't gotten cranked up. I really think there's this attitude among the fanbase that think if the Saints just need pull their head out of their ass and not sleep walk then 2009 will be HERE ANY MINUTE.

They don't realize the 2011 Saints are in a fist fight to the death to win the NFC South. I finally accepted the 2011 Saints for what they are at halftime of the Rams game. Their shitty tendencies like no run defense, horrible line play on the road, Brees throwing picks, and defense not getting turnovers aren't bugs in the system they are FEATURES built into the 2011 version.

The whole off season theory of Franklin/Rogers upgrading the defense is a failure so far although Franklin looked good and you grading confirmed it so there is a little hope.

I guess it's sort of a good thing the fanbase has become a little spoiled and has great expectations. But come on it's TIME TO HATE THE FUCKING FALCONS, that's like 35% of the fun being a Saints fan.


WANG:
Heh. Nice. Just for the record, I believe Mughelli is on IR (???)

Hate to say it, but I think Dunbar > Vilma at this point in most situations.

I think the Penn State story is dominating most sports fans' attention right about now. Might explain a lot of the lack of being fired up about this weekend.

Personally, though? There's the Penn State thing, but also, and I can't believe I'm about to confess this... I don't have any particularly extraordinary hate for the Falcons. For me, they're just another opponent. Not really sure why, but that's always been true for me. Sure, I want them to lose at every opportunity, but it's no different from how I approach Tampa and Carolina, and back in the day the Rams & 49ers. No extra juice there just because it's Atlanta.

If Kevin Held and I ever meet face to face, he's welcome to slap me in the face for saying that. I deserve it.


RALPH:
"But come on it's TIME TO HATE THE FUCKING FALCONS, that's like 35% of the fun being a Saints fan" - well said, except the number is more like 83%.

And congratulations Wang, you've officially brought my blood to a soft boil (hehe, soft). Way to be a Roddy White lover. Dave can still raise the temp with a plug of his physical relationship with Dave the Falconer. Come on Cariello, you know you want to shout it from the rooftops.


KEVIN:
Oh, I hate the Falcons, maybe not as much as Ralph does, but I hate them for sure. Wang's right in that most of us are consumed by this Penn State thing. I just read the full indictment for the first time today....do yourselves a favor AND DON'T READ IT. Your soul will get blacker just for looking at it.

Yeah, I kinda approach the NFC South roughly the same, but the Falcons get a nod above Tampa and Carolina. The Falcons are up there with Dallas and Pittsburgh and San Francisco for me. My hate is strong.

E-mail Roundtable: Losses make us forlorn!

Ralph Malbrough:
Listen, to me it says alot about the Saints that they had 4 turnovers, lost their coach, let Earnest Graham run for 100 yards, and yet still were in position to win. They were a train wreck and still almost won.
They'll be ok but they do have a couple issues.
1. Kevin and I chatted on the phone about Olin Kreutz and I asked, "What if the Saints looked at him and said. Yeah he is struggling in Chicago but their line sucks. But him between Evans and Nicks and he'll be fine." Not bad theory but in practice it's a fail. Teams will figure it out if they haven't already.
2. Defense is a blitzing team that can't get sacks. Bad. Gregg Williams ain't changing so I'm not sure what changes they can make except hope it gets better and hope is not a plan.
And by the way, I thought the first down play calling in the second half was awful. The Saints ran up to gut against a defensive line that was whipping them.
Just because Drew Brees didn't get sacked doesn't mean the line didn't play like crap.
3. Saints can't afford to have a bumpy month because the 49ers are winning 12 games with their defense and schedule.

Wang:
Absolutely BRUTALLY demoralizing loss. I haven't done shit today except mope, and that's how I plan to spend the rest of my day. I hear you about "Yeah, but they still almost won" but there are no moral victories, and even if there were, I don't see anything about yesterday that would qualify. The Saints got their asses handed to them in all facets of the game by a team that's mediocre at best. Division game, 3rd straight road game, pissed off opponent looking to bounce back from a trouncing, I don't care about any of that stuff.
I think I'm finally ready to come over to the dark side (and/or jump off a bridge) about the defense. I've been trying to defend them and stay optimistic that they'll get better, but I'm just about done. They're not gonna get any better, not without yet another infusion of personnel. And I don't trust them to hold anybody, ever. You guys were right all along. We got sold a bill of goods on the so-called "new and improved" defense. They're slow, old, undisciplined, weak, and soft. Tracy Porter flat out blows at this point. The linebackers are atrocious. Roman Harper isn't even very good at Roman-Harper-stuff lately. There are no pass rushers on this team. None.
Kreutz is terrible. Absolutely wretched. Complete whiff of an acquisition and he ought to be not just benched but released. Give me Brian de la Puente over this guy, if you refuse to play Tennant.
Lots of people blaming the offense this morning and trying to absolve the defense. Sure, turn the ball over 4 times and only score 20 while not running the ball for shit and you don't stand a chance. I get that. And it certainly wasn't a good day for the offense either. Plenty of blame for everyone yesterday. But that speaks to the larger issue, no? We're right back to 2008 where if Drew isn't 100% supernatural and the offense doesn't put up 30+, we've got no chance because the defense is all-but-fucking-helpless out there.
The good news is that I do think the offense will continue to put up 30+ more often than not, and I still fully expect the Saints to win 10+ games and the division. But the defense is circling the drain. Most of the time it looks like they're just hanging on for dear life out there.

Ralph Malbrough:
Wang, I'm not into moral victories either. I guess the only point I'm making is Saints dropped a big fat F- on the road against the second best team in the division and still almost won which means the division is shit.
I want different guys to bitch at on defense at least. Play Wilson more, play Gallete more. I also think it may also be a case of the NFL figuring out Gregg Williams. As Mike Lombardi says, "The Saints need Gregg Williams to have a great game plan to succeed because their personal is average at best."
Your point on Porter is dead on. Jesus, he looks like Ashley Ambrose on his second tour with the Saints. Old and slow. Just because he is young doesn't mean his body isn't shot.


Kevin Held:
Does Payton just hand over the draft reigns to Gregg Williams this off-season? Basically say, "we're going for defensive improvement." And will Loomis sign a LB this off-season? I'm saying off-season because it's patently obvious that these guys are interested in riding and dying with the defense they have.
We beat ourselves in this game, especially on offense. We ran up the middle for nothing so many damn times I thought I was watching Coach Conlin's later Brother Martin teams. BA-ZING!
Long story short: Saints need to skull drag the Colts and Rams. If they can't beat those two teams, we might as well relegate the season to a dogfight for a wildcard birth and a trip to San Fran or some shit.

Ralph Malbrough:
Gregg Williams is AWFUL at personal decisions. If the saints want to rebuild the defense in the drat fine but Williams can't have big say on players.

And listen, they tried to fix the d-line with Franklin/Rogers. And it might be a case of Vilma and Will Smith getting old at the same time. It happens.
Wang, I do think they'll be better than 2008 on defense just because all the blitzing will create some weeks where they get turnovers. And I'm not convinced teams can just cram the ball down their throat.
Besides Patrick Robinson is anyone on defense having a good year?

Wang:
Yeah I don't think Gregg Williams ought to be the guy making those decisions, but I'm not sure it ought to be the regular Saints braintrust either. Sedrick Elllis? Just a guy. Tracy Porter? We'll always have 2009, but he's just a guy too. Malcolm Jenkins? Last year everybody thought he was on the verge of becoming a perennial pro bowler, and by no means have I given up on him, but this year he's looking like just a guy. Cam Jordan? Too early to tell, but I don't have much hope that he's gonna be anything more than just a guy. Patrick Robinson has been looking pretty good so far this year, but time will tell if he's anything more than just a guy. I've defended Roman Harper for 5 years, because he doesn't suck nearly as much as people say, but if you combine his + production as an inside the box guy and his - production in pass coverage, you've got... just a guy. Usama Young? Just a guy. Martez Wilson, Jo-Lonn Dunbar, Jon Casillas, Junior Galette, all just guys. Al Woods? Ha!
This administration hasn't drafted for shit on D. I mean we're talking about 3 first round picks, 2 second rounders, 2 third rounders over 6 drafts, and the BEST they've done is "just a guy." (Pending Jenkins/Robinson, I concede that it's too soon to tell there.) Just a guy ain't nearly good enough, that doesn't get the job done. Not with first day draft picks. So I'm not sure who they ought to hand the draft over to and say "Draft us a defense" (oh by the way, without a first rounder) but I don't think he's "in the building."
Hell, for that matter, it hasn't been much better with acquiring vets either. Vilma gave us a couple good years (and I'd make that trade all over again) but he's always been a little overrated, and evidence is starting to mount that he might be done. Alex Brown? Shanle? Fujita? Simoneau? Dan Morgan? (Ha!) Bobby McCray? Franklin and Rogers? All just guys at best. I'd call Vilma a "hit" and I'd definitely call Greer a "hit." (Of course, they kinda lucked into Greer because Ron Bartell wouldn't sign with us.) Sharper was lightning in a bottle for 1 year. (And for that matter, they lucked into Sharper too because Gerald Sensabaugh wouldn't sign here.) Fujita and Shanle maybe qualify as "hits" just for the longevity of their contributions, even though they're average players at best. But there's been just as many if not more misses. And even the hits are just "meh" for the most part.
Honestly I think the whole franchise is pretty much rudderless as far as defense goes. I mean, look no further than the last two drafts. It comes out this week that they had their eye on Adrian Clayborn, but then when Tampa took him they went with Cam Jordan. Could the two players be any more different? And in 2010, they were drooling over Jerry Hughes, but then when the Colts take him, they completely switch gears and go with a corner. I know they'll scream "BEST AVAILABLE PLAYER REGARDLESS OF POSITION!!!" and that's fine and all. But at the same time, it could be taken as an indication that they're directionless. They don't have a firm goal, they're not sure who they want to be or how they want to construct the defense. They just plug in guys and hope for the best.
It's not that they don't try, because clearly they've been trying. Over and over again. But they haven't hit a single home run (except the inside-the-park home run on 2009 Sharper.) It's like the best they can hope for is to occasionally stretch a single into a sliding double.

Ralph Malbrough:

Yeah the defense acquisitions have been mostly bad. By the way Jerry Hughes is a big pile of fail right? At this point who's the best player on this defense through 6 weeks?
I have no idea really as no one has stood out except Robinson.
I do think they will be able to create a pass rush at home. They did against the Bears and late against Houston. Their pass rush is alot like the Bears offensive line. Cutler gets protection at home(Like last night) but get that shit offensive line on the road in a full stadium and it falls to pieces.
Saints defense might be the same. A loud Dome crowd, o-line has to go silent count, etc. At least at this point it's the only hope I got Wang.
#hopingformiracle

Wang:
Junior Galette!!! Heh. Yeah, I guess it's gotta be Robinson so far. Hell, he's got 2/3 of the whole team's takeaways. So... uh... yeah I guess it's him. Him or Shanle.
The whole Payton thing has the potential to be a big, BIG deal too. 8 weeks before he's even able to get up on crutches? Ouch. That's mid December, and even then they might not want to risk Payton being on the sideline if he can't move and get out of the way when another play comes his way. He gets rolled up on again and it could cripple him for life. So where does the buck stop on the sideline now? Who's in charge down there with Payton in the booth? Gregg Williams? Drew Brees? Maybe I'm overreacting, but I think potentially it could be almost as big as losing an actual player. An important one. And that's just on gamedays. He's not gonna be able to crack the whip at practices either. The lack of mobility could be a huge limitation as far as being able to monitor players' performances effectively during the week, and of course that's what a lot of his gameday decisions are based on. Etc. etc. etc. It could be a huge hinderance to his effectiveness as a head coach, in lots of different ways. And don't even get me started on the V word.

Yesterday did one hell of a number on me. My head is exploding over here. I'm all "OH SHIT!!!" about EVERYTHING right about now.

Ralph Malbrough:
Payton issue is HUGE DEAL. I think the biggest thing I worry about Wang is when the Saints are struggling and he is in the booth and not on the sideline and can't go over to the o-line and communicate to them about a blitz pickup, chew ass, etc. It's a huge deal but I think having Brees makes a huge difference. I think Brees can sort of do the whole Peyton Manning QB/coach thing at least on game days as far as sideline stuff for the offense.
The more I think about it though the more it worries me. The over/under on how many games Payton is on the sideline the rest of the year is 1. I'm taking the under.

Kevin Held:
You know how you're always talking about "the little signs from the football gods" or how certain teams "get the lucky bounces or the right calls at the time"? I think/fear we'll be looking back at Jimmy Graham getting shoved out of bounds into Payton's knee as a turning point.
/unsubstantiated rabble'd
Dave Cariello:
Saints are fucked....

Andrew Juge:
You guys all sound like a whining wife. The Saints just went 2-1 on a 3 game road trip and lost to the Packers. Big deal. 4-2 is an acceptable record at this point. The Packers proved last year it's all about getting hot late. The Saints can win on the road if Brees gets hot. Does the defense blow? Absolutely. Are they going to stay at a .5 takeaways per game ratio? Doubtful. Brees is still healthy and I'll be SHOCKED if they aren't 6-2 in two weeks. Then it's Tampa at home again. They'll be ready for that one. Are you guys still going to be crying at 7-2? It's all about making the playoffs. Sure I'd prefer home games, but none of us should be that picky. Playoffs beat no playoffs. After that, it's all about 1 game at a time.
If the Saints were 2-4 or even 3-3, with @ New England and vs. Atlanta coming up... Then yes, id be panicked like you all. But they're 4-2 with Indy and the Rams. 6-2 doesn't get anymore cupcake. If they lose either, then I'll panic. At 6-2 they'll be in terrific position.
You're telling me down the road you don't think the Saints can win in Detroit, San Fran or New York if they have to? Please. The only team I'm not convinced they can beat is GB and they almost did this year.
Ralph Malbrough:
I really like your grades this week, especially on Charles Brown. I can see why the Saints picked him and also why he dropped to larte 2nd Round. He'll look so good for two plays be mediocre on 3 and awful on 1. I can definitly see how a Saints coach would watch his college film and say, "I'll get him to play consistent."
I'm wondering about Payton's injury and my biggest concern is if he struggles physically in the booth to call plays effectively would he give up play calling duties for awhile? He's said in the past he loves calling plays and would never delegate them. I just wonder if he would be capable of saying, "You know my leg is so fucked at least for the next two or three weeks I'm going to game plan during the week but on game day I'm go to just be like Joe Paterno and oversee everything from the booth."
We really don't have any template for how a team handles this.
Andrew I think you right to say the Saints are in ok shape. The St. Louis game scares the shit out of me though. Their offense is moving the ball and I think they'll still win 3 or 4 games.

Wang:
Vicodin, bitches!

Ralph Malbrough:

Whatever it takes Wang. Do you think at any point the rest of the year someone else will be calling plays for the Saints?


Kevin Held:
As the chief officer of the "St. Louis Bureau" I can assure you that the Rams' offense can't move shit. Literally. They're all about bowel obstructions up here. These cats are fucking useless. Now if Brandon Lloyd shows up in Week 7 and has a good day and helps open things up for the Rams, THEN AND ONLY THEN, I might be worried. I'm more worried about the hapless Colts then the Rams.

Ralph Malbrough:
Wang, has the President of #wegotthis resigned? Great read and I think you have like a 80% chance of being right.
The only argument I can give is I think the 2008 secondary was a crime against humanity
Jason David
Randell Gay
Mike McKenzie
Kevin Kaesviharn
Roman Harper
Josh Bullocks
I'm saying Greer/Robinson/Porter at CB is way better and so is Harper/Jenkins at safety. 2008 defense couldn't do shit and Gary Gibbs bend/don't break was the equivalent of asking to get kicked the balls repeatedly while hoping the person would eventually miss and you could limp away. At least Gregg Williams blitzs will eventually at least I think lead to run of turnovers. 2011 defense can maybe start to create some big plays(not like '09) but something. If I don't see any the next two weeks then I'll admit you are 100% right.
I guess the difference is this year at least I can scream for Jenkins, Greer, Robinson or Harper to make a play. In 2008 we didn't even have that hope. Oh and Brees wants to get paid. I don't think we can underestimate that.

Wang:

Nah, he'll be back I'm sure. He's just confused and irritable right at the moment.
As far as this defense vs. 2008? I'd love to agree with you Ralph, and I definitely agree that there's no reason this team SHOULDN'T be a shitload better than 2008. Problem is, it ain't exactly working out so far....
2008: 23rd in total defense, 26th in scoring defense, 393 points allowed, 30 takeaways (15 INT, 15 FR)
2011: 17th in total defense, 26th in scoring defense, 403 points allowed*, 11 takeaways* (8 INT, 3 FR)
*on pace for that over 16 games
On pace for one third as many takeaways and 10 more points allowed. Over 2008! Yikes!

Ralph Malbrough:
Wang, I think the next two weeks will tell us a lot as far as the defense. If they can't get right against the Colts and Rams and improve those awful projections then It's 2008 part II.
If they can't hold the Colts/Rams under 20 points and create at least two turnovers per game then daddy will need to buy more crown for the rest of 2011.
Andrew Juge:
It blows my mind that this team only has 3 interceptions. Considering the accuracy problems of Josh Freeman, Cam Newton, Blaine Gabbert, Matt Schaub and Jay Cutler, how the heck do they only have 3 picks?!?! Aaron Rodgers was the only guy that was dead on accurate all game long. Schaub was like that for a half. The rest were all over the freaking place. Some of the incompletes we've seen in those games miss their targets by miles. Some of that has been poor luck, some of that has been bad hands by: Jonathan Casillas (at LEAST 2-3 times), Shanle (at least twice), Roman Harper, Malcolm Jenkins and Patrick Robinson. All those guys have dropped picks this year. Casillas has been hit in between the numbers twice, including once where he juggled it before flipping it to a Texan for a touchdown. I just don't understand that total. It would be one thing if the DB's were getting shredded by superior QB play, but that's not the case. If anything, I think this defense has been fortunate the accuracy of the quarterbacks they've played hasn't been better. I feel like the LSU DB's would have had 8-10 picks by now with the same balls.
I'm going to go ahead and offer that the Saints lack playmaking potential and HANDS on this defense. No one can catch. Sharper's 9 picks, most of which came in the first half of the season, made a HUGE impact in 2009. Jenkins through 6 games now has ZERO. That's the answer to improving this defense I think. Jenkins needs to be less of a headhunter and more of a ballhawk. That's what will turn this thing around. I'm convinced of it. I'm not sure if he's capable of that, and if he isn't, maybe he needs to get moved to SS and we need to find a better ballhawk at FS.

Kevin Held:
HONEY BADGER knows how to ball hawk!
/goes back to work

Ralph:
I'd like to publicly thank Wang for sending me the stat comparing the 2008 and 2011 saints defenses which gave me my Friday column idea. By the way I know it's not Saints related but I'll be so pissed if LSU loses to Auburn because the Honey Badger had to get high. I was so looking forward to reading Peter Finney write two weeks of columns waxing nostalgic about the Bear and Charlie Mac leading up to Sabangedon. Seriously, Pete Finney's book on the history of LSU football is one of my favorites.

Wang:
Well, I'd like to thank the email roundtable for prompting me to look it up. I probably wouldn't have thought to do it otherwise. I was replying to your email when it occurred to me to do that. Can't wait to read the Forecast. And is there a podcast tonight?
LSU's not gonna lose to Auburn. I mean, I can't think of 3 bigger players to lose all at once than Badger, Tharold Simon and Spencer Ware. Damn, that's an awful lot of talent to lose. I'd almost rather have lost Jefferson AND Lee. But LSU will still win, just by half as much as they would have otherwise. And you know Les would rather cut off his own balls than let the suspensions affect the Alabama game. So I suspect this will all blow over by next weekend

Ralph Malbrough:
Just wanted to give you props, and I think LSU wins I just think it's close. The great/awful thing about college football is every game is basically an elimination game. I think LSU/Alabama have looked unbelievably awesome because the SEC is absolute garbage after LSU/Bama/Arkansas.

Kevin Held:
"I think the Saints play mad and run the ball down the Colts throat. You read right, I think the Saints run the ball a lot against the 30th ranked run defense." -Ralph
AH-HA! My mad ranting got to you!!!

Ralph Malbrough:
It did. Of course you know we're both wrong and Payton will be calling 50 passes while in his wheelchair.