JOESAM2002

Someone has a short memory around here or just doesn\'t listen. :mad2:

BillyC

Alright Joe. I think I\'ll take a break for a little while. I seem to be upsetting the balance of this board.

Cassady37

You forgot to mention you\'ve also seen Brooks lose games single-handedly, squarely that is on his shoulders also. Delhomme is not the most physically talented QB in the league, that is for sure, which makes his feat as a starting QB going to the Superbowl that much more impressive. Hypothetically, I would trade brooks for Delhomme any day of the week as the Saint\'s QB. But then again, I would trade Brooks for just about any other QB in the league. Delhomme has the intangibles that Brooks does not.

WhoDat

Funny - the Saints did face a Delhomme led Panthers team twice this season. We were 0-2 in those games. Apparently if Brooks had been playing the league would have given the Panthers a third game or something. LMAO.

I\'m not sure if that \"top five\" comment is directed towards me or my comments, but if it is, you totally misunderstand my point Saintfan. Just to be clear, I think quite the opposite. We DON\'T NEED a top 5 guy. However, if you\'re going to pay a guy over 35 million dollars to be a top 5 QB, he damn well better be, b/c you\'re giving up a LOT in terms of other personnel for that one guy.

\"Excuses, excuses, excuses. That’s all anyone ever makes for the New Orleans Saints’ organization.\" - Eric Narcisse


\"Being a Saints fan is almost like being addicted to crack,\" he said.[i]\"You know you should stop, but you just can\'t.\"

saintfan

You\'ve been on this \"Money Kick\" again of late WhoDat. How Come? The Saints are in good shape even with Brooks\' contract. Please tell me what Brooks\' contract has to do with the price of tea in China.

I realize you were against this contract from the very beginning; however, at the very beginning there were backups making more than Brooks was making. He held out for more money. He could have gone down in camp and never played again, and this ain\'t Major League Baseball so nothing is guaranteed. You fault the man and accuse him of character flaws because he was in a position to better himself?

Brooks may be top 5 here and top 10 there but you can\'t argue that his numbers are solid. Better than solid. The Saints offense was less explosive last year for sure (for reasons that go beyond Aaron Brooks), but give me last year\'s offense and a defense that could keep a game close and I could have provided you with a playoff team.

[Edited on 23/1/2004 by saintfan]

C'mon Man...

WhoDat

I don\'t fault AB for his contract. I fault the Saints. The man\'s \"character faults\" are mutually exclusive from his contract. What\'s interesting to me is that after going to the playoffs in his first season here, Haslett let Glover go b/c even though he was a Pro Bowl player (no questions about potential or whether or not he could get there b/c he already had). Why? He cost too much and was the wrong guy for our system. I hated that move too. This is no different. Brooks costs too much and is wrong for our system... and he\'s not even proving that he\'s tops in the league at his position like Glover had, and continues to do now.

\"Excuses, excuses, excuses. That’s all anyone ever makes for the New Orleans Saints’ organization.\" - Eric Narcisse


\"Being a Saints fan is almost like being addicted to crack,\" he said.[i]\"You know you should stop, but you just can\'t.\"

BillyC

Glover was not only cut becuase of his salary. One of the BIG reasons Haslett cut Glover was because of his size and teams were running on us up the middle with Glover there. Not to the extent they are now, but they were doing it too much for Haslett\'s liking. I think it was a bad decision, but Haslett didn\'t cut Glover only because of his salary.

With that said, I agree with WhoDat that a player needs to earn his salary. But a players performance flucuates from year to year. Very rarely will a QB finish in the top 5 every year. Or any other player as a matter of fact. The only way to live up to WhoDat\'s standards is to pay a player by performance each year.

Just look at Rickey Williams. Top 5 one year and no the next. Look at almost anyone and that\'s the way it is.

[Edited on 23/1/2004 by BillyC]

WhoDat

Maybe, but Brooks hasn\'t ever been top 5. It\'s not like he had an off year. His numbers this year, all around, were the best of his career. They still didn\'t get him to a performance level equal to what we\'re paying him to deliver.

saintfan

Whodat, Brooks had a good year. Everything is relative don\'t you agree? Is Farve making too much money? How about McNabb?

WhoDat

McNabb? Yes. Favre, no.