Media Agenda???
 

Like most Saints' fans, I read several articles on the Saints from a variety of sources. And, of course, I hear from Saints fans both in person and on the internet.

Everyone has an opinion on what is wrong with the Saints. Myself included. But some media outlet and fans have agendas.

Take this site for example. Over the years you come to know who has an agenda and who doesn't. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with having an agenda.... However, most of those folks will never admit they have an agenda.

Well, it seems Aaron Brooks has become the focus of most agendas. Both by the media and fans. Some of you who are reading this right now know exactly who and what I'm talking about.

I don't have the time to drag it out of the "Agenda Hounds", nor the desire.

But, let me just say this -- I've watched Brooks this year and I've been disappointed in some of the decisions he's made. It's been an off year for Brooks. Not terribly good or bad. But, he's certainly not responsible of our 5-8 record.

Anyone who knows anything about football at all knows our offensive line is a JOKE. Brooks gets instant pressure on too many occasions and even the best of QB's often make mistakes. That 1-extra second in the pocket can and usually does make all the difference in the world.

Beyond that .... We are ranked 29th in rushing offense. Defenses are just teeing off against the pass, with no regard for the running game.

To make matters worse, our defense is allowing the most rushing yards, passing yards, and more importantly... THE MOST POINTS!!

Brooks has thrown the ball more than any other QB in the league. Of course his INTs are up, whose wouldn't be? He's still having no worse year than Matt Hasselback, Tom Brady, or some other QB's around the league.

Most folks know all of this,... Still, there are those out there who think Brooks is the promblem and to be honest, Brooks has made a few bad decisions and I want them corrected. Nevertheless... I know Brooks isn't the problem. But, to some, he's the problem.

Watch out for sports writers and fans who preach that stuff. They're just pushing their agenda...

.....Not that there's anything wrong with that.

Media Agenda???
 

Halo,

Is there any way we can ban the word \"agenda\" with the other dirty words, so that when you type it, it\'ll simply show as if you typed ****, *****, or ****nut?

Media Agenda???
 

I am not sure where I stand on Brooks -- I am not sure he is ever going to be a consistent enough QB for the Saints and it may be better for both organizations if he leaves. That said one thing I can say for sure is that we have many more important holes to fill before we start worrying about replacing the QB. If and when we get the linebacker, Cornerback and Offensive linemen we so desperately need we can then evaluate our quarterback needs and desires.

Media Agenda???
 

That would never work.... Then I would just type agen*a. Or maybe that would bug you as much.... :P J/K

What\'s up with the word \"agenda\". ???

Media Agenda???
 

See, this is where I have to disagree. I think part of the reason the o-line is so terrible is because of Brooks. NOT ALL, PART. Case in point. Went to the Dallas game with my homie, a Cowboys fan, and his impression before the game was \"Brooks is a pretty good qb.\" This sentiment was echoed by many sitting around me in the stands. \"Better watch Brooks he can hurt us.\" All it took was the first series for them to change their minds. Brooks badly underthrew a receiver on a crossing pattern and the receiver was wide open, ball hit the turf. The Cowboys came up into a run blitz on second well before the snap and play clock in the teens, Brooks made no attempt to audible and the play was run right into the blitz, predictably Deuce stopped behind the line for a loss. Next play, another bad throw, ON THE FIRST SERIES. They jumped off the Brooks is good bandwagon that quick. And they also noticed like I did it takes Brooks a count longer to step back from center than the lineman when the ball is snapped. It\'s like he has no urgency to back up. Surely your line will be bad when you are even with the qb A COUNT AFTER THE SNAP. He should already be behind you. Brooks\' best passes and our best pass blocking came in the shotgun. We had no false start penalties in the game and I don\'t remember any holding. Brooks had all kinds of time to throw all day. He still throws a red zone INT and misses open receivers. Call it an agenda if you want, but bad qb play after 4 years as a starter is bad qb play, and that\'s Brooks. Now if we go to a shotgun offense like Minnesota does a lot, I would be glad to keep him, but that eliminates Deuce as a viable weapon.

Also, maybe the problem with the defense has been our offenses inability to DO ANYTHING in the first quarter. Part of this blame goes to the coaches but part has to go to Brooks. The way he started the Cowboys game was terrible. I really liked the o-line as the game went on. They definitely got better and opened more holes. But Brooks was only under pressure a handful of plays and he still looked terrible.

Media Agenda???
 

Yes I could, but I think this was meant as a joke. I get it.

Media Agenda???
 

I could stop every variation of the word also, but I know we don\'t have to go there. It\'s a long story Billy, you\'ve been out of the loop. PM me and I\'ll answer you back later today to give you some scoop.

[Edited on 12/15/2004 by Halo]

Media Agenda???
 

I will come out of my self-imposed hiatus just long enough to say that I, for one, have been forbidden to use the word \"agenda\" on this site. What\'s interesting is the one guy with the biggest agenda is the one who caused all the drama. Sure, there are few people here who tired of the \"agenda\" discussion and together (all 4 of \'em) managed to get the word semi-banned, but then there are just as many of us who can readily see this agenda, and what about us?

The rules as they are now prohibit me or anyone else from pointing to an agenda even if said agenda is clearly present. I might better understand the banning of the word if it weren\'t fit for children, but I understand why it was quasi-banned, and the reason is:

Those with the most obvious agenda didn\'t like some of us callin\' \'em on it, and that, my friends and fellow Saints Fans, is the truth, the whole truth, and nothin\' but the truth.

By the way, Happy Holidays To You All...even those with an agenda!

Media Agenda???
 

Wow, look at that. The two musketeers are back.

There are definitely two people on this board who have an agenda. Two people who are mad that they were wrong about the coach, wrong about the team, and wrong about the quarterback. They scream about this unnamed source, for anyone wondering, it\'s me, and suggest that I have purposely tried to get AB thrown off the Saints for no good reason. It\'s laughable to think I would or could.

Most ironic though, is that they now come to this board to further their pro-Brooks and anti-Whodat agendas by suggesting that most of the posters on this board, the media, analysts, etc. all have an agenda, and they, the two who can really see the light, truly know what\'s best for the team. Then, in the next breath, they criticize others for thinking they might know a little something too.

Why don\'t you two turn your attention to Danno\'s Anti-Horn agenda huh? The two musketeers, defenders of the tang induced goggle world!! LOL

Merry Christmas right back at you. :)

Media Agenda???
 

Well, I should\'ve agenda known, the first agenda to agenda, was gonna come back and agenda with the original agenda. I\'m very agenda, guys. Agenda the agenda, then get back to me. Everyone, have a merry agenda.