You don't determine a good year by numbers, even the W's and L's. Would you be happy if you knew you had the best college football team in the land but lost several games to inferior opponents, thereby knocking you out of the title game and BCS bowl?
Success is determined by your performance based on potential... To underachieve as a team is no different than to do it as a player, yet fans often look at the two fundamentally different.
I am proud we won 11 games and are headed to the playoffs, but I am disappointed because the only game I truly felt like the Saints were beaten in was Baltimore (and even then, we had our chances). Where are the games that offset these losses? Who did we beat this year we had no business beating? As such, particularly with our historically weak schedule I feel like we should be looking at 15-1. There have seasons as a Saint I have felt that we overachieved, hell I felt that way in 2006. The point is to play to your potential, the "nameless" opponent as Chip Kelly calls it. If that isn't good enough to beat someone, then at least you can tip your cap and feel good(relatively) about it.