Intelligence.
 

Ok, now that we're going to begin a consideration of what we should do for next year (while continuing to root for this year's version of our favorite team), I propose we avoid some unnecessary stupid stuff. Here are two questions that must be answered:

1. Proof that AB is a moron must be given. I challenge someone to tell me what the connection between fumbling and intelligence is. If that cannot be provided, then some other argument for why Brooks is a moron must be given, or shut up about that point. It is not that I am not sympathetic to such an argument, I just feel that one has not been given.

2. Team collapses in Decembers are not evidence of bad coaching. Someone please tell me how what happens in one December has anything to do with the next. Also, each game is won and lost in a different manner. To demonstrate that it is coaching that is the problem, someone will have to tease out enough facts to convice the rest of us that coaching is the reason FOR EACH LOSS in any given set of losses.

Apologies to anyone who has heard me say this before, but these were burried deep in other threads.

Intelligence.
 

JKool -- All you are gonna get on here is a bunch of double talk. No one will really give you the REAL truth. What you will get is a spin on EVERYTHING. Most of the memebers on here have a clear agenda and skew things to fit their agenda.

Good luck on those questions, because I completely agree with you, but prepare to be frustrated by the responses you get.


[Edited on 7/12/2003 by BillyC]

Intelligence.
 

1. I do not know Aaron Brooks, but two things lead me to sometimes question his intelligence. First, interviews. I literally have to change the channel when he is on television or the radio. He is not the only professional athelete I feel this way toward, but he is one of the worst. Second, he does have a problem adjusting to defenses. This part of the equation, however, could be helped with better coaching. Could it be solved? I dunno. Maybe we\'ll hire a quality qb coach this offseason or a veteran mentor.

2. December is crunch time. Teams have had thirteen weeks to learn, develop, gel, etc. Injuries and wear and tear have also taken their toll by this point in the season. Opposing teams have weeks worth of film to analyze before each game. Coaches have to adjust in order to give their team the advantage. The ability to compile fresh strategies and game-scripts at the end of the season separates winning coaches from losing coaches.

Also, motivation becomes a factor at the end of the season as well. In our case, where we needed a four game streak to end the season, coaches must provide that extra spark to keep the players from becoming sloppy (this year) or complacent (last year).

Even if today\'s gameplan was sound, turnovers stem from a lack of discipline and personel decisions. I put those squarely on the shoulders of the coaches as well.

Intelligence.
 

Dallas 10 Final
Philadelphia 36


Would you blame this on coaching or players making stupid mistakes there in Dallas ?

Intelligence.
 

Philly has better players, but good coaching made Dallas a playoff contender

Intelligence.
 

Seattle 7 Final
Minnesota 34

How \'bout this one? And who do you think has the better players out of the Saints and Bucs? The Bucs did win the superbowl last year and have been in every game they have played. Fans look at records and assume teams are terrible, when that\'s really not the case at all.

Intelligence.
 

I think coaching and personel decisions were definitely part of the Dallas loss today. Absolutely.

Two things. I think Parcells should not have dumped Ross. I think he gets a bit carried away with the whole \"sending a message\" thing. The Cowboys were burned consistently in nickle packages today.

Second, Dallas played way too much zone defense today, and McNabb took advantage of it (he would have taken greater advantage had receivers not dropped a couple of balls).

Actually, I have a third one, too (this is the early game I was forced to watch in Birmingham). Dallas\'s receivers were taken out of the game out of the game today by Dallas\'s coaches. The Cowboys tried to run the ball exclusively early in the game, and by the time they got around to using the WRs, they were cold and unmotivated (which I blame on both the coaches and the players).

So yes, coaching was a big part of that loss. Maybe Philly has a bit more talent (not much), but they have a very good coach who out-schemed his opponent today.

Intelligence.
 

whowatches -- Just remember this. The amount of scheming a coach can do is limited to the talent his team has. Imagine the scheming Parcells could do with Mick Vick and Randy Moss on the same offense. Parcells schemes to cover up a lot of weaknesses on that team. If he had the talent he wouldn\'t have to worry about covering up so many weaknesses.

So, did he really get out coached OR did the lack of talent on the Cowboy\'s prevent him from running the kind of schemes he really WANTS to run?

Parcells will never do anything special in Dallas without more talent !!

Intelligence.
 

So Brooks\' fumbling was Haz\'s fault?

Surely you don\'t mean that? What you must mean is this: by not pulling Brooks, Haz contributed to some fumbles. Is that the case? Could someone who actually saw the game shed some light on this?

Also, how does lack of discipline lead someone to drop the ball? Just curious.

[Edited on 8/12/2003 by JKool]

Intelligence.
 

JKool -- I\'m going to give this a shot and I\'m going to be as honest as I can without any agenda.

When Brooks throws an air ball, I think it has something to do with the grip (either too tight or too loose.) Does this mean he is stupid? Of course not. When I first started playing the drums I used to have a bad habit of droping the drum stick that was in my left hand when I did a roll. I was gripping the stick too loosly. Through practice I corrected that problem. This problem Brooks has is correctable, but some folks just want him gone whether it\'s for smiling or whatever.

If someone bases intelligence on interview with the media they might need to rethink that arguement. Being in front of a microphone or camera makes some people nerveous and they come across as ignorant or dumb. Take Dan Quail for instance. He come off as a complete moron, but he was vice-president, so if he was dumb he was smarter in life and more successful than any of us. Come on people use you head. You can\'t be judging people like that.

3. Everything goes back on the coach. Most of it is not fair and fans should know it\'s not really all of Hasletts fault. Jon Gruden is a great coach but the Bucs lead the league in stupid mistakes. He can\'t do it for them.

Intelligence.
 

Billy, that is a salient and insightful post. It is also one of the better defenses of Brooks I\'ve ever seen you make on this board.

I just can\'t help but think this phrase when I think about Brooks, \"Hello Mr. Hot, I\'d like to introduce you to Mr. Cold. Oh my gosh! You\'re the same guy?!?\"

http://us.news2.yimg.com/us.yimg.com..._saints_nua105

[Edited on 8/12/2003 by BrooksMustGo]

Intelligence.
 

Billy, you are right. I should not have included the point about the interviewing in my post. That\'s just a personal pet peeve of mine. I honestly try not to let it influence my evaluation of Brooks (or other athletes as well), but I can\'t help it. That point does dilute the rest of my argument, though. I do think that Brooks has not developed enough in the academics of the game. He should be able at this point in his career to read and adjust to defenses better than he should. He also should know better than to hold on to the ball as long as he does.

Is he the only qb with that problem? No. Do I think he should be cut? No. Do I think a legitimate threat of losing playing time would help? Yes.

JKool, dropping balls, fumbling, interceptions, etc. do link back to coaching and personel decisions. If a player is careless or unmotivated or lazy, the coach has the responsibilty to fix that problem. If this was the first or even the only game we\'d seen these problems, that would be different. But I honestly feel that certain players on the field have no real impetus to improve.

We talk about Parcells and the lack of talent on his team. I agree that there\'s only so far he can take them, but look at what he\'s done with shear will. I know that Haslett has fire. I watched him play. I\'d just love to see that fire in some of his players\' eyes. I feel like I\'m starting to see a little bit of it on the defense.

I\'m not calling for his job. I want to see the remainder of the season first.

Intelligence.
 

Is Joe Horn unmotivated? Poorly coached?

He has let a few go this year. Don\'t get me wrong, I think he is a quality receiver, but Haz\'s inability to coach is reason he dropped some passes? It seems to me that it is what some people are saying.

I agree that coaching plays a role in wins and losses. It almost certainly does play a role in how disciplined a team is and even how quickly a team comes together. Thus, I agree with you Whowatches. However, I guess I\'m not as perceptive as others who seem to see that the coach is at fault in every mistake. I say, at best, it is a guess that the coach had some hand in an on-field error, like a dropped pass. I can\'t see how some people feel so confident in blaming the coach, when all I see is that the coach COULD HAVE MAYBE done something that MIGHT HAVE made that player not make that mistake.

Intelligence.
 

Here\'s nothing but the facts. No opinions included.

1. Joe Horn dropped a TD pass and had no help doing it.

2. Aaron Brooks had one fumble and had no help doing it.

3. Aaron Brooks had 3- fumbles that were caused by Tampa\'s defense.

4. Mitch Berger had a punt blocked that got returned to the Saints 1-yard line.

5. Aaron Brooks was sacked 7-times.

6. I didin\'t see Jim Haslett or any of the coaches make one mistake today.

[Edited on 8/12/2003 by BillyC]

Intelligence.
 

If the mistakes are isolated incidences then player error is a fine explanation. But when you see mistakes and errors become consistent, then it is a reflection on the coach and his staff. A coach cannot control the out come of every play but it is not by coincidence that some teams year in and year out have fewer penalties and commit fewer turnovers. Focus, concentration and disciplined play, the mental aspects of the game, are all within the realm of a coaches influence.

Intelligence.
 

I\'m not buying that. If my job is to count marbles and I miscount, it\'s not my bosses fault. If he tells me to count \'em correctly next time and goes over the correct way to do it and I still miscount. Guess what? It ain\'t his fault !! It\'s still my fault !! The only thing you can fault my boss for is not firing me. Agree?

Intelligence.
 

Billy have you ever coached at any level?

Intelligence.
 

I agree with everything you just (I didn\'t actually \'see\' the game; I heard it).

BUT

Don\'t you think that number six is a little subjective? Sure, even if all of the playcalling was okay, don\'t you think that numbers one through five have a little to do with the coaching that happens during each week? I am honestly asking the question... I\'m not just trying to argue. We\'ve got to face the possiblity that Haslett does not possess the ability to keep a team focused or disciplined, right? Am I way off here?

Intelligence.
 

Nope but I have played. But, it don\'t take a rocket scientist to figure out the coach can\'t force a player to stop making mistakes. Do you have proof that it\'s Haslett\'s fault or are you just speculating?

Intelligence.
 

I think this is what some of us are talking about. I\'m not saying that I want Has to start cutting everyone... lord knows he\'s not scared. But don\'t you think he could motivate Aaron, in particular, a little more with the threat of competition. I even think the receivers might benefit from this philosohpy as well. Why not give some of the younger guys more playing time if the starters can\'t get the job done. You accomplish two things: one, you give the younger guys some experience and two, you help bring some clarity to your veterans.

What do you think?

Intelligence.
 

In all honesty I saw no mistake TODAY that was coaching. Now, I can question some of the coaching decisions, but that wouldn\'t be factual. My intent was to show that coaching wasn\'t the reason we lost TODAY. I\'ve had enough of Haslett and I want a change, but I\'m going to call it like I see it.,

Intelligence.
 

ÂÂÂÂ*
Well the coaching really comes in in how you go over the correct way to count the marbles. Some employees will take to counting marbles quick as can be, others will have a lot of trouble, some you will have to teach to count. The type of environment you provide the employees to count marbles in will determine a lot about how well the counts go. If every one one the marble line is talking to each other watching tv etc, the count probably won\'t be as good as if you are able to have an environment where there is no other focus other than the marbles. How you motivate the employees is another factor. A marble count line with incentives and a sense of pride at good counts will probably do better than one that doesn\'t seem to care. Coaching matters Billy and mistakes can be influenced by coaching not eliminated but controlled.
[Edited on 12/8/2003 by saint5221]

Intelligence.
 

That\'s possible. It\'s certainly worked in other situations. I\'ve all for it, but not because I want Brooks cut, but because I think he might help him out in the long run. Even though everyone thinks Brooks has had more than enough time, that just isn\'t true. Brooks has actually played good in the passing game, it\'s just he\'s been fumbling too much. This is a new problem and is very correctable.

I\'m all for seeing what Bouman can do. If he comes in and does a good job and struggles a little bit. I\'ll be here defending Bouman.

[Edited on 8/12/2003 by BillyC]

Intelligence.
 

I don\'t want Brooks cut either; I just want him to have the proper coaching and influences around him to help him develop.

Intelligence.
 

saint5221 -- There\'s some truth to what you are saying. However, mistakes like jumping offsides, dropping passes, and commiting personal fouls, hardly need much coaching. This is something you learn playing pee-wee football.

This isn\'t something that is new to any NFL player. They know not to do it. They know how not to do it. They need to stop doing it. Short of Haslett holding a gun to their head, I don\'t know what he can do.

I hold the player MUCH MORE responsible than Haslett that\'s for SURE.

[Edited on 8/12/2003 by BillyC]

Intelligence.
 

Here\'s a question: If a coworker of yours made a big mistake at work, and your boss told him not to make that kind of mistake anymore, and he agreed that it was something he had to correct, yet every day, when he came into the office, he made the same mistake again - would you question his intelligence? I sure would, and I certainly wouldn\'t follow his lead.

So how can you let Brooks off the hook again? I mean, we\'re not talking about a fumble or two, we\'re talking about two fumbles EVERY game for the last MONTH. Brooks led the league in fumbles coming into this game, he is now head and shoulders above.

Billy talks about how this is only his third year. If you count preseason that\'s 60 starts. 60! And he\'s still making these kind of mistakes? C\'mon. Now, go ahead and make your comparison to Favre or whatever other QB you want, but I can tell you the difference right now: For every game that Favre has where he throws three INTS, he has three of four where he plays great and makes things happen on his own. Great games like that are the EXCEPTION for Brooks. Careless play is the rule. I\'ve never met a person who was just careless in his job that I also believed to be intelligent. I mean, even his scouting report says he\'s dumb. Look it up. It was the knock on him in school, and it\'s the knock now.

Last year when he struggled you heard announcers saying, \"Well, he\'s not playing great now but he\'s young and he\'ll come around.\" Now they\'re saying, \"AB just need to hang onto the ball. You cannot commit turnovers like that and win games.\" The shine is off and Brooks\' seat is getting warmer.

Intelligence.
 

WhoDat -- I ask you who is letting Brooks off the hook? Because I don\'t want to cut him, that means I\'m letting him off the hook? What the hell are you talking about?

Is the only thing that I can say that will me me RIGHT in YOUR eyes, is that Brooks should be cut? PLEASE answer that question WHODAT.

[Edited on 8/12/2003 by BillyC]

Intelligence.
 

No. I don\'t think he should be cut. I do think he should be dealt somewhere else and the Saints should find someone else to pilot their ship.

You said that people shouldn\'t argue that Brooks is not intelligent. I\'m explaining to you exactly why their argument is relevant. Also, if you think history doesn\'t play a role in the NFL... well...

Say what you will. If you want to look at any one game in a vacuum then maybe you have a shot at making that argument. However, if you look at Haslett\'s record in the last four games of the season since he\'s been in NO, I believe you will see something like this: 2-2, 0-4, 1-3, 0-1 (thus far). He is 3-10 in the most important quarter of the season since he has been in NO. If that is acceptible by you, then I will steal one from Saintfan and just say that I\'m happy that you\'re not making the decisions.

Intelligence.
 

Regardless of how long players have been exposed to something the play on the field says there is a problem. The standard I think that is fair to use is over the course of a season is something consistently happening? In this instance the answer is yes, penalties and turnovers have been a constant problem for this team. I am not at Hasletts practices so I can\'t say what exactly the cause or the correction is. If I were at Hasletts practices I\'m not saying I would be able to fix it either. But it is clear enough that a problem exists and it is a coaches job to deal with such things.

If a team exhibits a tendency over a sustained period of time that is not by chance it is by some effect. Every team is different and no one routine will work on all teams, thats one of the things that makes coaching so hard. You may have the turnover problem licked for years then along comes a team that just can not seem to hang onto the ball, as a coach it is your job to figure out something to do about it. I do know concentration and attention to detail is a large factor in such areas and these things can be worked on. The practice environment establishes a tone that carries over into games and every game is a test of the effectiveness of that practice environment.



Just so you know where I am coming from I have for several years and currently am a head basketball coach at the middle and high school level. I in now way profess to have any of the knowledge or experience necessary for coaching football or any sport at the professional level. But some of what we are discussing is very familiar to me and are problems facing any coach at any level.


[Edited on 12/8/2003 by saint5221]

Intelligence.
 

You amaze me. First of all. I did not say:

Here\'s what I really said. Why do you need to spin everything? You have no idea about Brooks intelligence. Show me some facts and not opinions?


If you want to think there is some voo-doo curse on the Saints in the month of December. Then by all means -- Do That !! -- I perfer to look at it on a game to game basis and see if coaching is the problem or something else. It could be more to it than the curse.

Intelligence.
 

Saint5221-- I agree that looking over an extended period of time is a good judge on whether coaching is to blame for players commiting penalties.

Saints penalties = 83

Cowboys penalties = 76

What does this tell us?

Intelligence.
 

Billy, JKool said:

\"1. Proof that AB is a moron must be given. I challenge someone to tell me what the connection between fumbling and intelligence is. If that cannot be provided, then some other argument for why Brooks is a moron must be given, or shut up about that point.\"

You replied:

\"Good luck on those questions, because I completely agree with you, but prepare to be frustrated by the responses you get. \"

So you completely agreed with the comment that there is no correlation between fumbling and being dumb and backed JKool\'s challenge to show proof as to Brooks\' lack of intelligence. I did that. Continuing to make the same sloppy mistakes over and over and over again in one\'s job - much more so than your peers - is enough to me to question a person\'s intelligence. That is reinforced by the fact that professionals paid to evaluate just about everything about football players almost all agreed in their scouting reports that Brooks is not bright. But you\'re right, you and JKool probably know more than all of us, all of the scouts, and pretty much everyone other than Jim Haslett who watched this guy play football.


As to your comments about December, all you\'re doing is showing how myopic your views are. Haslett has this team 30-19 in games played in the first three quarters of the season. They are 3-10 in the last quarter of the season. Show me ONE other coach in the league with those types of numbers. The only guy who may even be close would be Wannstadt, and he is in the hot seat. If you don\'t want to blame the coaches, then whose fault is it? What is the problem? If the Saints were 3-10 right now would you blame the coaches? OF COURSE YOU WOULD, but because these games have occurred in the pivotal part of the season over 3 1/4 seasons it\'s OK? Sure Billy, you\'re right. Man, do you even watch football?

[Edited on 8/12/2003 by WhoDat]

Intelligence.
 

While you are busy posting under this thread, maybe you should go back and correct that incorrect list of penalyzed teams in your other thread. Don\'t want you to look FOOLISH>

Intelligence.
 

Wow - I shut you down so badly that you couldn\'t even comment. Impressive.

Intelligence.
 

You fogot to sort the offensive penalties WhoDat. My stats are for the offense not for the total team. Go check it out. Can ya do that? Post the penalties for the teams and not just the names. Please do that for me?

Intelligence.
 

[img] C:\\My Documents\\My Pictures\\dorothyandarron.jpg[/img]

A picture is worth a thousand words ........

[img]C:\\My Documents\\My Pictures\\1026two.jpg [/img]


[Edited on 8/12/2003 by saintz08]

[Edited on 8/12/2003 by saintz08]

Intelligence.
 

Ok. I never claimed to know more about football than anyone (except maybe that crazy guy who hangs out on the street in front of my place). Why am I being accused of having made such a claim? Boy, I was merely trying to focus the discussion.

Anyway, I asked for an argument that Brooks is dumb. I got some answers, which is what I was looking for. Here are some thoughts on the answers I got:

Here are three arguments:

1. He keeps making the same mistakes. Ok, that is usually a sign that someone is dumb. However, in this case, I\'m not sure that fumbling constitutes making the same mistake. There are many reasons for a fumble. Sometimes a fumble is not the fault of the ball carrier - defenses train to strip balls. Of course, some people hold on to the ball better than others - running style, strength, or general feel for where the defense is can contribute to this. Thus, there may be some connection between fumbling and coaching - teach players better techniques for holding on to the ball! Furthermore, failing to learn such techniques could be evidence for some stupidity. What I suppose I meant to say is this: every fumble is different. To claim that there is a fumbling trend may be true, but what kind of fumbles were they? A sting of the same kind of fumble would lend some evidence to the claim Brooks is dumb, but simply having a string of fumbles is NOT such evidence. Furthermore, a sting of fumbles ALONE is not evidence for a problem with coaching either. That\'s all I meant to say, and if I wasn\'t very clear, I apologize. I don\'t think anyone has answered that challenge though.

2. The scouts say Brooks is dumb. Ok, that is the kind of thing I had in mind. This is an argument that has nothing to do with fumbling the ball, and that is what I asked for. I\'d be interested in a link to these scouting reports, but on the whole I take this to be a decent argument.

3. Some pictures that my browser won\'t open. I agree a picture can be pretty compelling, but it is hard to see the point when I don\'t know what the pictures are even of.

My other challenge was to people who thought that coaching was at the heart of our losses. Aparantly, asking this question makes me a moron. We are all supposed to know that history plays a role in the NFL. I guess, I didn\'t know that. I thought that independent events (like games) were at least possibly decided based on different factors. Now, I will agree that psychological effects can carry over from game to game (as can injuries of the body). Presumably, this is the part that is supposed to make us believe that Haz is a terrible coach - he cannot win in the fourth quarter and he cannot win in December. He is failing to motivate the team. I\'m not sure whether or not I buy this argument. What I said is this: if you want to make this argument, you need to show that there is a common element to the losses in the fourth quarter and in December. The simple fact that we did lose in December and in the fourth quarter could be the result of any number of things - to say that it is the coaches requires more analysis. I DID NOT SAY THAT IT WAS NOT THE COACHING; what I did was ask for some more evidence. I think I got some from these posts, but I am still a bit unconvinced. The argument that Haz is the only coach with such a foul record in December and in the fourth quarter is the kind of thing that is compelling, but I don\'t believe it yet - perhaps someone could shed a bit more light on why I should believe that (and I am not predisposed to not believing it, I just don\'t yet).

I thank all of those who gave thoughtful replies. I appreciate the discussion. To those people who like to make it personal, I don\'t know what to say. I just wanted to talk about these two points.

:P

Intelligence.
 

Here you go Jkool :

1999 Packer Draft: Aaron Brooks, Quarterback
Virginia/ 6:03.2-200/ Newport News, Virginia

What the scouts are saying . . .

AFC scout: \"He\'s not a detail guy. I get the feeling that Brooks isn\'t a worker or a studier. That scares you for a guy who\'s going to get barely any practice reps and will have to learn in the classroom.\"

NFC scout: \"Maybe there\'s some hope for him as a wide receiver. He\'s a great athlete. Horrible quarterback.\"


I would assume the detail the A.F.C. scout was refering to was the little detail of holding on to the ball .

Intelligence.
 

Thank you 08.