Dennis Allen confirms that Mickey Loomis was not in favor of firing him after Panthers loss (1 Viewer)

[Optimistic Ozzy]

I can hear it now. "Mickey, DA said you didn't want to fire him, what say you?". Mickey-"Look, I don't want to get into that, we're looking to the future and what we need to do to be successful in this league." ----------------saying this while smacking that gum.

 

[St.Dan]

Last year he was smacking on some gum...this time he's going to be full on repulsive and stand at the podium while nibbling down on a Twizzler

Only one guy in team history was allowed a Juicy Fruit. Since that was literally during a Super Bowl, which the team hadn't ever played in before his arrival, it was allowed Loomis did an injustice to chewing gum with that presser!

 

[sfidc3]

There's another word for patience, it's called being stubborn. Allen should have been fired last year but Mick will not admit he dropped the ball hiring a guy no one else would have hired as HC.

Yup, totally agreed here.....

Respect? Uh, sorry. But the NFL is a business. Dennis Allen was bad for Gayle Benson's business so she handled it since her manager wouldn't. If anything, I respect her more for that.

Exactly how I see it.....hope she finishes the job and takes ML out of the HC decision process....

The fans had nothing to do with it. This was a move for the players. He had completely lost the team. Benson had to go behind his back to contact the players then pull rank on Loomis to make it.

We won 3 games after he was fired, I'd say the team was significantly better off for it. Rizzi was just given an impossible challenge of trying to turn around a culture that had turned soft for 3 years.

Agreed again, the last few DA games the team was horribly lost. At the very least the players got some respectability back.....leadership is important and while Rizzi was in a very difficult situation, the players did respond, it also shows just how badly DA wrecked the culture of this team.....

Yay! Everyone gets to vent their anger out at ML again, this time for something they already knew and vented out about already!

Pile on…there’s room for everyone!

Not sure what you mean, there are actually posters on this board that have defended ML and have gone as far as to say he was part of the decision to fire DA.....when it's obviously clear he wasn't....

 

[ELLIASJWILLIAMS]

.... just six months, at least, too late.

I think it's the philosophy of "let him suffer" vs "put the dog out of his misery".

The injuries to the team crippled Allen, and yet injuries aren't an excuse. Acknowledging this, Loomis wanted to allow a prideful Allen to cross the finish line, even if on crutches and knowing he wouldn't be returning as the HC of New Orleans in 2025, but with his chin up. For some, it's an honorable death.

Others however believe that a more honorable death is a quick severing of ties and Loomis was overpowered and forced to go against his code of ethic (stressing that one or the other isn't wrong or right)

You can't satisfy both camps at the same time and the #'s always win.

 

[sfidc3]

I think it's the philosophy of "let him suffer" vs "put the dog out of his misery".

Are you talking about DA or the fans here?

Because if the goal of those in charge is to put the best product on the field that has the best chance to win games then I really don't understand this POV.....

The team had quit on DA, it was blatantly obvious to everyone, I don't think there is a sane owner (or GM for that matter) out there that would roll out a team that had quit midway through a season without attempting some kind of major change......ML's "code of ethics" really should be inconsequential/meaningless at this point, and hopefully they get him demoted.....soon....

 

[St. Widge]

Not sure what you mean, there are actually posters on this board that have defended ML and have gone as far as to say he was part of the decision to fire DA.....when it's obviously clear he wasn't....

Maybe some are "defending" Loomis but many are just clarifying the fact of the situation. Problem is that we have reached the point on this board that if your post doesn't include a rant about how Loomis needs to be fired, you are considered to somehow be complicit in the downfall of the team and should be ostracized from Saints fandom.

But, there is information out there that while Loomis did not want to fire DA mid-season, he did ultimately agree with Mrs. Benson that it had to be done when it was done. Was it reluctant agreement based on not really having a choice? Probably so. And in the end this was likely more of a business decision by Mrs. Benson to placate the fan base and hope it would help season ticket sales. Or at least that they wouldn't lose as many as they would if they waited to fire DA until the end of the year.

But I also didn't expect Loomis to call DA in and tell him to get the fork out of here your loser arse is fired. It's not Loomis' style nor is it the Saints' style. So, even if he ultimately agreed with the decision, he wasn't going to be a dick to DA and he was going to put it as softly as possible. Which kind of matches with DA saying that Loomis "wasn't really in favor of the decision".

Beyond that Underhill and Tripp have reported that Loomis likely was going to fire DA at the end of the season but he has a philosophy that you don't fire coaches in the middle of a season because it doesn't result in more wins and you look bad as an organization. And, frankly, there is some sense to it since perspective coaches will like the idea that they get time to develop the team and try to prove they can turn things around. Tom Benson had the same philosophy and it's why Mora ended up quitting mid-season before Benson would fire him.

Also, had we kept DA for the entire season, we likely lose at least two more games and end up with a top 5 pick so maybe keeping him for the rest of the season would have been the strategic move? But, I will admit that I was just tired of seeing and hearing DA and wanted him gone by mid-season since it was clear it was not going to work.

And honestly, I think the bigger criticism of Loomis is that he didn't fire him after last season and allowed him to coach this year. And, I personally think he should have realized it wasn't working after the first year and DA should have been let go then.

 

[kcirdor]

Maybe some are "defending" Loomis but many are just clarifying the fact of the situation. Problem is that we have reached the point on this board that if your post doesn't include a rant about how Loomis needs to be fired, you are considered to somehow be complicit in the downfall of the team and should be ostracized from Saints fandom.

Cool, now they understand how the small handful of us felt this past offseason as we got dog pilled for expressing our discontent for Loomis's recent series of follies. There is a reason i unblocked everyone mid season to see how their tunes changed and save a small handful, literally everyone else seems to be on board the train ive been the conductor of for years. Now, i no longer have to lead the charge. This coaching hire is the final chance to win back the fanbase. I hope he pulls it off and proves me wrong.

 

[sfidc3]

Maybe some are "defending" Loomis but many are just clarifying the fact of the situation. Problem is that we have reached the point on this board that if your post doesn't include a rant about how Loomis needs to be fired, you are considered to somehow be complicit in the downfall of the team and should be ostracized from Saints fandom.

But, there is information out there that while Loomis did not want to fire DA mid-season, he did ultimately agree with Mrs. Benson that it had to be done when it was done. Was it reluctant agreement based on not really having a choice? Probably so. And in the end this was likely more of a business decision by Mrs. Benson to placate the fan base and hope it would help season ticket sales. Or at least that they wouldn't lose as many as they would if they waited to fire DA until the end of the year.

But I also didn't expect Loomis to call DA in and tell him to get the fork out of here your loser arse is fired. It's not Loomis' style nor is it the Saints' style. So, even if he ultimately agreed with the decision, he wasn't going to be a dick to DA and he was going to put it as softly as possible. Which kind of matches with DA saying that Loomis "wasn't really in favor of the decision".

Beyond that Underhill and Tripp have reported that Loomis likely was going to fire DA at the end of the season but he has a philosophy that you don't fire coaches in the middle of a season because it doesn't result in more wins and you look bad as an organization. And, frankly, there is some sense to it since perspective coaches will like the idea that they get time to develop the team and try to prove they can turn things around. Tom Benson had the same philosophy and it's why Mora ended up quitting mid-season before Benson would fire him.

Also, had we kept DA for the entire season, we likely lose at least two more games and end up with a top 5 pick so maybe keeping him for the rest of the season would have been the strategic move? But, I will admit that I was just tired of seeing and hearing DA and wanted him gone by mid-season since it was clear it was not going to work.

And honestly, I think the bigger criticism of Loomis is that he didn't fire him after last season and allowed him to coach this year. And, I personally think he should have realized it wasn't working after the first year and DA should have been let go then.

I guess the fact that our football team has been destroyed over the last 3 years means that.....yes, fans will be looking to blame folks, especially those that are supposedly "in charge" of things......not trying to be snarky here but should the ML vitriol really surprise anyone?

I think my original point was do folks realize how much of a disaster this football team would have been had DA been allowed to coach out the season? ML is dead wrong about the "organization looking bad by firing a HC midseason", what if the players had already quit on the coach by midseason? It would have been really, really ugly had Gayle not stepped in....

And yes, starting with Mora the Saints Benson ownership can be criticized for holding onto failed coaches too long, I believed they did the same with Ditka and Haslett but that's another discussion.....

I guess what I'm saying is I don't think the entire Saints organization and it's fans should be less important than ML's "code of ethics" or whatever you want to call it.....

I totally agree with your last paragraph.....Cheers mate

 

[Infoman]

NGL... I was already not a big fan of "Present Day Loomis".... But if he wanted to keep DA after that 7 game Trava-Sham-Mockery... I may be ready to get my torch and pitch fork out...

 

[St. Widge]

Cool, now they understand how the small handful of us felt this past offseason as we got dog pilled for expressing our discontent for Loomis's recent series of follies. There is a reason i unblocked everyone mid season to see how their tunes changed and save a small handful, literally everyone else seems to be on board the train ive been the conductor of for years. Now, i no longer have to lead the charge. This coaching hire is the final chance to win back the fanbase. I hope he pulls it off and proves me wrong.

This isn't really that serious. It's fans talking about grown men playing a game. It's supposed to be entertainment.

Anway, sure Loomis has one final chance to hire the right coach and rebuild the team. If he misses, he is gone. And frankly, at his age, he's likely gone in a few years even if he hits on the right coach. I'm not all that confident that he is going to get it right, but he does at least seem to be going through the right process this time.

 

[Big_L]

No one feels sorry for Dennis; this was his second chance to prove himself after being given almost three years with two different teams. Two coaches just got fired this year after just one year. Don't let the door hit you . . .

Well, those two coaches share something Dennis doesn't.

 

[texasjefe]

Dennis screwed the pooch early. He went from the 9-0 win in Tampa in '21 and the iconic photo of Chauncey with arms-folded in Brady's face -- to training camp just 8 months later when he and Mickey alienated our team and fans' spirit animal right out the door. I think money was involved and we know there aint enough of that around in King Mickey's palace of debt.

Then there was the optimism of Winston returning from injury when that house of cards fell immediately and we suddenly only had washed journeyman backup Andy Dalton at QB.

I think it was the road game at the Steelers when I concluded Dennis was a fail at HC. The team was non-existent emotionally all game long.

Any debate on when was it right for Dennis to be fired - the answer is he could've been fired after one season.

 

[dvdman]

Shout out to DA. He was a darn good defensive coordinator.

Unfortunately he wasn’t even that at the bitter end. The defense was falling apart along with the rest of the team. Rizzi did his best but ultimately I believe the players believed he was still part of the Allen cultures

 

[kcirdor]

This isn't really that serious. It's fans talking about grown men playing a game. It's supposed to be entertainment.

Anway, sure Loomis has one final chance to hire the right coach and rebuild the team. If he misses, he is gone. And frankly, at his age, he's likely gone in a few years even if he hits on the right coach. I'm not all that confident that he is going to get it right, but he does at least seem to be going through the right process this time.

At his age he should have retired years ago... so I don't get the whole "he's going to retire soon". Why retire when you have carte blanche?

 

[Domeination]

Lol

Oh, but he can if Gayle lets him remain in place.