Bleacher Report - Articles by Andrew Brown

Baby Got Back: A Struggling Defense's Best Friend

Andrew Brown — Mon, 09 Feb 2009 13:29:50 -0500

___________________________________________

We've all talked about what has to happen to our Dreaded Defense...

More depth at the line.

Another shut-down cornerback to line up with Porter.
A more capable free safety.

I've heard it all. But what I want to introduce to you is what I like to call "Law of Big Backs." No, I'm not talking about my love for thick rear-end. I'm talking about my belief, and the statistical law, that a defense's best friend is a big, power running back that grinds down the field and speeds up the clock.

Now, I'm no fool. I know many of citizens of WhoDat Nation are so infatuated with Reggie and Pierre that they cannot bear imagine the Saints' roster with a different backfield. I know I might catch some heat for this. But somebody needs to say it.

I'm not going to pretend that I am the first to realize this truth. However, all-too-often fans tend to follow football too black & white (you know who you are). We all know these people—it doesn’t matter the topic, they quote TD and YPC stats all day long. They measure a defense's strength and weakness based upon the number of points they allow and turnovers they produce. They see the game of football as only stats and highlights—no variables. Here I am to say that every stat is tied to another variable.

I've heard many cases from people within WhoDat Nation that suggest that the Saints should be content with our current running backs (Thomas and Bush specifically). They will tell you about Reggie's touchdowns when he's healthy and they talk about Pierre's YPC average. They don't want to "waste" our drafts or salary cap on any more offense. I understand your stance, but in my utmost humble opinion, you aren't seeing the whole picture.

What I don't hear people talking about is what happens on 3rd-and-short when opposing defenses know what's coming. Let’s be honest, I think anybody that has ever watched a Saints’ game within the last two seasons know that first-downs are a crapshoot when opposing defenses know that Pierre and Reggie are getting the ball.

Too many variables are being ignored. Sure, we all love to see big numbers when we look at the YPC and TD categories, but let's look at the bigger picture. Let's look at the numbers that really killed us.

The Breakdown

The New Orleans Saints ran the ball 43 times this season when we were 3rd-and-1. Guess how many times our current running backs were able to pick up the one yard (or less)? A mediocre 26 times. You can do the math and compare that stat to other running back tandems in the league—but a warning; you won't like what you see.

Furthermore, did you know Pierre Thomas averaged 1.1 yards in 3rd-and-1 scenarios this season? You might think that's good, at first glance, but when you convert that 1.1 YPC into a percentage, Pierre is only picking up the first-down around 53 percent of the time. Whereas, other true power running backs around the league are gaining the first-down around 70-77 percent of the time. Call me crazy, but on third down and a yard or two to go, I'm not content with Pierre or Reggie.

I’m not done yet; I have another stat for you. Did you know that our average time of possession every time our offense stepped onto the field was the third shortest in the league? We either scored or gave the ball back to the other team without a hesitation. Everything we did on offense—good or bad—was quick. What does that do to our defense, besides give them very little time for potty breaks during a game? It simply wears them out. Suddenly getting to the quarterback and covering the wide receiver are such simple requests.

Do we need a new free safety? Yes. Do we need another shutdown cornerback? Yes. Do we need some more depth around the line? Another yes.

But what many of us aren't remembering is "the Law of Big Backs," which says that the easiest way to help a struggling defense is to pick up the first-downs on 3rd-and-short situations. For us to be able to do that, we have to bring in someone who can consistently pick up that one or two yards.

I know right now criticizing the offense is not a popular thing to do around those that follow the Saints organization. We’ve watched too many games within the last two years were it seemed as though the offense was keeping us in the game and the defense was doing everything they could to keep us out of it. And yes, I want to see us bring in a lot of talent and depth into our defense this offseason and I hope to see a lot of draft picks used towards the defensive side of the ball.

But whether it comes through a trade, a free agency signing or a draft pick - let's be open to the thought of using a little bit of our cap space or maybe even one of draft picks to bring in a big running back.

Once again, I repeat: I’m not suggesting that the Saints break the bank for one of the top running backs on the market. I am simply voicing what so many other Saints fans are ignoring—Reggie and Pierre aren’t cutting it.

I know it’s easy to just classify a position as someone who contributes either the defense or offense, but out of every position on the field, there is no other position in the game that does more for both sides of the ball than a ground pounding running back. I think you might be surprised by what some of our current guys on defense are capable of doing when given a little breathing time between possessions.

"The Law of Big Backs" helps offense and defense. Think about it ya'll.

---------

Like what you have read? Want more? Feel free to jump on Andrew Brown's "Baggin Wagon" at www.brownbaggin.blogspot.com.

No Room For Excuses: New Orleans Saints' Offseason

Andrew Brown — Mon, 02 Feb 2009 08:11:56 -0500

In this time of reflection, I think the most important thing that the Saints can do is to be honest with themselves. No more finger pointing, no more excuses. If they have the courage to look themselves in the mirror, they will see only one reason as to why they have had consecutive disappointing seasons.

Truth is, the numerous games that the Saints have lost over the last two years weren’t due to penalties; although there has been times when the boys in Gold n’ Black did have too many mental errors.

Furthermore, as popular and as easy as it is to blame on the band-aids and boo-boos, the losses aren’t because of injuries. Yes, the Saints have had more than their share of doctor’s visits—but once again, looking in the mirror and being honest with themselves, couldn’t the Steelers say the same thing? Didn’t they play the majority of the season without their top two running backs (Parker and Mendenhall), numerous starters on their offensive line and other team leaders like Heath Miller? Oh, and let's not forget how banged up Ben Roethlisberger was almost the entire season.

The game is football, where very large, quick and hairy men hit each other as hard as they can for three hours straight. Injuries happen to everybody.

The losses aren’t because of the defense and they are not because of the offense.

Fact of the matter is, the Saints have lost their groove because they have lost their toughness.

If you look back throughout NFL history, you’ll see that the best teams played like a pack of wolves. If an opponent popped one of their teammates, the rest of the team rallied behind the man down and hit back.

That is why the 2006 Saints team was different. Think of it this way: in our entire franchise history, we have never had as much star power as we did this past year in 2008. However, Payton has taught our players to play with such finesse and flash that they have lost their fight. As a result, the offensive stats have piled up while the team has grown stagnant in the standings.

In 2006, the New Orleans Saints picked themselves back off the ground after one of history’s hardest sucker-punch sacks (Katrina). All throughout 2005, our Saints played without a home. We literally had the wind at our front and our world was spinning.

In 2006, as a team, we looked up from the ground and realized that we weren't ready to be knocked out. As a team, we picked ourselves up. Every team we faced, we fought. We played with an unparalleled swagger. Remember the Homecoming Monday Night game? We knew we were winning the game before the first kickoff. There were no excuses and no doubts.

In 2006, when one of our players got clocked in the open field, the rest of the team hit back. Not once did we not return a punch. If somebody threw a punch at us, we threw two back. As mentioned before, we played like a pack of wolves. Our city was starved and our defense played hungry. The offense didn't just want to put points on the board and break Dan Marino’s record—they wanted to run under, over, around and through the defense.

Our 2009 team needs to learn from their recent past. I don’t know about every other Saints fan, but I'm tired of making excuses about all our injuries. What ever happened to throwing some dirt and tape on your hand or ankle and getting the hell back out on the field? The great, toothless linebacker of the “Steel Curtain” Jack Lambert once said: “The season is too short to watch from the sidelines.”

Don’t get me wrong; I understand people will miss games because of injuries. I understand players will take hard shots. But what worries me about our current team is that I don't see enough of our players play with the hunger and the urgency that it takes to win games in the NFL.

My hope is that Payton and Williams make a commitment to initially work towards playing more old-fashioned football in 2009. They need to start preparing their Sunday morning sermons for next year about hitting the snot out of whoever is in front of them. Payton and Williams cannot become complacent with a few wins here and a few wins there. To win in the NFL, our players will have to stop seeing wins as simply outscoring the other team. They have to start defining a win as knocking-out the other team; out-willing the other team. The Saints number one goal should become the most feared and hated team in the NFL.

This isn't the Babysitters Club. No more excuses for injuries, penalties, defenses, fumbles, etc. This is football, dammit, and it's time to toughen up. As my old Drill Sergeant use to say: “Pain is weakness leaving the body.”

Toughness is a state of mind and it's up to our coaches to instill that mindset in the locker room.

It's time for Payton to become one mean S.O.B. over the offseason.

---------

Like what you have read? Want more? Feel free to jump on Andrew Brown's "Baggin Wagon" at www.brownbaggin.blogspot.com.

Beer, Blood, and Boobage: Exactly What the Super Bowl Halftime Show Needs

Andrew Brown — Fri, 30 Jan 2009 09:52:49 -0500

I don’t know about you, but I’m sick of the Super Bowl’s halftime show. There have been a few respectable performers that have been asked to entertain the millions of watchers across the nation, but more often than not, the show is embarrassing.

Don’t tell me about the numerous legends of Rock n’ Roll that have performed for the Super Bowl Halftime Show. I am not fooled.

For instance, I am a huge Tom Petty fan. Huge. With that said, I wasn’t entertained in the least bit last year when he took the stage.

Why, you ask?

It was watered down.

Ask yourself this: How many times has a Rock n’ Roll band gone on stage at halftime only to be engulfed by fake extras that circle the stage with streamers? I hate streamers.

When was the last time you went to a rock concert and saw some cheesy-ass fool waving a streamer and clapping to the song? Rock n’ Roll isn’t something to you clap along with. In fact, the only music you clap along with is gospel music and the Jonas Brothers.

This is football. Why must the halftime producers take the manliness out of the Super Bowl Halftime Show? Why?

In 2007, Prince took the stage. I like Prince. He’s an alright guy. He likes women, and I respect that.

But even Prince—a 49-year-old man stuck inside a perverted 18-year-old boy’s body—didn’t bring the usual funk. Prince didn’t give the crowd one nut-grab or pelvic thrust. How do you ask Prince to do a PG-show performance?

In 2006, the legendary Rolling Stones graced the football world with their presence. I can’t tell you how much I love the Stones. Really—no sarcasm whatsoever. But to be honest, their show was horrendous.

It wasn’t so much Mick Jagger’s fault—Lord knows he was his typical self. The thing that got me hung up was the fact that Keith Richards was asked to perform sober. No bottle of Jack Daniels allowed by his feet while he played the hell out of his guitar? Come on! Not only that, but when he sung backup, he didn’t even slur his words.

Keith Richards without slurred speech is like George W. Bush with no Southern drawl. In fact, I’m pretty sure we could actually understand what he was singing.

That’s not good for the Rolling Stones—and what is not good for the Stones cannot be good for Rock n’ Roll.

In 2005, Paul McCartney performed. I’ll make this short...McCartney without Lennon sucks.

The year of 2004 was the year of the great “wardrobe malfunction.” First off, Jessica Simpson performed alongside the TSU marching band. And let me give you a brief history lesson: 2004 was the year before Jessica Simpson got slutty and three years before Jessica Simpson got boring.

You see, there was a two-year gap where Jessica was naughty enough that she needed to go to church, but not too dirty that you couldn’t take her home to meet your mother. Sorry Jess, but you hit your ceiling in ’05 and ’06. So needless to say, the '04 Jessica Simpson show was still too innocent and cute to be permitted at a football game.

But I think the NFL saw this coming. They knew Jessica would be cute and innocent, so they tried to manly things up by letting P. Diddy, Nelly, Kid Rock, Justin Timberlake, and Janet Jackson close the show.

The problem that I have with this part of the show is P. Diddy has been desperate since white kids in the suburbs stopped listening to “Mo’ Money, Mo’ Problems.” Sorry Diddy, but we don’t want to hear your next Cher remix.

Kid Rock is a confused country/rap/rock singer from the North but acts like a Southern redneck. His music follows his theme in life. Nelly was amazing when “Country Grammar” came out in 2000, but he lost me once he started trying to sing.

And then there was Justin and Janet. I like where they tried to take the show, but they came up short. If Janet is going to go so far as showing her gold, star-shaped nipple shield, go ahead and show full-fledged boobage.

I won’t give you guys a passing grade for your performance because you came up just a little short, but I will classify you two as the pioneers of where I’m hoping to see the Super Bowl Halftime Show go in the future.

In 2003, the NFL saw the Super Bowl at its worst. Somebody, somewhere (hopefully currently burning in hell) asked Shania Twain to perform “Man, I Feel Like a Woman!” The mere thought of seeing the NFL hit such a hard rock bottom nearly makes me cry.

I could go on and on. I mean, let’s be honest, there’s a lot to complain about when other years featured folks like Britney Spears, Christina Aguilera, Enrique Iglesias, ‘N Sync, Toni Braxton, and many, many more.

Roger Goodell, if you’re reading this, please salvage the Super Bowl’s halftime show. Give us in the corporate world of America something to talk about on the following Monday.

Did you like seeing a portion of Janet’s boobies, Roger? Yeah, me too. Let’s encourage that. No more Hannah Montanas and “S Club 7” groups. We are talking about football...as in beer, blood, and boobs.

Mix those three components together however you want, Roger. Let’s just do something to change the current Super Bowl halftime show from being another 30-minute pee break.

-----------------

Disagree with Andrew "BrownBagg" Brown's blatant and adamant support of beer, blood, and boobage making its way into the Super Bowl Halftime Show? Let him hear about it. All comments welcome.

Like what you have read? Want more? Feel free to jump on Andrew Brown's "Baggin Wagon" at www.brownbaggin.blogspot.com.

Let's Face It: Steroids Could Do Wonders For Some Sports

Andrew Brown — Thu, 29 Jan 2009 21:09:28 -0500

I'm a baseball fan. I love the innocence of a backyard evening game amongst all the neighborhood kids. I love how there is no other sport in the world with such legendary names as Jumpin' Joe Dimaggio, Hank Aaron, Jackie Robinson, Lou Gehrig, Mickey Mantle and who can forget the “Sultan of Swat,” George Herman "Babe" Ruth.

There's nothing more suspenseful in the sports world than a full-count pitch and there is nothing more exciting than a walk-off knock to the upper deck in the bottom of the ninth.

But the largest reason why I hate the idea of steroids intruding the game of baseball is the fact that baseball is so strongly embedded in our glorious American culture that the past time has become sacred.

If you ask me, there are about two or three levels of Hell; the second worst level being reserved for those that pollute sacred things while here on Earth. Taking steroids in baseball is like sneaking a porno mag into church or trying to smoke a bowl in a Catholic confessional booth.

Any decent Big League player, when given steroids, could threaten a heavenly record set by one of the greats gods of baseball.

That is why I hate villains like Barry Bonds and Mark McGuire. As children, they grew up idolizing the Greats; as adult baseball players, they selfishly tarnished as many sacred records as they could before the world caught on to their crime. Hank Aaron's record was honestly earned. No steroids, no muscle-enhancers... Aaron rocked the Home Run record with just drinking a glass of cold milk every morning.

Steroids have no place in baseball.

But don’t mistake what I’m saying. Notice that I said “steroids have no place in baseball.” That doesn’t mean that steroids don’t belong in pansy sports.

Imagine how luring figure skating could be if the men were jacked up on 'roids, throwing 110 lb. hotties around the ice. Occasionally, one of the men would throw a steroid tantrum and pick a fight with another contestant. Just think about it... the best thing that has ever happened to figure skating was the Tonya Harding and Nancy Kerrigan battle. Let's bring that back, figure skating. But this time, let's give them steroids. I guarantee someone would end up with something more than a busted kneecap. And yes, I would watch that.

Imagine what would happen if you pumped some 'roids into more tennis players: more racquet throwing, more stabbings, more screaming at the line referees, and best of all—louder grunting after every serve. Tennis players would stop aiming their serves for the inbounds box and start aiming at the other opponent. It would resemble a great game of dodgeball—with faster balls and a hard racquet. Sad? Yes. But once again, I would watch that.

Imagine how thrilling Olympic speed-skating would be if athletes were allowed to juice up before a race. Speed skating would quickly become Speed Roller Derby. Yes, I would definitely watch that.

Imagine what would happen if we injected steroids in the hockey rink. I'm not saying hockey is a pussy sport at all, but I do hear that the NHL is having a hard time selling itself these days. Steroids may just be the solution. I guarantee America will embrace it if there are more fights—that's the only reason anybody watches it anyways. So let's just give the people what they want. Pump the NHL players with a couple doses of steroids every now and then and we'll see a lot more outraged fights on the rink (any honest man that has seen a pissed off meat-head on ‘roids has to know what I’m talking about).

And why stop at steroids? I think there are some sports that would be better if the participants were boozed up.

Imagine the intensity of watching a NASCAR race when all of the drivers were at least 10 beers deep. Harder bumpin' and closer drafting. When the cars hit the pit, the pit crews would swap tires and throw the driver six more cold ones. Don't get me wrong, I'm not an advocate of drunk driving (on public streets)... but I have to say: I would watch that. Sorry M.A.D.D.

---------

For the Record: Andrew Brown does not endorse the mixing of alcohol and motorsports. Actually, that’s not entirely accurate. Truth is, as long as there is a protective barrier, such as a racing wall, between the participators and the spectators, every thing is kosher in his book.

Like what you have read? Want more? Feel free to jump on Andrew Brown's "Baggin Wagon" at www.brownbaggin.blogspot.com.

Can a Bayou Boy Get a Bailout?

Andrew Brown — Wed, 28 Jan 2009 10:17:00 -0500

Every time I turn on the news I hear about more and more bailouts and stimulus packages. The last time I heard this much about a “package that stimulates,” my mother caught me watching Cinemax in seventh grade and I was grounded for two weeks.

Did you know that, within the last six months of today, there have been over 600,000 that have asked Uncle Sam for some sort of a bailout! Porn companies, banks, entertainment companies, auto makers, private schools, universities, toilet producers, alcohol producers...and the list goes on!

I was reading the names of these companies that were listed by the Wall Street Journal and something crossed my mind. Lord knows my boys in Black n’ Gold need some stimulating!

With that said, on behalf of WhoDat Nation, I have mailed two letters and one petition (in which I signed 659 random names which proclaimed to be members of the Saints fanbase) to Saints’ franchise owner Tom Benson suggesting that he try to pay a visit to Washington DC to see if the New Orleans Saints can catch a corner of the next stimulus plan.

Editor’s Note: Benson and I go way back. In fact, when I was a kid, I use to refer to him as “Uncle Benny.”

I told Uncle Benny not to worry about our offseason concerns, that his boy BrownBagg had a plan.

I told him that the first thing we had to do is get on Travelocity and get him a round trip ticket to Washington DC. On his way to Washington, all he has to do is set back, eat honey roasted peanuts and fill out an application for economic stimulus on behalf of the New Orleans Saints organization.

Once he got to Washington, he is to go straight to Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi (Fox News says she’s the Mother Bitch of the whole Bailout Operation).

Once he finds Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi, he is going to give her his application. If need be, Uncle Benny can sweeten the pot by pinky-swearing Pelosi that he wouldn't buy any luxury jets with the money in which the Saints organization received.

In fact, to make it an even easier decision, perhaps instead of a monetary kick-down, we could just request a couple extra draft picks to stimulate our roster.

One question: Who put this lady, Nancy Pelosi, in charge of stimulating the country?

Then I told Uncle Benny not to worry if he was informed that NFL draft picks were outside the Queen of the Congress’ jurisdiction. If that is the case, I suggested that he request some additional cap space so we too, as an organization, might be able to do our part at combating the Nation's current unemployment rate.

If that fails, I told good ol' Uncle Tom ("Benny" that is) not to give up HOPE. Congresswoman Pelosi is known to be a real stickler of a bitch to folks from the South.

In my letter, I instructed Uncle Benny that if he gets to this stage and Pelosi isn't showing us the money, then to simply tell her that you already asked Barack if the Saints can get a piece of the Bailout Berry Pie and he told you emphatically, "Yes we Can!"

Word on the street is that phrase gets Pelosi all hot n' bothered every time. We'll have the Federal Government right by the bailout balls.

So lay to rest your worries and fears about our current cap-space or draft pick predicament, WhoDat Nation. Your boy BrownBagg is already in communication with a guy who is going to talk to a girl who knows our beloved President ”Bail’em Out” Obama and everything is going to be okay.

---------

Like what you have read? Want more? Feel free to jump on Andrew Brown's "Baggin Wagon" at www.brownbaggin.blogspot.com.

New Orleans Saints' No. 1 Draft Priority: "Spread the Wealth"

Andrew Brown — Tue, 27 Jan 2009 19:24:07 -0500

Although the Super Bowl champion hasn't been determined yet, we, as WhoDat Nation, are at the crossroads where we look back at our past season with "what ifs" and look forward to next season with hope and longing.

More specifically, we are at the point where we start to look at next year's horizon and the 2009 NFL Draft. For the last few weeks, I've read article after article, blog after blog suggesting who the Saints should go after in the Draft:

"Maybe we should try to trade up to grab Malcolm Jenkins!"

"No, no! Laurinaitis is who we need!"

"Are you crazy? Rey Maualuga is our man!"

But what I want us to keep in mind is that if the Saints want to build a dynasty, the fellas that work at 5800 Airline Drive are going to have to draft well in the next couple of seasons. If they get greedy and try to focus on one specific player, we are destined to make seasons like 2008 a common occurrence.

So, what am I suggesting? It's simple. When you look at the upcoming '09 draft, I think it's obvious that the smartest thing to do is trade down for more picks.

Let me explain:

1. Simply put, the Saints need more picks.

Many people will say that having quality picks (high picks) is better, and while I disagree with their notion, I will agree that it is definitely more popular.

However, our team is in the rare situation where the quantity of draft picks is much more important than the location as to where we are picking from.

It's no secret; the Saints traded numerous future picks for both Shockey and Vilma. I'm fine with what we gave up for Vilma but what we lost for Shockey is unforgivable. The Saints made the trade due to the lack of control that our Head Coach had on his emotions.

Payton was in love with Shockey and the Giants knew it.

Everybody knows the old rule when you're car shopping—if you love the car, don't let the car salesman see it. In this situation, Payton couldn't wipe the smile off of his face, and the Giants saw how Payton blushed every time Shockey's name was mentioned.

As a result, the Saints gave away too much for Shockey and while we can do nothing to change the past trades, the Saints need to find a way to get their picks back.

2. This year's draft class, particularly the projected first rounders, doesn't look to be anything extraordinary.

Not only were we in the position, both salary cap-wise and draft pick-wise, to trade down for a specific player, but last year, we also knew that Ellis or Dorsey would be a huge addition to our defensive line—not the case this year.

I think there are tons of hidden talent that will be found after the first round of the upcoming draft. Let's find them.

3. While some WhoDats might jump to argue with me, I strongly believe that the Saints' organization doesn't have one single dying need.

We could go around and around for years about what we need most. Do we need a big running back to help pick up the 3rd-and-short, so our defense can stay on the sideline longer?

Is it more offensive line depth? On the other side, is it more DL depth? Do we need another starting cornerback to lineup with Tracy Porter? Is it an outside linebacker to play alongside Vilma and Fujita? Or possibly a ball-hawk free safety?

To be fair to all views, I think we could all make reasonable cases for each cause.

So when a situation like this occurs, the only thing that can be done it to try to provide a little help to each. The only way to "spread the wealth" is through more picks.

How do we get more picks?

That's a good question. Quick warning—some folks might not like to hear what I'm about to say... But, the businessman in me thinks it's time to shake hands with a few of our players, thank them for their services, and place their names on NFL's shopping market.

Who could be some of these players? I would suggest the following:

*Charles Grant—Not producing enough for the money we're paying out; I think we could still get some value for him.

*Will Smith—See Charles Grant; One stays, one goes; Bobby McCray gets promoted.

*Pierre Thomas—Everybody knows his name right now and we could get some good draft picks. I know some people will hate the thought of trading him but let's remember that the NFL is a business in an industry where the best businessmen win championships.

And on the business side of things, trading Thomas now makes perfect sense. Furthermore, consider the fact that we got him for relatively nothing (UDFA). He played well enough to be noticed around the league and he's going to want more money soon. The same could be said about Lance Moore.

As hard as it is for us fans to remember, football players are like stock. The best way to build a good, sturdy portfolio is to BUY LOW & SELL HIGH. The case of Thomas is Business 101.

*Jeremy Shockey—Thanks, but no thanks. I know we aren't going to part ways with him after just giving up so much for the guy, but for the record, I'll take Billy Miller and Mark Campbell any day of the week over Shockey. Both on the field and in the locker room. There's a time and a place to cut ties and count your losses.

*Robert Meachem or Devery Henderson—With Colston, Moore, Bush, Arrington, Miller, and Shockey most likely the running routes for Brees next year, we simply don't need both of these guys. We would have to sign Devery first before we could trade him, but I do believe that both Henderson and Meachem have value.

*Jason David—I think he still holds value as a nickel, dime, or Cover-Two Cornerback. He's no first or second round draft pick trade, but if we could even get a fourth or fifth for him, I'm fine with that.

Which, before you say I'm crazy, let's remember that he is coming off a five-interception season and almost everyone in the NFL knows he would most likely excel even more in a Cover or Tampa-Two defense.

What Could Trading Away Some of Our Players Do For Us?

Easy. The Saints could get more picks for the 2009 Draft and possibly even some draft picks for 2010.

Think about a few things...

Within the last three weeks I've heard about numerous guys that had my interest of staying in college another year. Spikes, Mays, Bradford, Hardy, Verner, etc., etc.

What that means to me is that next year will be loaded with talent. Imagine what our team could do if we had two picks in the 2010 first round.

My first suggestions are that the Saints trade our 2009 first round, 14th pick for a 2010 first round, 2009 second-round pick (and possibly a 2009 third or fourth-round pick depending on which team we dealt with).

I know that won't make some people happy—people that want to see a whole new team in '09—but long term, I think the Saints would see the most bang-for-their-buck if they took that path.

Also, before you shoot down the thought of trading away the Saints' 2009 first rounder, remember that both Porter (who will add to our CB unit), Pressely (who will give us more depth on the DL), and Arrington (a WR to help simmer Payton's constant desire to add more offense) will essentially be joining the '09 draft class.

If my suggested scenario took place, the Saints would be doubling up their 2010 first-round picks and would be picking up more picks in this year's second and third round.

And rest assured, if the Saints do their homework, they will definitely be able to find plenty of talent in the second and third this year—once again, if they have the picks.

Our coaches draft well...Let's give them ammo.

---------

Like what you have read? Want more? Feel free to jump on Andrew Brown's "Baggin Wagon" at www.brownbaggin.blogspot.com.