OnTheRocks Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 1. I don't get why Willis McGahee didn't have 40+ carries. 2. On the play when Losman threw his interception....it was one of the sweetest looking play action fakes I have seen in a long time. 3. No single player on defense seemed to want to make a BIG play. 4. I hate to say it....but I was happy for the Saints to finally get what seemed to be a "homefield" advantage. 5. Looks like Mularky took a page out of Bum Phillips book and doesn't wear a hat when he plays inside. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BackInDaDay Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 Looks like Mularky took a page out of Bum Phillips book and doesn't wear a hat when he plays inside. 462595[/snapback] Easy OTR! These types of incendiary remarks can lead to a all-out posting war! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smokinandjokin Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 1. I don't get why Willis McGahee didn't have 40+ carries. 2. On the play when Losman threw his interception....it was one of the sweetest looking play action fakes I have seen in a long time. 3. No single player on defense seemed to want to make a BIG play. 4. I hate to say it....but I was happy for the Saints to finally get what seemed to be a "homefield" advantage. 5. Looks like Mularky took a page out of Bum Phillips book and doesn't wear a hat when he plays inside. 462595[/snapback] 1. Agreed. At least 25-30 would've seemed about right. Of course, he probably would've been in the 20's if we converted 3rd & 1 and 4th & 1. 4th down was not WM's fault, he had no chance there. 2. The play action was so sweet, it fooled neither of the two guys covering Moulds. 3. McGee was the only one on the field who looked like he wanted to be a difference maker. That return, had he scored and the Bills won, would've gone down in Buffalo lore. 4. They couldn't sell out, but the crowd got behind the Saints. The dome, for being relatively new, looks a little dumpy. 5. MM looks like a tool wearing the mock-turtleneck t-shirt. It's embarassing. Not even a polo shirt? Doesn't look too classy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BackInDaDay Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 MM looks like a tool wearing the mock-turtleneck t-shirt. It's embarassing. Not even a polo shirt? Doesn't look too classy. 462961[/snapback] It has begun! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gross Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 3. McGee was the only one on the field who looked like he wanted to be a difference maker. That return, had he scored and the Bills won, would've gone down in Buffalo lore. 462961[/snapback] Big Sammy was showing glimpses of his "prime self," and I'd say Crowell was playing like his hair was on fire as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Garranimal Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 2. On the play when Losman threw his interception....it was one of the sweetest looking play action fakes I have seen in a long time. i have to say i do agree with this point. The play action was good and it held the rush back. There wasn't anyone coming at JP on that play. Now, his accuracy is another thing entirely. Kinda looked like he expected Moulds to go more vertical while moulds seemed to begin to drift sideways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gross Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 i have to say i do agree with this point. The play action was good and it held the rush back. There wasn't anyone coming at JP on that play. Now, his accuracy is another thing entirely. Kinda looked like he expected Moulds to go more vertical while moulds seemed to begin to drift sideways. 463002[/snapback] ...and the DB pretty much knew to stand about five yards ahead of the receiver... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnTheRocks Posted October 3, 2005 Author Share Posted October 3, 2005 2. The play action was so sweet, it fooled neither of the two guys covering Moulds. 462961[/snapback] the play fake was sweet....and Moulds was open....it was however like all the other throws.....horrible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of BiB Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 the play fake was sweet....and Moulds was open....it was however like all the other throws.....horrible. 463052[/snapback] You do have to wonder when the opposing D-backs come out wearing outfielders gloves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BDW1968 Posted October 3, 2005 Share Posted October 3, 2005 1. I don't get why Willis McGahee didn't have 40+ carries. 2. On the play when Losman threw his interception....it was one of the sweetest looking play action fakes I have seen in a long time. 3. No single player on defense seemed to want to make a BIG play. 4. I hate to say it....but I was happy for the Saints to finally get what seemed to be a "homefield" advantage. 5. Looks like Mularky took a page out of Bum Phillips book and doesn't wear a hat when he plays inside. 462595[/snapback] The Saints had the ball for over 30 min. How can you run the ball if you do not get the chance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts