Mike D on Brooks
 

http://saintsreport.com/modules.php?...ticle&artid=24
Hmmmm, Brooks is like Kerry Collins, Kordell Stewart or Kyle Boller; he can play great and then he can kill you with his stupid decisions. Again, there is plenty of blame to go around this season, but what is certain is that our QB is not going to elevate the level of play on this offense. Any other Brooks thoughts here?

Mike D on Brooks
 

BMG,

Why do you say this?
When the article your post includes this:
Do you mean that this year AB will not be what we want, he\'ll never be what we want, or that Haz will never make him what we want (or something else altogether)?

I just don\'t understand. Some of these guys mentioned as being \"idiots early on\" turned it around - like Plummer and Testaverde. Given your own post, I\'m not sure why you\'d conclude that it is CERTAIN that AB cannot become a great QB?

[Edited on 20/10/2004 by JKool]

Mike D on Brooks
 

I see this over and over... People complaining, \'TRADE HIM TRADE HIM\' and then are shocked to see that player on a Super Bowl team. I truly believe Brooks could lead a team to the Superbowl.

He is not perfect. He may only be a top 15 QB, but if we had 11 guys that could play defense, even slightly, and we were 5-1 or 4-2, we\'d see things differently.

Do you think the Ravens were pumped up about Dilfer when they won the Superbowl?? Do you think he fit their bill as THE QB??? Heck no.

All this talk about chemistry, egos, etc. is just because they are losing. Do you hear the Giants\' players *****ing about Coughlin anymore?? Why? You think they suddenly love the guy? Hell no. But winning makes things better.

It comes down to winning. And honestly, I still think our main reason for sucking so bad is our defense. We do not have to have a Vikings type offense. But we should have a defense that can stop Emmitt Smith and the Cards.

Mike D on Brooks
 

JKool,
I agree that BMG\'s claim was a little inconsistent if you take it to mean that AB could NEVER improve on this team. However, if you take it to mean that he could never improve on this team with the current coaching staff, I think it\'s consistent, and accurate. With a coaching change, it\'s possible his play could be elevated quite a bit. However, my opinion is that it would be best to let him go if a suitable replacement could be found, just because we need some change for the sake of change at QB. I don\'t know who that replacement might be; my first thought is Kurt Warner, with a young project player to challenge him (not Bouman--maybe Ramsey?). I\'d want the new coach to be involved in the process. Wouldn\'t it be great to get Mueller back, btw?

Mike D on Brooks
 

Brooks is a loser.

Mike D on Brooks
 

Yes it\'s a pretty harsh statement and I could be be happily proven wrong. More what I\'m getting at is that the guys Mike mentioned in the Q&A were guys who needed a fresh start someplace else. If it\'s true that there is friction between Brooks and the other guys on the team (and I don\'t think this is a stretch based on the Charles Grant thing, things Horn has said and AB\'s own \"fake love\" comments), then maybe several people need a change of scenery in order to play their best. I agree with a statement that I think Halo has made on occassion: Haslett has ruined Aaron Brooks. The favoritism and excuses haven\'t helped the guy develop and now he\'s a veteran still making the same rookie mistakes over and over with no accountability. Brooks could be a very good player, but I don\'t see it happening here.

Collins took the Giants to the superbowl after all the guys in Carolina hated him and he basically got run out of town. Dilfer went to the superbowl managing the Ravens offense after stinking it up in Tampa for years. Plummer is being reborn in Denver now that he gets a chance to play with a lead for a change.

I think that Haslett has linked his own career in New Orleans to Brooks\' that the two are a package deal. Haslett has said on several occassions that as long as he\'s coach here, Brooks will be the QB. This ties the two together in a way that I\'m not sure the next coach will want to deal with. So while Barry Switzer did go to the superbowl with Troy Aikman, Aikman was a more proven commodity and didn\'t like Switzer. I\'m not sure Switzer could have won without Jimmy Johnson\'s team still intact (a point I happily concede). But the cowboys were Aikman\'s team far more than they ever were Switzer\'s. Brooks is no Aikman and if I were a new front office/coaching staff, I wouldn\'t want the distraction he provides. But then I suppose it all depends on who you want to keep. But if we cut everyone who\'s ever had trouble with Brooks, does that make Brooks easier or more difficult to work with when you have to spend a lot of time on fundamentals with him?

Mike D on Brooks
 

Did they turn it around? I don\'t really consider Plummer or Testaverde as NFL success stories - unless you mean they are successful simply by still being in the league. These are guys who turned into top 5 QBs? Not in my book.

Mike D on Brooks
 

Where have I heard THIS before? :casstet:

Mike D on Brooks
 

Who,

Those guys are serviceable QBs who get the job done. Denver is on its way to the playoffs, and Plummer will not hurt their chances to win it all. Also, neither of them are \"idiots\" anymore - so in that sense, they certainly turned it around.

I think that BMG makes a compelling argument about Haz ruining Brooks. I don\'t know what I think about that yet, but it sounds relatively plausible to me.

Rich006,

A good reading, I\'d say.

Mike D on Brooks
 

Seems to me you people need to get your facts straight. Brooks not a qb bull. He just set a record for the most plays without an interception last week not to mention his stats say diffrently. Look at the stats please . When is the last time you had a qb year after year in the top ten in stats for the saints I think Jim everett. Not to mention Brooks is one of the only ones to throw for 3,000 yards in three straight seasons. Now I will agree that his discision making is not up to par. I mean your at the redzone you have one of the best backs in the league all of a sudden your gonna go pass happy and throw an interception. Once your at the 20 whatever happened to running the football. This is some of Mccarthy\'s fault though also. Anyhow he has worked on his mechanics some what such as not shuffling back 15 yards when pressure was coming than trying to out juke everyone. He seems to be able to find the open running lane when pressure is coming now unlike past times. I hate to say it other than the 1 interception last week the loss against the vikings was not his fault. The defense was getting used last Sunday. I thought I was watching highschool ball for a minute. I\'m sorry when your offence gets you back in the ball game and your only behind bye 7 now and the defense allows the opponents to score again. This is just to much of a deficit too overcome. Not to mention They tire themselves out when they can\'t get off third down and force the opposition to punt. More of a ruuning game could of helped too. When rush for 1000 yards you have a good chance at winning most of your games. This keeps the score down so the opponents offence does not have much time to comeback either. Or in are case we where the ones getting rushed on trying to come back. culpeper looked like Moon,cunningham,the k gun jim kelly, and montana put together. Every week I evaluate the opposing runningback this week I though the runningback was not much of a threat. Boy was I wrong I should of known better when you let a back such as emmitt Smith A Rookie IN 91 RUSH FOR 100 YARDS. I guess you can expect everyones runningbacks to run on you. Something telling me Moore DID NOT HAVE 100 YARDS AGAINST US. He sure did play a big part in there offence though. It\'s almost like octavius swithed jerseys with Moore. http://www.nfl.com/stats

[Edited on 20/10/2004 by blackwidows]

[Edited on 20/10/2004 by JOESAM2002]

Mike D on Brooks
 

Nothing like having a guy pad his stats and lose games.

Mike D on Brooks
 

yes, lets think about his stats....

hmm how about him averaging 13 yards lost per sack, if he thorws it away, it hurts his STATS... the sack yards count against the TEAMS RUSHING yards....

ever notice how at the end of games he throws nothing but little dump passes to RB\'s in the flat??? boost his completion numbers.....

and you talk about no interceptions??? HE LED THE LEAGUE LAST YEAR IN FUMBLES WITH 15... a turnover is a turnover....
(one of which WAS AT THE GAOLINE AGINAINST ARIZONA!)

so yes, you can simply look at the stats and it looks like he has played really well and is a good qb , BUT THE WINS SIMPLY DO NOT REFLECT IT....

Mike D on Brooks
 

Care to qualify this statement? I think it\'s 13 come-from-behind victories and counting. Dumpin\' it off to a back who\'s always been a bit suspect at catching the ball isn\'t exactly how that has been accomplished.

Mike D on Brooks
 

aaron stecker is a great reciever out of the backfield....

and as far as i know, so is deuce mcallister

Mike D on Brooks
 

You sure about that J???

Mike D on Brooks
 

Hey Gator - I don\'t question the guy\'s skill at all. Nor do I believe that the Saints couldn\'t get to a SB with Brooks at the helm. However, I do think that there is dissention in the ranks. Even AB talked about \"fake love.\" Further, I think Brooks is not a great leader and his play is inconsistent. The QB position is so important, and teams often feed off of that. That\'s part of the reason I\'d rather have a smart fiery leader that plays consistently. I think dealing Brooks would depend on what\'s being offered and who is out there. I still think AB can be a Pro Bowl QB - he\'s just not doing it right now. Maybe that\'s Haslett and Co. Maybe not. Point I\'m making is that I\'m not necessarily for trading Brooks, but I\'m not exactly against it either.

Mike D on Brooks
 

I think that\'s a sensible approach.
I\'d prefer not to tell a new head coach that he\'s stuck with AB, like it or not.

Mike D on Brooks
 

To compare Brooks to Boller or Stewart is a joke in itself! Nuff said!

Mike D on Brooks
 

just one question. How come everyone ready to call Brooks a Bust, when he is one of the few that put in some effort. I like Deuce and I think he is the centerpiece of our offense but he should take more blame than Brooks. Joe Horn is the top WR on the team, but look at all the drop balls, the only game i seen him put alot of effort in was Viking game. I know he made a spectaculiar catch in the endzone against the Ram but he also had drops. I could go down the line and say not one offensive player put more effort in trying to win a game than Brooks, Plus I don\'t think their any QB out there that can play as well as him with the situation saints fan thrust on him. BOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!! :facesjump: this if that make all you haters happy

Mike D on Brooks
 

All I have to say is look at the stats from the best qbs ever to dawn a saints uniform I think you will fine Brooks is he best one we had since Bobb herbert andBrooks is 3rd on the list in touchhttp://www.geocities.com/washfeds/bhebert.htmldowns.

Mike D on Brooks
 

Well, I personally don\'t get why people compare AB to Deuce or Horn. I mean, let\'s consider:

There\'s no question Deuce is having an off year so far. He started the first two games slowly, but then the scheme changed and it made a dramatic impact. Then he got hurt. So his numbers are off and he\'s not completely free of blame. Of course, since he\'s come back, and while injured but with a FB in the backfield, Deuce has run for 200 yards in 2 games. More importantly, he proved he\'s a real top talent in this league two years running. In his first year as a starter in 2002 he was 6th in the NFL in rushing an in the top ten in yards per carry. Last year he was 4th in yards and 6th in yards per carry. If you add in his yards after contact, his blocking ability, rare combination of size and speed, hands, etc. it\'s hard not to call this guy a premier back IMO. He\'s top 5 or 6 no doubt and despite his slow start this season.

Horn may be an even worse comparison. He\'s been to the Pro Bowl 3 of the last 4 years. By default that makes him a top 5 or 6 guy. Last year he was hurt and had an \"off\" year that still had him in the top 20 WRs in the NFL. This year he\'s back in the top 10 currently at 9th - and that\'s after a few real bad games in which the Saints offense didn\'t do much of anything at all.

Brooks on the other hand has never ranked in the top ten in passer efficiency rating. Sure, he\'s racked up the yards, and one year the TDs, but I\'m yet to hear anyone other than AB or fans on this board refer to Brooks as \"top five.\" You may even be able to say that about top ten...

My point is, Deuce and Horn, IMO, have proved it on the field, and they\'ve received recognition around the league and in the media for it. Haslett and AB himself hype up Brooks, but very few people outside the team say that AB is top five or ten. Most say he\'s in the 12-15 range with the talent to be top 5 but the leadership and smarts to be bottom 10. That\'s what I\'ve seen and heard anyway.

Mike D on Brooks
 

I personaly don\'t see why ya\'ll are so hard on Brooks........he didn\'t give up over 600 yards of off last week...as a matter of fact I saw Brooks trying to rush the offense to the line in a hurry up off.......WE DID SCORE 31 POINTS!!!!!!!...........Brooks makes mistakes but I remember Forcade and Hobert.........Is that what you want?.........Get a coach in there that can light the fire under their asses and get thru the season and into the post-season..............(I\'m going to the Raider game Sun In good spirits)...................

[Edited on 21/10/2004 by CHACHING]

Mike D on Brooks
 

WOAH WOAH WOAH WOAH!!! I was gonna bite my lip on this one till someone wants to bad mouth John Fourcade... BTW you misspelled FoUrcade...

I know he was never a great QB, but he gave it everything he had cause he loved the game. I believe he was a player coach in an arena league till he was in his mid 40s... Brooks doesnt look like he loves the game and for sure he wouldnt give his all for the team. Brooks is a solid QB who can get the job done. Yeah we scored 31 points... what did we do against Tampa? how about Arizona??? Yeah nothing to say now... thought so...

Billy Joe Hobert was not as talented as Brooks is nor did he have the players we have. I wouldnt want him back, but lets get a QB like Bobby Hebert with heart and who would do anything for his TEAM not his stats... I remember Bobby leaving teeth on the floor of the dome... you think Brooks would do that?

It just seems that no matter how gutsy a QB we have is he doesnt have the TALENT Brooks has. Jake doesnt have the talent Brooks has, but he has been to a Super Bowl. Tom Brady has been to 2 Super Bowls and he doesnt have the arm or the mobility that Brooks has... SO why is it that he is such a great QB??? Cause he has the TEAM first not his stats... 2 weeks ago against Miami 7 of 19 for 76 yards, but they won... Yes the D is better than ours and sure they were playing the Dolphins, but you cant compare statistics with results... fact is Brooks has better numbers than a ton of QBs, but I would take most of those QBs over Brooks simple because of their leadership, heart, and team first attitude... When it comes down to it you have to compare more than just stats... why is NFL draft combine so important? Cause there is alot more to it than just looking at stats...

Im sure Im not the only person who knows stats arent everything... and Im sure others will disagree with a few things I said, but I hope you can at least get the point I was trying to make...

[Edited on 21/10/2004 by SycoSurfer]

Mike D on Brooks
 

Thanx for the spelling lesson. He is not worth me getting his name right....Hebert....I agree had the heart of a lion.....I still think Brooks is the key to our success........Geaux Saints......

Mike D on Brooks
 

I guess I\'ll have to go NoSpin like O\'Reilly. Time for a fact check.
The 88.8 in the 2003 regular season was tied for 7th in the league.
Top 10 the last 3 years in TD passes. More TD passes over a 3 year period than any other Saints QB in history. Dropped the INTs from 22 in 2001 to 8 last year heading the pack for both least INTs thrown and highest TD/INT ratio.


The stats are all on http://nfl.com/stats . Even the 2001 stats are still there even though there isn\'t a link to it anymore. Simply choose a later year for the stat that you want, then change the year to 2001 in the URL.

But Brooks has proved it on the field just like the other guys. And 13 come from behind victories in the last 3 years points to having some semblance of ability to put together talent and guts to pull out the win from the jaws of defeat.

That\'s what I\'ve seen anyway.

SFIAH

Mike D on Brooks
 

Some snippage to keep it shorter...
Another \"Jake has been to the SB...\" cat has been dragged into the conversation again.

You\'re trying to play both sides of the fence. It doesn\'t work. Either heart, guts and leadership wins football games, or team and talent does. But you simply pick whichever item helps your agenda. Let\'s take them one by one:

1. Jake. Defense and running the ball got Carolina to the SB. Jake\'s job was to manage the offense, just like Dilfer did in 2000. Simply ask yourself if Brooks and Jake had swapped places would Carolina not gone anywhere and the Saints would be hoisting up the Lombardi Trophy? I don\'t think so.

2. Brady. Think he would have won 20 in a row if he were a Cardinal for example? New England is the smartest, most talented team from top to bottom. Why do you think I say that we get Romeo Crennel in here?

3. Defense wins football games. Let me repeat: Defense wins football games. Last I checked the Saints defense was dead last (32nd out of 32 teams) in both points and yards allowed. You could bring back Joe Montana or Jonny Unitas and they couldn\'t lead a team to victories against those odds.

It\'s gotten to the point where Brooks haters blame him for the waterboy tripping over a cord on the sidelines. \"If Brooks were smart and had leadership skills, then he would have known to move the cord before someone tripped over it. But if we had Jake or Brady, then the WB wouldn\'t have tripped.\" Sounds ridiculous, right?

You point has little substance. Any team that gives up 605 yards and 5 TDs in a game is going to lose. In fact should be flat blown out. The Saints only lost by 7 and scored a TD the last posession they had the ball.

So I guess Brooks should have strapped it up, and gone out with the defense and played safety or something to get the ball back to tie the game. That\'s being a team player with leadership I guess.

The guy isn\'t perfect. He has his problems and his issues. But Sheesh!

SFIAH

Mike D on Brooks
 

Honestly this tangent about Brooks is beyond stupid, it\'s bordering on retarded,with the notable exception of the Arizona fumble, Brooks has done more than any other player in this organization to put the team in a place to succeed. Maybe everyone should look around the rest of the league, go ahead it\'s OK, do you know what an unbiased set of eyes would find? a sea of mediocrity, with 2or 3 goliaths. Brooks will never be a Manning,Mcnabb, or Culpepper, but are they the only 3 quarterbacks going to the playoffs?
Fact is, if we had even the faintest premise of a defence, co-ordinated by someone with the vaguest ideas of what schemes are achievable, and staffed with true professionals then we would be singing a different tune. Whatever happened to the fearsome Saints D ? I can\'t wait to see Haslett canned, I just hope that Mr.Benson hires a strong enough Personality to whip these inconsistent millionaire primadonnas,
too bad Coughlin is gainfully employed. : :soleil:

Mike D on Brooks
 

Top 10 the last 3 years in TD passes. More TD passes over a 3 year period than any other Saints QB in history. Dropped the INTs from 22 in 2001 to 8 last year heading the pack for both least INTs thrown and highest TD/INT ratio.

One issue SaintfaninATL, did you factor in Brooks\' league leading 14 fumbles and 11 lost with his 8 INTs last year? Can\'t disagree with much else you said as I do think Brooks would be better with different coaches, but this is kinda fitting the argument to your liking as you said SYCO had done.

Also, can you find another Saints team in it\'s histor with as much talent on offense as this one? As a matter of fact, I question if you could take a team of all time greats from the entire history of the team on offense and make an offense as good as the one we have now. Brooks\' numbers are definitely a reflection of that.

[Edited on 21/10/2004 by saintswhodi]

Mike D on Brooks
 

Well, well well. I\'m in tears. You\'ll catch a LOT of heat for that statement, but not from me. ;) I recognize a fellow realist when I see one.

:yourock:

Mike D on Brooks
 

The problem you ppl have is you would rather try and make somone else look silly or try and shut them up instead of making a point. Yes Jake has been to a SuperBowl. Im not sitting here saying he is better than Brooks... However its a FACT he has been to a SuperBowl. I know he was in a better position with a better team, but wasnt he a backup at the begining of the season? However given a chance he proved he wasnt just an average backup QB. I think Brooks has more talent than Jake. He prolly has more talent than Brady too... However he hasnt been able to LEAD this team to anything. You all want to take one sentence from a post and reply on it to try and make someone look stupid. When did I say Jake was better? I didnt... I was just saying he had been to a SuperBowl.

Jake didnt have better numbers than Brooks... However he had wins. Brooks can pass the ball all over the field with our Offense. However if he cant lead us to wins he isnt a great QB. I know he has come from behind wins. Our team talent doesnt have anything to do with him winning a game in the 4th? He does play great at tymes, but he still plays average at others...

Im not just refering to one game that Brooks leadership has lead us to a lose. I know the Vikes had 605 yards... Ok so why did we lose to Tampa? Or Arizona? I know our team isnt playing great, but why is it that our DE and our QB are fighting? Brooks calling out the D maybe? Saying its their fault we lost? Do you know leaders that pick fights? The team doesnt get behind the guy then he cant lead them anywhere... I dont care how much talent a player has. If the team doesnt want to play with him he will not perform. Keyshawn Johnson didnt want to play in Tampa however you gonna tell me he isnt a solid WR? Why was he playing so bad there then? He didnt like the leadership... You think Carolina would have went to the SuperBowl with Roodney Pete? what about New England they didnt make it to the SuperBowl with Drew Bledsoe... I guess the team talent is the only reason they went... Bledsoe doesnt have a better arm than Brady right? The fact is Brady has less talent, but more leadership and heart... How many more talented QBs were there when Joe Montana played?However who was the best QB of that tyme? The thing is that it is a team game no matter how you look at it. They all have to work together so you picking on the defense isnt gonna help the Saints win. Neither will picking on the Offense... Im just saying that the Saints have more problems than just an inconsistent QB. We need to get the D playing better. We need to get some WRs to catch the balls that hit them in the hands. We need to find OL who know how to block for more than 2 seconds... The list goes on... I hope you get the point... But Im sure you wont...

Mike D on Brooks
 

Syco,

Look at you makin\' good points all over the place. We have certainly picked up a couple of good posters over the last two weeks. Welcome, in case I forgot to before.

Here is something you\'ve said, that I\'d like to discuss: \"However if he cant lead us to wins he isnt a great QB.\"

Do you really think this is true? I know this is kind of an old argument, but I\'ll make it again. (Notice the numbering of the points to make it seem more badazz - read convincing - than it is.)

1. Football is a team sport, but individual players have skills and talents that make them good/bad independent of who plays around them. This is how scouts make decisions about who to draft, trade for, etc.
2. The player is evaluated as an individual when it comes to assessing his draft status, trade value, etc.
3. Whether the team wins or loses does not depend on one player\'s skills and talents, but a combination of his with the other players and the game plan.

Thus, when a team does not win, I don\'t see how it reflects on the skills or talents of any one player. Sure sometimes it is the case that one player costs the team the game and sometimes one guy wins it for you, but more often than not that is not the case (and even then an argument can be made that it is the team that puts the player in a position - with respect to score, etc - to win or lose the game).

Thus, I don\'t see how winning or losing can have much to do with whether or not some guy is good (with respect to skill and talent), or even great, at his position, regardless of the position.

What say you?

Mike D on Brooks
 

[quote:55af1b5486]Well, I personally don\'t get why people compare AB to Deuce or Horn. I mean, let\'s consider:

I compared their EFFORT. Are you saying if this was Favre playing the same way Brooks playing you \'ll let it slide. Do you see how stupid that sound? Yes, Brooks haven\'t made it to the Probowl but he is putting the effort in to make it this year. Brooks can\'t help it that the WR want hold on to the ball.

My question is what last year performance have anything to do with Brooks being blame for the team fault this year? People blame him for his fumbling the ball but most of those fumbles came from one game LAST YEAR \'S lost that he had a hand in helping to keep the game close. MY QUESTION TO ALL BROOKS HATER, NAME A PLAYER ON OFFENSE THAT YOU SEE PUTTING MORE EFFORT IN WINNING? If you can\'t find one then why not BOO the team and not single out one player? Let it be known I think it is kinda foolish booing anyone even Tsucky so soon in the season.

Mike D on Brooks
 

You didn\'t ask me, but I agree. So then, here\'s a question:

What or why is it that you think someone with relative football savy would continue to blame ONE player...even for an OBVIOUS mistake made by another player?

AND

How do some manage to justify ONE player\'s worth based on wins and losses when it\'s clearly a team game?

Mike D on Brooks
 

Kool I totally agree and I prolly worded it wrong, but you get the point... I mean a great QB has the ability to carry a team to victories... I know Brooks is a solid QB, but I dont feel he can take a game over like a GREAT QB can. Brooks does put up great numbers, but I think that is based on the system and the talent we have. With a wide open offense like we have Brooks should put up big numbers every year. Trent Green isnt a great QB, but he has put up numbers... I know its not all him, but you get the point. Brooks wasnt a 1st round draft pick for a reason. He had all the physical skills, but the leadership and mental parts of the game were suspect... Teams sumtymes take a chance with a physically gifted athlete as Green Bay did. However they traded him for a reason... I think he has the chance to do special things if he can ever learn how to read Defenses, audible, throw it away... and just all in all become the LEADER of this team... Some teams take chances on leaders with less physical skills... Thats kinda how Tom Brady got where he is... He learned what he needed to learn and put it all together... Brooks needs to do that to become great... Just my opinion...

Mike D on Brooks
 

Ah. So, as I\'m sure most of us suspected, it seems as though W/L are EVIDENCE that some player or other is good or bad, but that isn\'t the whole story. Furthermore, W/L isn\'t even that great evidence is it, since, as SF points out, it is a team game? With that, I agree.

SF, you know what I think about this.

Syco, in a different thread I considered a question about whether or not Brooks has missed his prime developmental period due to being mishandled by Haz - if you spot that, I\'d like to hear what you have to say about it.

[Edited on 21/10/2004 by JKool]

Mike D on Brooks
 

Holy S#*t Whodi! That statement about best ever offense is bold.
Not saying it\'s untrue, just bold.
Who would be on the best ever Saints offense, of the past?
Willie Roaf, Kyle Turley, Jay Hilgenberg, Brad Eddleman, Steve Korte, Eric Martin, Hoby Brenner and/or John Tice, Terrelle Smith, Ricky Williams, Dalton Hilliard
Who would be Archie\'s backup? Hebert or Everet
Who else?

Mike D on Brooks
 

Stan Brock.

Mike D on Brooks
 

Oh yeah, and this may be unpopular, but I\'d take Iron Head over T-Rex.

Mike D on Brooks
 

Yeah I was thinking about Ironhead, He would be the better runner for sure, and Smith the better blocker.

Mike D on Brooks
 

FOB,

I know it was bold and in my haste to make the staement I did not take into account the O-line, although I believe Bentley will be one of our greats. Also, I was thinking mainly along the lines of skill positions and Deuce was the crux of my offense. IMO, he is the best Saints rb of all time. I may be crucified for making that statement, but I will stand by it. You will be hard pressed to find a group of players on the Saints offense all-time better than the one we have now. By the way, Dalton Hilliard is my fav Saint of all time, but Deuce is still the best we have had. Mainly, just look at it pure talent wise and I may be right. lol