Mike Florio bringing the proper perspective to our organization: “Saints are a solid long-term destination for a new coach“ (51 Viewers)

[StudioSaint]

If Payton picked the players that made the team great, then Payton picked the players, not Loomis.

Correct. Payton gets credit for identifying players to get. Loomis gets credit for finding a way to get those players, like creative contracts and trading up in the draft.

If Payton "hamstrung the team and bailed" then he did that, not Loomis. But I seem to be detecting a common theme amongst the front office defenders that the people that are still with the team did the good things and those that are not did the bad things.

You're not getting any of that from me. If you are, then you need to re-calibrate your detector, because it's giving you false readings.

Is Loomis just a facilitator for the head coach or is he running the team?

One of the many things he does to run the team is to facilitate the head coach. It's pretty straight forward.

My opinion is that Loomis' job is to facilitate but only to the extent that it doesn't hurt the team. In that way, Loomis has been a failure.

Oh, I see, you only give Loomis credit for allowing Payton to make mistakes. You don't give Loomis credit for any of the good things he let Payton do. You're doing the same thing you are "detecting" other are doing, only you fault Loomis for all of the mistakes made and don't give him credit for any of the success.

 

[StudioSaint]

This article is Florio carrying water for Loomis.

Why in the world would Florio "carry water" for Loomis? Florio gains nothing from "carrying water" for Loomis.

 

[SweetT]

A big part of it is that they are also looking at it from their shoes, because they've never been in the shoes of someone spending their whole career working towards getting a head coaching job.

Bingo!

"What do the Saints have? An owner who is patient and doesn’t meddle."

That I think is the biggest appeal to our HC spot. Gayle will give a lot of control and influence to our new HC. Decisions, coaching staff, roster (draft and FA), etc. That coupled with the fact that she was more than patient with DA when it was clear a lot sooner he was never gonna be the guy. There's a lot of owners that have pulled the plug after one year, hell even shorter in some cases. I think the biggest offer here is opportunity, and in spades.

You also have to factor in, that we have a good amount of young talent on the roster already. Plus, those old contracts will fall off the books soon, barring no restructuring to them. A new HC will always have a good amount of roster turnover, so there’s that. Not to mention, they will be able to handpick their QB in time, if the chance presents itself. The cap will work in our favor soon as well. To go further, if we do manage to start winning, our fanbase could give our new HC one of the best home field advantages in the league.

 

[No2DC]

 

[Lazarus]

Dang I think thats the nicest thing Florio ever said about the saints

 

[Lazarus]

Correct. Payton gets credit for identifying players to get. Loomis gets credit for finding a way to get those players, like creative contracts and trading up in the draft.


You're not getting any of that from me. If you are, then you need to re-calibrate your detector, because it's giving you false readings.


One of the many things he does to run the team is to facilitate the head coach. It's pretty straight forward.


Oh, I see, you only give Loomis credit for allowing Payton to make mistakes. You don't give Loomis credit for any of the good things he let Payton do. You're doing the same thing you are "detecting" other are doing, only you fault Loomis for all of the mistakes made and don't give him credit for any of the success.

Great points all, Folks it a team sport..Running the team. Its a partnership Coaches-GM-Scooting It takes all three its not an either or proposition.

Why did it fall apart, we had an aging roster when Drew fell apart and Payton needed a break and didn't have the patience to reset. He knew he was in a trap. He is too good a coach to ever allow the team to suck enough o get a top flight QB.

For him there are only two ways to reset 1 Some other team is so stupid they let a top flight QB go (happens onece every 25 years maybe ) or leave and take over a team in a position to draft a top flight QB.

So here we are Loomis has the same problem, the roster is still too good even without Payton to suck enough to get a top tier QB so we are stuck waiting on the stupidity of others or for the roster and the coaching to degrade enough to get to the top tier pick. We are pretty much fcked at this point and just have to wait it out.

 

[Covington Saint]

I think there points are a bit hypocritical. Detroit stacked w talent too just like eagles and yet they presented different looks w lions and eagles w where credit goes as well as dismissing the lions failed and eagles did not when it mattered.

 

[Mr. Sparkle]

Basically it’s Loomis’ “1 of only 32 jobs” talking point in a different medium.

He’s of course correct that good teams well positioned for short term success usually aren’t looking for a head coach. And Gayle is happy to write checks without calling in plays to the sideline.

But the rest of it boils down fo 1) Loomis will keep kicking the salary cap can down the road, and 2) sure the QB situation sucks but … they will fix it?

I am hopelessly anti-Loomis at this point so I’m a tougher sell.

That said I am excited about Kellen Moore (fingers crossed) and maybe Florio’s optimism will turn out to be warranted.

 

[No2DC]

I think there points are a bit hypocritical. Detroit stacked w talent too just like eagles and yet they presented different looks w lions and eagles w where credit goes as well as dismissing the lions failed and eagles did not when it mattered.

No coach is perfect, I agree. Although the Eagles roaster has all pros on both sides. That said, Moore is our guy and I am ready to give him a fair shot.

 

[Hedon James]

"What do the Saints have? An owner who is patient and doesn’t meddle."

That I think is the biggest appeal to our HC spot. Gayle will give a lot of control and influence to our new HC. Decisions, coaching staff, roster (draft and FA), etc. That coupled with the fact that she was more than patient with DA when it was clear a lot sooner he was never gonna be the guy. There's a lot of owners that have pulled the plug after one year, hell even shorter in some cases. I think the biggest offer here is opportunity, and in spades.

I've said for awhile now that I want the guy who looks at the mess the Saints situation currently is, but has the confidence (arrogance?) to believe "I HAVE THE TOOLS...I CAN FIX IT!" (cue the clip of Jeff Spicoli bragging on his old man's "ultimate set of tools")

Anyone who looks at our current situation and withdraws their name....lacks the intestinal fortitude to do what needs to be done here. I don't want them! Not NOW....not EVER! If you can't stand with me at my worst, you sure as hell don't deserve to stand with me at my best.

I'm underwhelmed with our remaining choices, but that doesn't mean they're not solid hires. They're all still standing, in play, and haven't withdrawn. I was underwhelmed with the CSP hire in 2006, but I'd say that turned out pretty damn well. I'm fine with being underwhelmed if it means we've found the next HC to invoke the 2nd golden era (I would argue the 3rd...Dome Patrol was the 1st, IMO) of Saints football. Fingers crossed!

 

[Hedon James]

Bingo!

You also have to factor in, that we have a good amount of young talent on the roster already. Plus, those old contracts will fall off the books soon, barring no restructuring to them. A new HC will always have a good amount of roster turnover, so there’s that. Not to mention, they will be able to handpick their QB in time, if the chance presents itself. The cap will work in our favor soon as well. To go further, if we do manage to start winning, our fanbase could give our new HC one of the best home field advantages in the league.

Moore has never stood out to me in either of his previous OC gigs in Dallas and San Diego. He's lighting it up in Philly, but Philly was solid before he got there, stacked with former Saints and picks that Roseman fleeced Loomis for (but that's a different subject). Maybe Moore was their "missing ingredient", or maybe he's the straw stirring the drink. Or maybe....just maybe, he's 2005 CSP getting ready to bloom?

Giving credit where it's due, one thing I do REALLY like about Moore is that he was a former QB in his playing days. He was a really good college QB, and a backup/journeyman QB who bounced around the league. And he's been around some fairly decent QBs in his offensive coaching duties...Dak, Herbert, Hurts. Very much reminds me of CSP....perhaps in his earliest stages of becoming a QB guru? As a former player, I'd like to think he knows a little about what it takes to be successful as a QB in the NFL. And as an offensive coach, I'd like to think he's figured out some of the combinations of qualities and characteristics that make a QB "elite", and can spot those combinations in younger talent. If he can do that....find his QB and mold his QB...we could be very happy with this hire.

 

[Elvis]

Correct. Payton gets credit for identifying players to get. Loomis gets credit for finding a way to get those players, like creative contracts and trading up in the draft.


You're not getting any of that from me. If you are, then you need to re-calibrate your detector, because it's giving you false readings.


One of the many things he does to run the team is to facilitate the head coach. It's pretty straight forward.


Oh, I see, you only give Loomis credit for allowing Payton to make mistakes. You don't give Loomis credit for any of the good things he let Payton do. You're doing the same thing you are "detecting" other are doing, only you fault Loomis for all of the mistakes made and don't give him credit for any of the success.

It was Payton’s job to coach the team as the “head coach”. It was Loomis’ job to manage the team as the “general manager”. A coach will always want everything now. A GM has to balance that with the longer term viability of the roster. Allowing the team to draft the least amount of players by trading away picks and getting the cap in this shape for short term gains was irresponsible. Maybe not you, but many, blame Payton for that stuff when it was Loomis’ job to create a balance between short and long term goals.

For many, that mismanagement will be seen as a negative until he can show that he recognizes it as a detriment and that he has a plan to recover from it so that long term goals are attainable. Because right now the balance is gone. Neither short nor long term goals look good. We’ll see over the next month or so what it really looks like because right now it’s too early to say either way.

For a prospective coach, it looks like a tough road to climb if you can’t really mold the roster much for two years because of the decisions made in the past. And the reality is that coaches are always the ones to get the blame for the lack of success.

 

[Mr. Sparkle]

For a prospective coach, it looks like a tough road to climb if you can’t really mold the roster much for two years because of the decisions made in the past. And the reality is that coaches are always the ones to get the blame for the lack of success.

Especially when the GM is a de facto owner, as here.

Which is the biggest blind spot in the Florio piece - it assumes that Loomis as GM is a feature, not a bug, for a prospective coach. There is some evidence to suggest that the opposite is true.

 

[Doug B]

Why in the world would Florio "carry water" for Loomis? Florio gains nothing from "carrying water" for Loomis.

Who else remembers the early, early days of ProFootballTalk when Florio would regulalry heap dung on the Saints? Does anyone else remember when he even made fun of the Saints' having a flower as a logo?

Florio redeemed himself in the eyes of Saints' fans when he took the team's side against Roger Goodell's Bountygate facade.

 

[No2DC]

Especially when the GM is a de facto owner, as here.

Which is the biggest blind spot in the Florio piece - it assumes that Loomis as GM is a feature, not a bug, for a prospective coach. There is some evidence to suggest that the opposite is true.

Exactly. Talking about this team's future without mentioning Mick ignores a critical obstacle. I'm willing to give Moore a fair shot, but Mick is part of the problem; we need new people in the FO instead of the collection of has-beens.