Hats off to AB (this week)

yasoon · 10-02-2005, 08:11 PM

We really should have won this game by a bigger margin, but a win is a win.

I have been hard on AB, but one noticeable improvement I see is his pocket clock. He seems to be moving forward before the pocket collapses...one of my biggest criticisms of him. Really seems to be ready to make plays with his legs again.

Our run blocking was pretty bad...but did anyone notice? At the end of the game, deuce ran wild...They knew it was coming and we pounded them.

Nice win. But.....the best we can hope for is 3-3. I will be shocked if we win the next 2.

The D layed it down today. Will the pack be ready to go 0-4 at home? probably not. Very similar to where we were last week, but the pack has been very beatable at home.

Go Saints...you inconsistent f*&kers.

SaintStoneyMount · 10-03-2005, 04:05 AM

inconsistancy is our pedigree.

4saintspirit · 10-03-2005, 07:09 AM

Originally Posted by yasoon

We really should have won this game by a bigger margin, but a win is a win.

I have been hard on AB, but one noticeable improvement I see is his pocket clock. He seems to be moving forward before the pocket collapses...one of my biggest criticisms of him. Really seems to be ready to make plays with his legs again.

Our run blocking was pretty bad...but did anyone notice? At the end of the game, deuce ran wild...They knew it was coming and we pounded them.

Nice win. But.....the best we can hope for is 3-3. I will be shocked if we win the next 2.

The D layed it down today. Will the pack be ready to go 0-4 at home? probably not. Very similar to where we were last week, but the pack has been very beatable at home.

Go Saints...you inconsistent f*&kers.

Well --best things I can say about Brooks is that he didn't turn the ball over and he ran -- finally he took off a couple of times. Made a world of difference. Stallworth killed his great play though -- scrambling and then throwing a dart off balance -- but Stallworth couldn't hang on.

saintfan · 10-03-2005, 08:14 AM

Maybe he's finally figured out that with our O-Line he needs to take a run first mentality.

WhoDat · 10-03-2005, 09:24 AM

Seriously? You're really knocking our o-line for it's pass blocking? Maybe if you watched only the first half of the Minnesota game, sure. But in 4 games you're going to tell me that the pass blocking is bad?

4saintspirit · 10-03-2005, 09:59 AM

Originally Posted by WhoDat

Seriously? You're really knocking our o-line for it's pass blocking? Maybe if you watched only the first half of the Minnesota game, sure. But in 4 games you're going to tell me that the pass blocking is bad?

I agree -- I thought that the O Line looked pretty good. Just how long does one expect them to keep people out. I saw AB with plenty of time to throw the ball more than once. And the running he did was because the blocking opened up such a huge hole he walked intot he end-zone --

saintswhodi · 10-03-2005, 10:02 AM

Being at the game, I can tell you pass blocking was not a problem. The running lanes were there cause Buffalo did not respect Brooks' running, period. HE had huge holes in front of him several times, sometimes it caused him to miss open receivers it was so open, cause he ran instead of throwing. I don't know what concept Buffalo was running, but every time we shaded a receiver across the face of MLB London Fletcher he went with them, leaving the middle open. Brooks' wasn't running cause of duress, he was running cause it would have been dumb of him not to. You would only think otherwise if you didn't see the game, and saw Brooks ran several times.

BrooksMustGo · 10-03-2005, 11:42 AM

Originally Posted by WhoDat

Seriously? You're really knocking our o-line for it's pass blocking? Maybe if you watched only the first half of the Minnesota game, sure. But in 4 games you're going to tell me that the pass blocking is bad?

And here I've been thinking the pass throwing was bad. Go figure.

Tobias-Reiper · 10-03-2005, 05:28 PM

..granted no one is confusing the Buffalo defense with the Steel Curtain, but Brooks took what was given, didn't commit any real mistakes, ran the ball effectively, and actually showed some fire out there... so yes he did have a good game.

BoudinSandwich · 10-03-2005, 07:07 PM

I wasn't able to watch this one on television, but from what I've heard from everyone (including the Saints' radio network) Brooks played well. I'm fine with Brooks as long as he doesn't make stupid plays at critical times that kill the team. He doesn't have to be a superstar or put up big numbers. As long as he's not a major reason that we lose ball games.

10-02-2005, 08:11 PM	#1
yasoon 500th Post Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 594	Hats off to AB (this week) We really should have won this game by a bigger margin, but a win is a win. I have been hard on AB, but one noticeable improvement I see is his pocket clock. He seems to be moving forward before the pocket collapses...one of my biggest criticisms of him. Really seems to be ready to make plays with his legs again. Our run blocking was pretty bad...but did anyone notice? At the end of the game, deuce ran wild...They knew it was coming and we pounded them. Nice win. But.....the best we can hope for is 3-3. I will be shocked if we win the next 2. The D layed it down today. Will the pack be ready to go 0-4 at home? probably not. Very similar to where we were last week, but the pack has been very beatable at home. Go Saints...you inconsistent f*&kers.
yasoon 500th Post Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 594

10-03-2005, 04:05 AM	#2
SaintStoneyMount 100th Post Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Stone Mountain, GA Posts: 448	RE: Hats off to AB (this week) inconsistancy is our pedigree.

10-03-2005, 07:09 AM	#3
4saintspirit 500th Post Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 690	Re: Hats off to AB (this week) Originally Posted by yasoon We really should have won this game by a bigger margin, but a win is a win. I have been hard on AB, but one noticeable improvement I see is his pocket clock. He seems to be moving forward before the pocket collapses...one of my biggest criticisms of him. Really seems to be ready to make plays with his legs again. Our run blocking was pretty bad...but did anyone notice? At the end of the game, deuce ran wild...They knew it was coming and we pounded them. Nice win. But.....the best we can hope for is 3-3. I will be shocked if we win the next 2. The D layed it down today. Will the pack be ready to go 0-4 at home? probably not. Very similar to where we were last week, but the pack has been very beatable at home. Go Saints...you inconsistent f*&kers. Well --best things I can say about Brooks is that he didn't turn the ball over and he ran -- finally he took off a couple of times. Made a world of difference. Stallworth killed his great play though -- scrambling and then throwing a dart off balance -- but Stallworth couldn't hang on.
4saintspirit 500th Post Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 690

10-03-2005, 09:24 AM	#5
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631	Seriously? You're really knocking our o-line for it's pass blocking? Maybe if you watched only the first half of the Minnesota game, sure. But in 4 games you're going to tell me that the pass blocking is bad?
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631

10-03-2005, 09:59 AM	#6
4saintspirit 500th Post Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 690	Originally Posted by WhoDat Seriously? You're really knocking our o-line for it's pass blocking? Maybe if you watched only the first half of the Minnesota game, sure. But in 4 games you're going to tell me that the pass blocking is bad? I agree -- I thought that the O Line looked pretty good. Just how long does one expect them to keep people out. I saw AB with plenty of time to throw the ball more than once. And the running he did was because the blocking opened up such a huge hole he walked intot he end-zone --
4saintspirit 500th Post Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 690

Latest Blogs
2023 New Orleans Saints: Training Camp Last Blog: 08-01-2023 By: MarchingOn Puck the Fro Browl! Last Blog: 02-05-2023 By: neugey CFP: "Just Keep Doing What You're Doing" Last Blog: 12-08-2022 By: neugey

10-03-2005, 08:14 AM	#4
saintfan Donated Plasma Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 18,556 Blog Entries: 5	Maybe he's finally figured out that with our O-Line he needs to take a run first mentality.

10-03-2005, 10:02 AM	#7
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	Being at the game, I can tell you pass blocking was not a problem. The running lanes were there cause Buffalo did not respect Brooks' running, period. HE had huge holes in front of him several times, sometimes it caused him to miss open receivers it was so open, cause he ran instead of throwing. I don't know what concept Buffalo was running, but every time we shaded a receiver across the face of MLB London Fletcher he went with them, leaving the middle open. Brooks' wasn't running cause of duress, he was running cause it would have been dumb of him not to. You would only think otherwise if you didn't see the game, and saw Brooks ran several times.

10-03-2005, 11:42 AM	#8
BrooksMustGo 1000 Posts + Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 1,762	Originally Posted by WhoDat Seriously? You're really knocking our o-line for it's pass blocking? Maybe if you watched only the first half of the Minnesota game, sure. But in 4 games you're going to tell me that the pass blocking is bad? And here I've been thinking the pass throwing was bad. Go figure.

10-03-2005, 05:28 PM	#9
Tobias-Reiper Merces Letifer Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 4,161	..granted no one is confusing the Buffalo defense with the Steel Curtain, but Brooks took what was given, didn't commit any real mistakes, ran the ball effectively, and actually showed some fire out there... so yes he did have a good game.

10-03-2005, 07:07 PM	#10
BoudinSandwich OldiesDJ Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Scott, LA Posts: 951 Blog Entries: 12	I wasn't able to watch this one on television, but from what I've heard from everyone (including the Saints' radio network) Brooks played well. I'm fine with Brooks as long as he doesn't make stupid plays at critical times that kill the team. He doesn't have to be a superstar or put up big numbers. As long as he's not a major reason that we lose ball games.