New Orleans Saints - blackandgold.com

New Orleans Saints - blackandgold.com (http://blackandgold.com/community/)
-   Saints (http://blackandgold.com/saints/)
-   -   Brooks proves 'em wrong at each turn. With a little help fro (http://blackandgold.com/saints/4876-brooks-proves-em-wrong-each-turn-little-help-fro.html)

GumboBC 07-12-2004 04:10 PM

Brooks proves 'em wrong at each turn. With a little help fro
 
Over the past couple of seasons, several folks (you know who ya are ;) ) have come up with several arguements in an attempt to prove Aaron Brooks is not worthy of being the QB of the Saints.

When I first joined in the discussion, it was completion %. Brooks took care of that arguement!!
Completion %
1st year as starter: 55.9%
Last year as starter: 59.1%

So, then they complain about interceptions:
Aaron Brooks proves them wrong about that:
Interceptions:
1st year as starter: 22
Last year as starter: 8

Now, they are so desperate they want to say he's dumb and they say the "wonderlic" proves it. I say any rational person would know that one test doesn't prove anything. Obviously these folks don't know too much about the wonderlic or what the test is designed to prove. So, let me let Mr. Charlie Wondelic tell you for himself. But, I think SOME or you already knew this. Never-the-less, let me shoot this one down, so I won't ever have to hear the word "wonderlic" again.. :P

Wonderlic Score:
Aaron Brooks: 17
Dan Marino: 16

Quote:

The difference between the Wonderlic and a more comprehensive IQ exam is that subjects get only 12 minutes to complete 50 questions. The test is designed to give employers a glimpse into the problem-solving ability of the job candidate and doesn't provide in-depth analysis about one's intelligence.
"It is not diagnostic," said Charlie Wonderlic, president of Wonderlic, Inc., in Libertyville, Ill. – Charlie Wonderlic

http://www.jsonline.com/packer/prev/...der18041701.as p
Quote:

Unlike other knowledge tests, it is not designed to gauge intelligence. Instead, it assesses a person's ability to reason in a short period of time, which makes it the ideal test for prospective NFL players.

Deciphering defenses at the line of scrimmage. Reading an offensive formation for clues on the upcoming play. Those are tasks a player must perform before he ever lunges for a tackle or throws a pass.

http://www.petebigelow.com/clips.php?a=1&b=2
What's the next arguement ya'll want to discuss... ;)

BlackandBlue 07-12-2004 05:14 PM

Brooks proves 'em wrong at each turn. With a little help fro
 
http://banerunner.freeservers.com/im...upidthread.jpg

And the best thing about this picture is that whoever put it together, spells about as good as some of our members :D

[Edited on 12/7/2004 by BlackandBlue]

buzwa 07-12-2004 05:17 PM

Brooks proves 'em wrong at each turn. With a little help fro
 
Brooks is a talented QB. If he could just not fumble as much, that\'d be great. He actually cost us games by his untimely fumbles, which always seemed to take bad bounces.

GumboBC 07-12-2004 05:23 PM

Brooks proves 'em wrong at each turn. With a little help fro
 
B&B --

Stupid in a good kind of way, though, right? Like when someone says \"that\'s bad\", they really mean it\'s good. :P

If these folks want to hang their hat on some \"wonderlic\" score, then we must have our facts straight. Knowledge is power :exclam: ;)

BlackandBlue 07-12-2004 05:31 PM

Brooks proves 'em wrong at each turn. With a little help fro
 
Well, this is a more user friendly, P.C. Black & Gold message boards. I was in no way implying that the creator and writer was stupid, just the thread.
And sure, it could be construed as stupid=good.

GumboBC 07-12-2004 05:34 PM

Brooks proves 'em wrong at each turn. With a little help fro
 
Quote:

And sure, it could be construed as stupid=good.
Then the opposite could be true too? In that case, your post was good :D

[Edited on 12/7/2004 by GumboBC]

[Edited on 12/7/2004 by GumboBC]

saintz08 07-12-2004 11:44 PM

Brooks proves 'em wrong at each turn. With a little help fro
 
Quote:

When I first joined in the discussion, it was completion %. Brooks took care of that arguement!!
Completion %
1st year as starter: 55.9%
Last year as starter: 59.1%
For the fun of it , let\'s see where our wonder boy has progressed too ....

Brooks in his 3 years of unchallenged learning and progress has achieved a 59.1 completion percentage ......

Let\'s look at some other players ......

Ferrotte 58.5 - 2nd string
Volek 63.2 - 2nd string
Delhomme 59.2 - starter 1st season
Bulger 63.2 - starter 1st season
Couch 59.1 - Cut by team
Warner 58.5 - Cut by team
Brooks 59.1 - Seasoned veteran

Hmmmm

Well the only thing left to wonder is why does he still have a job ...... ;)

JKool 07-13-2004 02:21 AM

Brooks proves 'em wrong at each turn. With a little help fro
 
B&B,

I think when stupid = good, it is spelled \"stoopid\". ;)

saintz08 07-13-2004 02:57 AM

Brooks proves 'em wrong at each turn. With a little help fro
 
Quote:

I think when stupid = good, it is spelled \"stoopid\".
Stick around awhile and it will be spelled \" Brooks \".

I have a hunch , knowing this bunch .... :P

St.Shrume 07-13-2004 06:43 AM

Brooks proves 'em wrong at each turn. With a little help fro
 
Let me ask you guys (Brook haters)...

You want Brooks out, right? Who would you have start? Bouman? Kordell Stewart? Hell ya, i want a Peyton Manning, Steve McNair, but nobody\'s going to trade them. So who? Tim Couch? Jeff Blake?

I am highly critical of Brooks and all the Saints because my heart skips beats on Sundays, my pulse quickens and my attitude gets adjusted, and so I want them to be the best that they can be...

But lets be realistic. I\'m sure there are quite a few of you who (if given the chance) would fire him right now. Cool. SO then what? Who do you put in, coach?

I ask this, because a lot of pessimists think of themselves as \'realists\'. But i beg to differ. Optimists and pssimists are much more alike than that.



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:08 AM.


Copyright 1997 - 2013 - BlackandGold.com