I will say the Saints didn't give Ricky the ball enough. However, they were down 21-0 and crap like that in the 1st Q, so they had to pass the ball and get some quick offense going. I blame the Saints defense for their failures more than their offense. Their offense was pretty good, except when Brooks would make stupid mistakes.
The defense was their achilles heel last season, true. However, Brooks did not have the year many expected from him and Joe Horn did not have nearly as good of a season as the year before. That offense would've been in big trouble had Ricky not been around carrying it for the most part.
FWIW, Ricky had 8 fumbles last year. Maybe that was a big reason why the Saints didn't want him toting the rock that much. I still am wondering why they didn't bring in Jeff Blake more.
I realize that. However, the Saints were supposedly a contender, therefore they should have looked to winning THIS year. As opposed to developing Brooks a little more.
Can't say I disagree with ya there kidrock. When they realized Brooks was struggling they should have gotten Blake some time. But then everyone in the media has a hissy fit ... OMG it's a "quarterback controversy" yeah, the better performing players should play, and future "stud" players shouldn't need to be handled with kiddie gloves.
Haslett did a poor job last year. I think I was the one guy who didn't think NO was a title contender. Merely because I felt Ricky was overrated, and the fact that they had career years from everyone in 2000, such as Horn, and their DL. The Saints should have gone to the Super Bowl in 2000. They were a better team IMO than the Giants. Who did the Saints lose to again, in the playoffs that year?
kidrock, They lost to the Vikings in the Metrodome. Other than that, on Ricky, I think to an extent you're right. I'm a Saints fan and a Texas fan, and I actually believe Deuce can do a comparable job. Because of that, I think it might be better off for the Saints to trade Ricky for some depth, since they have other holes to fill. I want Ricky to do well, but I just don't think he's been all that irreplaceable, to this point. Ricky puts up great numbers, but if you watch the Saints a lot, I think you'll notice a lot of those numbers come from the Saints giving him the ball so many times every game. IMO, the Saints have been trying to force him into the superstar role, but I'm personally not sure if he's ready. He doesn't have great breakaway speed, he has pretty good power, and overall has a variety of skills, but I don't think he's to that superstar category. There were many times last year I wished Duece were in the game at RB since he had more game-breaker potential. BTW, there are a couple of bad misconceptions on the Saints in this thread. First, the season fell apart when the defense lost practically all intensity during that game against Tampa Bay. Two weeks earlier, they were 7-5, and appeared to be peaking at the right time. They put so much emotion into their Monday night home game against the Rams, but committed way too many penalties and lost. After that, they just kind of fell apart. Against Tampa, the Saints missed tackle after tackle, showed almost no emotion, and were down 21-0 about 9 minutes into the game. The same scenario happened in the final two games. In those situations, you have to throw the ball more. Also, I was impressed with Aaron Brooks last year, despite what the numbers may lead you to believe. Brooks just needs someone that can go downfield and make a play for him, which is actually what Duece could provide. Brooks is smart, has a good arm, and makes plays. However, for the most part, the Saints receivers were tremendous letdowns last year. He had no one breaking open to make a play, and sometimes he had to force the ball. If the Saints can sign a Cris Carter, or draft a Josh Reed, I think Brooks will be one of the best quarterbacks in the league next year. As someone who watches the Saints more than a lot of posters in this thread, and considering Deuce McAllister, I'd trade Ricky before I traded Aaron. I honestly have a feeling Brooks is going to be special... don't know when it'll happen, but wait and see.
Cat-There is no way that you can tell me that Brooks was better in 2001 than in 2000. I agree the defense is to blame for the collapse. Haslett may have blown the Rams game, with the onsides kick call. Also, who knows what would have happened if Turley didn't shotput Damien Robinson's helmet.
all I know is that any and all fantasy owners should be drooling at the prospect of ricky williams in a norv turner offense. on a sidenote, everybody wants to talk about jimmy this and jerry that. with norv and wannstedt reunited this year in miami, we may find out who the real brains of the Cowboys mini-dynasty were. now, if the dolphins could just get a qb.
I am glad Ricky is out of NO. I have kind of liked the Saints for a while, but that team was the worse disciplined and worse prepared team I remember last year. I blame that on Haslett. I wish Duece well, but I would bet anyone Ricky has a better year than Duece next year. It is always easier to go in there for the occasional play and look good, it is another thing when the whole defense knows you are getting the ball and the OL is banged up and playing sloppy. BTW Ricky had more catches than the likes of Hearst or Davis--it isn't like he can't do other things. WHERE RICKY STANDS WITH LEAGUE HBs I can think of 2 backs clearly better than Ricky, and they are Faulk and Curtis Martin. I can think of 3 more with a good, but not clear cut, case for also being better: Davis (if you think Ricky is 1 dimensional check out Stephen "Westbrook's face pillow" Davis), Green (benifits from playing with Farve and an overall complete offense) and James (would be in the above group if not for the injury). And a few more that could go either way though I think Ricky is probably overall the better player: Alexander, Dillon, Tomlinson, Hearst, Holmes, Garner, Bettis and Taylor. Honestly, if I were starting a team and considering age of the player, injury history, and what they can do for you know, I would probably only take Faulk (just too dominant to pass up), James (if he looks healing perfectly), Green and maybe Tomlinson to be my HB over Ricky. Yes, not worth the #1 pick in this years draft. But that puts Ricky in very good company and a hell of a pick up for a team in need of more offensive threats like the Fish.
Well... Bear in mind that Ricky will probably face more 8-man fronts, as well as the fact that Miami's OL is poor.
How is Ricky a threat? Big play guys are "threats". The defense will be able stop him against Mia with 8 man fronts. Mia does not have a passing game to force the defense to respect the passing game. Moreover, Miami clearly overworked Lamar Smith in 2000, and it showed in 2001. I never understood why people think Miami is a good fit for Ricky. Yes, they need a RB, but so do 15-20 other teams.
Miami needs all the help they can get. A good example is Baltimore. Their offense has always sucked, but it sucked a whole lot more without Jamal Lewis. With Ricky and their rookie WR coming back, it gives them a lot more weapons. I don't see why it is hard to understand that upgrading their skill people is a good thing. Ricky certainly is an upgrade of anybody Miami has had back their in a couple of decades..
Yes... But Ricky will be hard pressed to match what Lamar Smith did in 2000. It's an upgrade for the Dolphins, I give you that. I just don't think it's as big of an upgrade as people are making it out to be. Nice RB, but not a difference maker. The Dolphins will be an 8-10 win team next year.
