What's The Difference? Payton's 1st Year Saints & Haslett's 1st Year Saints? (1 Viewer)

[Optimistic Ozzy]

Win or lose, you don't see Payton on the sideline with that defeated look on his face.

Team unity seems to be much stronger also. I know the players liked Haz for a while and played hard for him, but I wonder if they learned a few thigs about him after a year or so.

That look on Haslett's face, no confidence, i.e., the Delhomme, Brooks fiasco.
Sometimes you have to go through alot of BAD days to get to the good ones.
These are GOOD days.

 

[DMaestro]

I've been thinking about this for a while now. I hate to say it but I heard a lot of the exact same praises of Haslett the first year as we're now giving to Payton (probably by the same people even). And Haslett won Coach of the year too I think (Which I'm sure Payton will get if we keep winning).

And people did not quit in 2000 either as some said; remember almost all our receivers were down at the end Joe Horn was out, so was other receivers. Jeff Blake got injuried and we kept winning, Ricky Williams was out some games, but they bounced back and stayed competitive and fighting. We haven't had to overcome such things yet this season; that's often what kills playoff runs (see Giants and maybe Seagulls).

If you go back to the archives, I'm sure you'll see the exact same praises of Haslett as Payton are getting in these days, as well as the same bashing and comparing to the old coach (Ditka and Haslett respectively). I really like Payton but I know I also really liked Haslett that first year, so I'm still not ready to hail him as the new messiah. I think its way premature to draw any conclusions about who's the best one at this point. After we win the SB this year I'll be right there on the bandwagon

My sentiments exactly. Well said, either way.

 

[Ken-Bob]

Although they take different approaches, I think Haz approached worked just fine.... for one year. In his first year, remember how Mike D. was talking about the up-tempo practices and all? I think Haz got complacent, and perhaps filled up a bit with his own ego after the year one success. Whatever it was, something about him changed after tha first year.

There are a couple of other differences. Zimmer was apparently a pretty good DC. And that team had more talent on the D-Line. Both of those went away after 2000.

 

[joe87]

Hey, didn't Haslett also sign Fast Freddie towards the end of the season? I think we had a few injuries on special teams and had no choise, then he sticks with the team until this training camp. Well, he's back now.

 

[keepoursaints]

My sentiments exactly. Well said, either way.

Noway we will know until the next few years, but I just don't remember Haslett instilling discipline and accountability as Payton has from the beginning. I could be wrong, but I just don't remember that and to me that's one of the biggest intangibles that this team has is the respect for each other, the discipline to play as a team and being accountable to your teammates for your actions on and off the field... from the coaching staff down

 

[LSSpam]

I think the problem is that when comparing the 2000 to the 2006 seasons, the players you mention are irrelevant.

Please read the thread, the discussion has moved on.

 

[Wahoo]

...

But frankly I think we'd have won two games in the playoffs if we'd played Blake.

....

Not sure why you say that. This isn't a "defend Brooks" post, but I don't think it mattered who would have played QB for us that day. Minnesota was rested and at home coming off a first round bye, while we had just played a very emotional game vs StL six days earlier. We had no running game, and gave up those 2 long TDs to Moss. I actually went to that game with 3 buddies. Was a bad ending to a surprisingly good season.

 

[jcollins9]

I think the biggest difference is that Haslett got rid of most of the guys on the team who had heart. He brought in guys with great measurables, but weren't necessarily good football players. Payton brings in guys with the right attitude, the right football IQ, and with talent. He then holds those guys accountable, while letting them know what the expectations are up front.

my $0.02

 

[SaintKenn]

Mueller basically built that 2000 team with some input from Haz.

Payton has built this team with some input from Loomis.

Mueller had an eye for talent on the football field but character didn't seem to be a concern of his. Whereas Payton stresses character players that give 100% on the field. The biggest difference in these two teams is the effort of the players that make up the rosters.

 

[kc2000]

I think the biggest difference is decipline. Haslett and Mueller had a lot of vets on the team that could be counted on as leaders, and Haslett and his coaches weren't really relied upon as much for their leadership. They had guys on the field who were able to lead the team. When those guys left (Glover, Knight, Darren Perry, Blake, etc.), that's when we really understood what little control Haslett actually had over the team. Another good point that was made earlier is that Payton actually teaches the right way when a guy makes a mistake instead of just yelling and blowing smoke.

I'm not so sure this current team has more talent than the '00 team, but I'm fairly confident that Payton's squad would blow that 2000 team out of the water. This current team is just flat out better than that 2000 team.

 

[st.randy]

Please read the thread, the discussion has moved on.

LOL......no just you man. A lot of us were actually debating the topic. I think the post 2000 saints are pretty obvious, and can't be compared to Paytons second year yet......jmho.

 

[Marlboro Man]

One word here too: Adaptability

 

[LSSpam]

LOL......no just you man. A lot of us were actually debating the topic. I think the post 2000 saints are pretty obvious, and can't be compared to Paytons second year yet......jmho.

This began with the below post

After reading all the good answers, and the more I think about it, I beginning to understand that the major difference between Haz's 1st team and Payton's first year team is the following:

When hired, Payton was "ready" to become a head coach in the NFL. Haz simply wasn't... and still isn't.

This prompted this reply from me

Well yes. Payton understands the foundation of his success (leadership, effort, "players") and has intentionally built his team on those principals. Haslett accidentally fell into a team with a lot of that (overachievers like Sammy Knight), didn't grasp why he had success, and then promptly dismissed the reasons for his success and loaded up on guys who
a) didn't care/weren't motivated (Grady Jackson)
b) had great talent but zero football ability/instincts (Tebucky Jones)
c) were toxic (Albert Connell)

Which is why there is every reason to suppose Paytons success will be sustainable while Hasletts was not.

Then multiple people commented on the above post

I agree. The first thing Payton did when he got here was rid the roster of Haslett-type players (Gandy,Sullivan, Stallworth,Brooks) and started bringing in good character guys.

Love the way you put that so clearly, LSSPam. :bier:

So clearly at this point the reasons for Haslett's failure after 2000 (and why one can suppose Payton will succeed where Haslett failed) is part of the discussion. 3 people are talking about it including the thread starter. You even tangentally mention it

Actually there was vry very little difference. Jeff Blake was on a Brees like tangent, and had total control of his offense, made smart audibles and kept the team in a position to win games. The defense wasn't great but they were playing well as a unit. The difference between 2000 and now would be that to this point Brees has stayed healthy and Blake did not.

That would be purely looking at the 2000 season vs the 2006 season. And not trying to take advantage of an opportunity to insult Haslett.

You also said Blake was on a "Brees like tangent" which, I guess, if by "like tangent" you mean 82 QB rating to 98 QB rating, 2,000 yards to 3,500, 0 straight 300 yard games to 5 straight.

Then someone else directly addresses my post on the topic of Haslett's success/lack thereof after 2000 and why

Problem is that LSSPam isn't right. It was Mueller who brought in problem players like Connell, Grady Jackson or Dale Carter. And it was Mueller who brought in many of these "athletes" who couldn't play. And the fans applauded these moves.

So I directly address him

You're partially correct. Haslett borrowed his personnal philosophy from Mueller. When Mueller was fired, Haslett became the primary influence on the players we acquired, and the pattern continued. Tebucky Jones, Jonathon Sullivan, Sedrick Hodge, etc.

I'm sure a lot of fans applauded those moves. I know I applauded some (Sullivan for instance). Remarkably, that still doesn't make those good moves or justify them.

Where we finally arrive at your "confusion"

I think the problem is that when comparing the 2000 to the 2006 seasons, the players you mention are irrelevant.

So, while you may have only been strictly comparing the 2000 to 2006 season we see 4 seperate people involved in a tangental off-shoot discussing why Haslett failed after 2000 but many of us suspect Payton will succeed.

You're welcome to join the discussion if you so choose, now that i've caught you up on everything.

 

[trujm]

The difference was that 6 game winning streak in 2000 was a huge part of why the Saints got into the playoffs. The Saints went .500 outside of that streak, whereas with Payton, the Saints are more consistent and less streaky.

 

[Saintsfan321]

Honestly, I don't see any big differences between 2000 Saints and this year's Saints.

You guys can say everything about how Payton's team is more disciplined and he's a better coach and everything, but we all know deep down that in 2000 we had the same feelings about Haslett. He was the greatest coach ever, he won us our first playoff game ever, he was going to be here for years and lead us to the promised land (Superbowl).

I think when discussing Haslett's 1st year and Payton's 1st year, people tend to also look at Haslett's other seasons where the team consistently fell apart. But if you look at just Haslett's first year, he had just as good of a season as Payton has had so far.

He found gems through free agency like Joe Horn and Fred Thomas and made solid trades like getting Aaron Brooks for KD Williams. Even after the FA QB, Jeff Blake who was playing well, went down the team didn't fail and Brooks played really well.

So while I'm very happy with Payton, I can't say that I'm happier now than I was in 2000 at this same point. I guess since we have younger stars like Colston and Bush the future looks a lot brighter than it might have with Haslett.. but I really don't see the big differences you guys are seeing between Payton and Haslett's first years.