Who in the Local Media Do the Best Job of Covering, and Providing Analysis on, the Saints? (1 Viewer)

[RJ in Lafayette]

This should be interesting.

A few prefatory comments. First, it seems Sean Payton has no problems giving access to the local reporter most disliked on this forum, Jeff Duncan. Second, note the heading of the thread. By media, I am talking about print, radio and television. And I include analysis as well as reporting. Third, if you believe several do a great job, please mention as many as you like.

I have some strong opinions--one of which will surprise a few. At this moment, I prefer to keep my powder dry and let others go first.

 

[SonOfNOLA]

Underhill and Triplett at New Orleans Football. They have credible intel and always provide frequent, thorough Saints-related articles and podcast discussions.

 

[CantonLegend]

Ross Jackson does a daily saints podcast. It’s very educational and the dude does an excellent job with content even during lulls

 

[SigFreudianSlip]

Underhill and Triplett at New Orleans Football. They have credible intel and always provide frequent, thorough Saints-related articles and podcast discussions.

They’re my favorite of the bunch. I enjoy my monthly subscription.

 

[Saint Jack]

Adam and Ryan from The Saints Twitter Podcast.
I’d say that’s a must listen too.

 

[Heard_Dat]

Underhill has always been informative, accurate, and fun. One of my favorites

 

[RJ in Lafayette]

These are my thoughts, which are different from those above.

I frankly am more interested in analysis, especially big-picture analysis, rather than breaking news, which increasingly has become the province of the national media and which everyone learns of 10 minutes after a website runs the story.

I generally like those on the tertiary radio stations (that is, not WWL)--Matt Moscona, Gus Kattengell, Scott Prather in Lafayette, and the Saints reporters they normally interview.

I think one of the best is Deuce McAllister. He really knows the game, he is fair, but he is also fairly candid. Mike Detillier is also a favorite. Bobby Hebert is an embarrassment to his employer station and the region it services.

I have no problem with Jeff Duncan, but do not go out of my way to read him. It seems that he resolved long ago any issues with Sean Payton. I find the rest of the reporters on nola.com something of a revolving door and again do not go out of my way to read their articles.

I save for last Nick Underhill and Mike Triplett, in part because I no longer subscribe to Underhill's website--for me the value was a question because I did not have the time or desire to listen to hour-long podcasts--and thus have not had access to their more recent stories. Between the two, I favor Triplett more than Underhill. I understand the reasons that Underhill is a favorite of many--he works extremely hard, he has a passion for the team, he is a trained professional journalist, and he spends much time watching game film so that he can break down what is happening on the field. I certainly understand why many find value subscribing to his website.

My sole criticism of Underhill is that, whether because he values his access to the organization or a positive temperament, he avoids criticism of the organization when I believe it is warranted. I can remember a podcast about two or three months ago with Mike Triplett when Underhill was still less critical of the team's 2022 offseason decisions than was Triplett and essentially favored a continuity-light approach going forward. In short, I think the biggest story in Underhill's career was whether the Saints were correct last year in believing that they were still talented enough to win a championship, that Dennis Allen was the right choice at head coach, and that their aggressive draft decisions such as the Philadelphia trade made sense. Underhill was one of the organization's biggest champions last year. His training-camp reports were especially positive. And it seems that more than most--though again I do not currently have access to the website--he still is generally supportive of the general manager and the organization's approach.

 

[SigFreudianSlip]

These are my thoughts, which are different from those above.

I frankly am more interested in analysis, especially big-picture analysis, rather than breaking news, which increasingly has become the province of the national media and which everyone learns of 10 minutes after a website runs the story.

I generally like those on the tertiary radio stations (that is, not WWL)--Matt Moscona, Gus Kattengell, Scott Prather in Lafayette, and the Saints reporters they normally interview.

I think one of the best is Deuce McAllister. He really knows the game, he is fair, but he is also fairly candid. Mike Detillier is also a favorite. Bobby Hebert is an embarrassment to his employer station and the region it services.

I have no problem with Jeff Duncan, but do not go out of my way to read him. It seems that he resolved long ago any issues with Sean Payton. I find the rest of the reporters on nola.com something of a revolving door and again do not go out of my way to read their articles.

I save for last Nick Underhill and Mike Triplett, in part because I no longer subscribe to Underhill's website--for me the value was a question because I did not have the time or desire to listen to hour-long podcasts--and thus have not had access to their more recent stories. Between the two, I favor Triplett more than Underhill. I understand the reasons that Underhill is a favorite of many--he works extremely hard, he has a passion for the team, he is a trained professional journalist, and he spends much time watching game film so that he can break down what is happening on the field. I certainly understand why many find value subscribing to his website.

My sole criticism of Underhill is that, whether because he values his access to the organization or a positive temperament, he avoids criticism of the organization when I believe it is warranted. I can remember a podcast about two or three months ago with Mike Triplett when Underhill was still less critical of the team's 2022 offseason decisions than was Triplett and essentially favored a continuity-light approach going forward. In short, I think the biggest story in Underhill's career was whether the Saints were correct last year in believing that they were still talented enough to win a championship, that Dennis Allen was the right choice at head coach, and that their aggressive draft decisions such as the Philadelphia trade made sense. Underhill was one of the organization's biggest champions last year. His training-camp reports were especially positive. And it seems that more than most--though again I do not currently have access to the website--he still is generally supportive of the general manager and the organization's approach.

Totally agree on Nick and I’ve found many of them to be that way. I thought it was Sean’s influence but as he’s gone, I was wrong. As you said I’m sure it’s because they value their connections to the team and fear reprisal.

 

[El Caliente]

These are my thoughts, which are different from those above.

I frankly am more interested in analysis, especially big-picture analysis, rather than breaking news, which increasingly has become the province of the national media and which everyone learns of 10 minutes after a website runs the story.

I generally like those on the tertiary radio stations (that is, not WWL)--Matt Moscona, Gus Kattengell, Scott Prather in Lafayette, and the Saints reporters they normally interview.

I think one of the best is Deuce McAllister. He really knows the game, he is fair, but he is also fairly candid. Mike Detillier is also a favorite. Bobby Hebert is an embarrassment to his employer station and the region it services.

I have no problem with Jeff Duncan, but do not go out of my way to read him. It seems that he resolved long ago any issues with Sean Payton. I find the rest of the reporters on nola.com something of a revolving door and again do not go out of my way to read their articles.

I save for last Nick Underhill and Mike Triplett, in part because I no longer subscribe to Underhill's website--for me the value was a question because I did not have the time or desire to listen to hour-long podcasts--and thus have not had access to their more recent stories. Between the two, I favor Triplett more than Underhill. I understand the reasons that Underhill is a favorite of many--he works extremely hard, he has a passion for the team, he is a trained professional journalist, and he spends much time watching game film so that he can break down what is happening on the field. I certainly understand why many find value subscribing to his website.

My sole criticism of Underhill is that, whether because he values his access to the organization or a positive temperament, he avoids criticism of the organization when I believe it is warranted. I can remember a podcast about two or three months ago with Mike Triplett when Underhill was still less critical of the team's 2022 offseason decisions than was Triplett and essentially favored a continuity-light approach going forward. In short, I think the biggest story in Underhill's career was whether the Saints were correct last year in believing that they were still talented enough to win a championship, that Dennis Allen was the right choice at head coach, and that their aggressive draft decisions such as the Philadelphia trade made sense. Underhill was one of the organization's biggest champions last year. His training-camp reports were especially positive. And it seems that more than most--though again I do not currently have access to the website--he still is generally supportive of the general manager and the organization's approach.

This is my criticism of Underhill as well. I used to subscribe to his site, and he had great content, but once you peeled back the layers you realized he was just carrying water for the team.

I really got turned off when I responded to a tweet he put out regarding (I can’t remember, maybe it was DA, or maybe it was Jameis), and he fired back with a snide remark, and then the folks who follow him started chiming in. He didn’t refute what I had said, he just made a flippant comment, and none of his acolytes refuted it either (they just regurgitated things that they had heard or read from Nick in the past). I’ll follow him on Twitter still (as I enjoy most anyone’s Saints content), but if he says something that doesn’t make sense, I’ll respond to his tweet, and then put a metal strainer on my head and duck for cover. Lol. It’s like a religion with some of those folks, and I had no time in my life to follow a false prophet.

But if you like content (true or not), Nick is your guy. I’ll never fault someone for peddling a product, or tell anyone how to spend their money.

 

[HoustonSaint68]

Or maybe he just really believes what he said and you’re ascribing motives on a personal theory for which you have no evidence.

Toe-may-toe, toe-mah-toe.

 

[SigFreudianSlip]

This is my criticism of Underhill as well. I used to subscribe to his site, and he had great content, but once you peeled back the layers you realized he was just carrying water for the team.

I really got turned off when I responded to a tweet he put out regarding (I can’t remember, maybe it was DA, or maybe it was Jameis), and he fired back with a snide remark, and then the folks who follow him started chiming in. He didn’t refute what I had said, he just made a flippant comment, and none of his acolytes refuted it either (they just regurgitated things that they had heard or read from Nick in the past). I’ll follow him on Twitter still (as I enjoy most anyone’s Saints content), but if he says something that doesn’t make sense, I’ll respond to his tweet, and then put a metal strainer on my head and duck for cover. Lol. It’s like a religion with some of those folks, and I had no time in my life to follow a false prophet.

But if you like content (true or not), Nick is your guy. I’ll never fault someone for peddling a product, or tell anyone how to spend their money.

That’s too funny, and spot on I’m sure. Nick is gold around these here parts lol. I get why he carries the water, but I don’t get why people deny that he does.

 

[SigFreudianSlip]

Or maybe he just really believes what he said and you’re ascribing motives on a personal theory for which you have no evidence.

Toe-may-toe, toe-mah-toe.

I disagree but do see the pov.

 

[Moon]

LOL, the one podcast I listened to with Nick he was talking about how it had been a mistake to just promote Allen & not do a true fair head coaching search. He also pointed out that MOST people (himself included) were on board with the off season decisions being made last year & they couldn't have backfired more.

I think he makes fair criticisms when it's warranted, but then focuses on what the team needs to do to get better.

 

[HoustonSaint68]

That’s too funny, and spot on I’m sure. Nick is gold around these here parts lol. I get why he carries the water, but I don’t get why people deny that he does.

I would agree that he respects his sources, doesn't hang them out to dry, and that he mutes his criticism with decorum and a purposeful lack of venom and bombast. I would agree that a benefit to his muted criticism is that it allows him to maintain a wider group of sources within the Saints organization.

But that doesn't mean he's a lackey for them.

I suspect a lot of folks have been conditioned over these last 20 years or so to see hot takes, high volume and aggressive language as absolutely necessary elements of "criticism". Well, that's simply not true, and anyone who regularly listens to Underhill knows that he is regularly critical of the Saints. His criticism just doesn't sound like that of most of the internet and sports channel loudmouths out there.

Look, I loved Buddy D and I loved his loud criticism of the Mickey Mouse operation that once was the Saints organization. But Buddy D was a character, not a football analyst, and this is NOT a Mickey Mouse operation. One can disagree with moves they make and don't make, and call them out for things that haven't worked out -- fair enough. But the punishment should fit the crime, and the last decade and a half of Saints football should buy them a bit of time before placing them in the ranks of bad football organizations. I think that is what's reflected in Underhill's criticism, not a fear to be critical.

 

[RJ in Lafayette]

Underhill does some really good work that you will not find anywhere else. And if his website relied less of podcasts, I would at least consider again subscribing.

And in fairness to him, he has to consider access to the organization, which he seems to rely on, and his subscriber base. Regarding criticism, he has to pick his spots because he does not want to burn bridges to the organization and lose subscribers who believe he is too negative. But I find that for whatever reasons, he is very comfortable--for my taste. too comfortable--supporting what the organization does, regardless of how critical others in the media, especially the national media, are of what the team does. I would never call him a lackey. I respect him. And I dislike strongly those who are loud or controversial for the sake of clicks and air time. There is a right way to express critical views.

Again, I have not had access to his website for several months, so I do not know what he has been writing about regarding Allen returning, Carmichael returning, and top assistants leaving. And I certainly did not hear the podcast cited by Moon in his post. He frankly should have been writing about the lack of a true head-coach search 11 months ago. However, if he is now saying in retrospect that mistakes were made, then he deserves credit.

 

[HoustonSaint68]

Again, I have not had access to his website for several months....

Well, there you go.