The Saints and their history of drafting QBs (1 Viewer)

Interesting point, OP.

Dave Wilson and Steve Walsh were supplemental picks. Wilson was okay, Walsh not so much.

We also drafted Marc Bulger who had a good career for another team. :hihi:

I always thought Walsh came from Dallas via trade..
 
Well, also to be fair, we've never drafted a first or second round QB with Loomis and Payton.

Any of our prior history pretty much doesn't count. This team did few things right before this time (other than Defense)

to be fair, loomis started as GM with a coach (Haslett) that had an unhealthy obsession with starting a below average QB

and went into 06 with Payton by stealing Drew Brees out of Free Agency....

I'd make bets that in the next 3-5 years when Drew starts finishing out his career, that if there isnt a big timer free agent, or someone already ready to take over, that we could possibly see a 1st/2nd round QB that will be expected to start shortly after being drafted.

i dont really see payton going into a season with a stop gap at QB. ever.
 
to be fair, loomis started as GM with a coach (Haslett) that had an unhealthy obsession with starting a below average QB

At what point in Haslett's coaching career with the Saints can you definitively say that he didn't start the best available option?

I can name 1....the last few games of 2002 when the Saints needed 1 win. Haslett admitted as much himself later on.

2000? He started Blake and later started Brooks after Blake got hurt. Brooks would then give us a playoff win.

2001? Pretty obvious you're gonna start the season with the guy who, you know, just gave you the first playoff win in team history. Plus they actually played some solid ball until the last month of the season.

2002? Brooks started them off at 6-1 and for a while they were scoring 30-plus points a week nearly every week.

2003 - 2005?....Jake was gone via free agency.....who was the better option? Todd Bouman? Adrian McPherson ?
 
I always thought Walsh came from Dallas via trade..

We did get Walsh thru a trade. After Fourcade stunk it up the first few games of 1990, we traded a #1, #2, and another draft pick to Dallas for Walsh. Walsh played so well, that Finks and the Saints went to Hebert to try to get him to sign back with the Saints--which he did.
 
We did get Walsh thru a trade. After Fourcade stunk it up the first few games of 1990, we traded a #1, #2, and another draft pick to Dallas for Walsh. Walsh played so well, that Finks and the Saints went to Hebert to try to get him to sign back with the Saints--which he did.

Heh....everyone always credits the Herschel Walker trade for contributing to Dallas winning those 3 Super Bowls in the 90s.....I'd say the Saints probably contributed to that as well.
 
the only good talent evaluator we ever had before the current regime was Jim Finks and defense was where his eye for talent was. When the time finally comes that we have to spend a high draft pick on QB again, I will feel comfortable knowing that Payton (God willing) will have final say.

That is a very interesting fact you revealed tough OP.
 
in.

2001? Pretty obvious you're gonna start the season with the guy who, you know, just gave you the first playoff win in team history. Plus they actually played some solid ball until the last month of the season.

this I don't agree with. Haz said that the QB competition would be open the next camp but it was pretty clear the job was always Brooks. I am not one of the Brooks bashers but I liked Blake, and think he deserved a better shot given he was doing quit well and only lost his job to injury.
 
At what point in Haslett's coaching career with the Saints can you definitively say that he didn't start the best available option?

I can name 1....the last few games of 2002 when the Saints needed 1 win. Haslett admitted as much himself later on.

2000? He started Blake and later started Brooks after Blake got hurt. Brooks would then give us a playoff win.

2001? Pretty obvious you're gonna start the season with the guy who, you know, just gave you the first playoff win in team history. Plus they actually played some solid ball until the last month of the season.


2002? Brooks started them off at 6-1 and for a while they were scoring 30-plus points a week nearly every week.

2003 - 2005?....Jake was gone via free agency.....who was the better option? Todd Bouman? Adrian McPherson ?

Ok so we remove 2000 and 2001 because Loomis was not named general manager until the 2002 season.

Brooks gets injured late season 2002 (tampa), Delhomme comes in and wins that game. they put him back on the bench and and play an obviously hurt brooks who manages to lose the last 3 games. (we both agree on this)

so we have a Jake Delhomme that looks reasonably promising in 99, and in 2002, as well as pulling a world bowl in '99 (admittedly not worth that much).

but neither Delhomme OR Jeff Blake ever got a REAL chance once Haslett found his "diamond in the rough"

but lets say that Aaron's first 3 years were good enough to cement him as starter regardless of the injury, or that there was no possible way that jake wants to stay in new orleans after 2002, even if he was promised the entire salary cap and the starting position.

IMO 2003 & 2004 are the years that serious consideration should have gone into a new qb, jake or no jake.

04 especially. you look at the 05 draft and both jason campbell and aaron rodgers are on the board and are expected to be mid/high 1st rounders that slid.

those 2 years, he was miserably inconsistent. had all the physical tools but it was pretty obvious he couldnt hang mentally

but hey, thats just me. and luckily for us that only lasted 2-3 years too long and not a decade before we did something about it..
 
this I don't agree with. Haz said that the QB competition would be open the next camp but it was pretty clear the job was always Brooks. I am not one of the Brooks bashers but I liked Blake, and think he deserved a better shot given he was doing quit well and only lost his job to injury.

I see people say stuff like this occasionally......but I think mostly they are speaking in hindsight. Aaron Brooks wasn't a perfect player when he came in for Blake, but anybody who watched him play (a) in his first start for the Rams, (b) @ San Fran , and (c) in the Wildcard game vs. the Rams saw a guy with a ton of big-play potential and ability.

That's no knock against Blake at all....he did play well in 2000....but Brooks had an "it" factor that Blake didn't. Regardless of how anyone feels about the way Brooks's career ended up, the fact is he looked like a major player early on. Kinda like last year in the Seahawks preseason.....Matt Flynn played well....but Russell Wilson blew people's socks off.
 
Heh....everyone always credits the Herschel Walker trade for contributing to Dallas winning those 3 Super Bowls in the 90s.....I'd say the Saints probably contributed to that as well.


and now the cowboys contribute to our success
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

    Back
    Top Bottom