WhoDat and Saintfan sound off on Brooks
 

A couple of comments. One, leaders cannot be made or taught. You can be taught to be a better manager. You cannot be taught to be a better leader. You\'ve got it or you don\'t. Brooks don\'t. ;) Maybe he can become a better manager of the game, but never a better leader... in my opinion.

And you\'re absolutely right about Jimmy Johnson. Haslett is doing the same thing with Brooks. Most probably, one of us will be right. Either Brooks will become a star and for the rest of your life you can follow up anything I say with an I told you so, or he\'ll flop and I\'ll be able to do the same to you... although I hope neither of us gives the other TOO hard of a time since we all win some lose some.

In any case, I think Haslett is sticking with Brooks to his own demise. The knock on Brooks has been that he doesn\'t work hard. I\'ve seen it written in the papers, I\'ve heard it on TV. Now, you\'ll probably blow evey single one of those accounts off as total hogwash b/c Haslett has said Brooks isn\'t a hard worker, but c\'mon. Does the man look like he\'s trying really hard to figure out what other teams are doing on defense when he\'s on the sidelines? Does he ever have the headsets on? Do you ever see him looking at film? Never!!! So why would you think that he spends other time watching game tapes?

WhoDat and Saintfan sound off on Brooks
 

Honestly, I don\'t see a camera following Aaron, so I can\'t tell you whether or not he\'s looking at film or talking to the recievers or what. You must have one of those wide screen TV\'s, because my TV doesn\'t show the sideline constantly. hehe :P I do remember Donte\' dropping a pass. He said afterwards, on the sideline, Brooks came over to him and told him not to sweat it...that he would be looking for him again. Donte\' scored a TD in that game and gave Aaron credit for his sideline motivation. He said it helped him and that he appreciated it. So....

...as for leadership, I disagree totally. I\'ll grant you that some people are natural born leaders while others aren\'t, but to say someone can\'t learn the leadership skill is selling humanity short. C\'mon WhoDat, people can learn to be leaders. Some people are leaders while others prefer to follow, so I\'ll agree that some people just aren\'t made to lead, but to say a person cannot learn to lead if they have the desire to do so just plain ain\'t right. Leading has as much to do with the desire to do it as it does being given a natural born talent. Not every General went through West Point man.

Now, what I have heard and read is people speculating as to whether or not Brooks works hard...it generally follows up some sort of comment about him smiling, but what I have NOT heard or read is someone stating it flat out...factually! What I have read and heard is his coaches and teammates saying how hard he works in practice. I haven\'t heard anything contrary to that that wasn\'t speculation coming from someone who has no inside track with which to base his/her opinion.

WhoDat and Saintfan sound off on Brooks
 

You\'re right, I forgot about his work ethic in practice. Like all those snaps he DIDN\'T take during the last month of the season... but he was hurt... or wait, no he wasn\'t... well, he was hurt enough not to practice but not hurt enough to be affected in a game. Which makes total sense to me! ;)

About leadership, I think we have a different opion (imagine that) on what it means to lead. A true leader to me, is two things and two things only. 1. A visionary. 2. A motivator. A great leader can be a bad manager. You can\'t teach a person to be visionary... sorry, there\'s just no way. You can teach motivation, but people are smart. You know how you can tell if a person is just a \"people person\" versus one who is trying to motivate. I don\'t know about you but people who \"try\" usually fail with me.

Now, part of being a good NFL quarterback is being a good manager. Telling people where to be, holding them accountable for their actions, calling the shots. All of that stuff can generally be taught. Be, in my opinion, you cannot be taught to be a leader. You got it, or you don\'t got it. Kind of like natural ability.

Another problem is that I don\'t see Brooks progressing a lot overall. When he improves one area, another suffers. I mean, I don\'t remember him back pedaling in his first year and a half. I also don\'t remember him throwing the ball away much - so in this case he\'s gotten better. He runs less, which can go either way in terms of good or bad... In any case, there are a million things. The point is that for every good thing he does there is at least one bad. It never seems to me like the good is beginning to outweigh the bad, but rather that the two are simply getting shuffled around but staying in a state of equilibrium.

WhoDat and Saintfan sound off on Brooks
 

Maybe if you gave the man more than 2 seasons to pass judgement on him your opinion might be different. If you and some others in here were to have passed judgement of some of today\'s great QB\'s NONE of \'em would be in the NFL. Patience is a virtue. If you weren\'t so quick to judge you might have a different opinion. Now, about practice. If you\'d read much about the situation you\'d know the following:

The injury Brooks had didn\'t necessarilly hinder his throwing motion, but what it did in fact do, according to Doctors, and for that Matter Jake Delhomme, who by the way had the very same injury in college, was cause the arm to be fatigued quicker than normal. This was the biggest issue according to anyone and everyone who was close to the situation. I have to think, adding one and one to get to two, that this is why Jim sat him down during the practice.

What I\'ll suggest to you and anyone else who thinks AB doesn\'t have what it takes is to remember those players that were told they didn\'t have what it took, but made it anyway. Have some Patience with Brooks, and I bet before too much longer you\'ll be glad you did.

WhoDat and Saintfan sound off on Brooks
 

Hey Saintfan, I\'ve said before and I\'ll say it again. Aaron Brooks may be an NFL great some day. I don\'t see that happening next year, or the year after, or the year after. In fact given the Saints history with QBs I would bet it won\'t happen while he\'s wearing black and gold. I\'d rather have a quarterback who can help us win now than have to deal with Brooks for the next five years until he finally comes around. Normally, I\'m not like this. I the poster boy for delayed gratification... however, with this team\'s talent and the ease at which it can slip away, I\'m not particularly interested in waiting for Brooks to mature. (which, by the way, I\'m still not sure he can do).

One other thing... when can we begin to hold Brooks accountable? In the middle of next season when he\'s started for three straight years, after next season, after his fourth season as a starter, fifth...? When, in your mind, can you say, OK, he has to start producing now?

WhoDat and Saintfan sound off on Brooks
 

The question really isn\'t when, but what. What is it exactly that you would like to hold him accountable for? It seems as though everyone wants to make his the scape goat for the problems at the end of the season. The bottom line is that, as another posted said so well, you can all say what you\'d like to about Brooks, but ultimately he had the Saints in position to win the vikings game AND the carolina game. Poor defense, fumbles, and dropped passes are what kept us out of the playoffs...period, end of story.

Gripe about Brooks all you want, but I\'ve said it before and I\'ll say it again and again. He is NOT NOT NOT NOT NOT the problem nor is he where the focus should be. He\'s an easy target, plain and simple. The Eagles fans bood the selection of their current QB. The Vikings fans were ready to can Culpepper earlier this year. Tampa Bays current QB was run out of Minnesota. Oaklands current QB was run out of Kansas City. I think you get the point.

WhoDat and Saintfan sound off on Brooks
 

BOOOOOOO Brooks, BOOOOOOOO!!

He is not THE problem on this team, but I think that\'s a good thing for you. If the defense gets better next year and plays like it did in days gone by, he WILL be THE problem, and then there\'s no place for him to hide. No way for the coaches to direct attention to other BIGGER problems. Just b/c the defense is bad doesn\'t mean Brooks is good. It means he is not as bad. If they get better, that relative scal swings against him... and then there\'s gonna be trouble.

WhoDat and Saintfan sound off on Brooks
 

It\'s too bad that you feel that way, because as Brooks continues to set Saints records for passing what will you do WhoDat? Will you really be able to enjoy the bandwagon as much then?

The question remains, if you wanna hold Brooks accountable, what is it exactly that you wanna hold him accountable for? You gonna make him accountable for the fumbles and dropped passes that cost the Saints the playoffs? Maybe you\'d like to hold him accountable for the falling stockmarket and the world economy too. This guy has come in here and played better than any Saints QB since Manning and you all still wanna paste him to the wall. Talk about his footwork or a selection of poor throws if you want, but I\'m still wondering what it is exactly that you hold Aaron responsible for.

WhoDat and Saintfan sound off on Brooks
 

...and another thing. If the defense this year had played as well as they have in days gone by, I think our average 27 points a game would have been just fine, don\'t you? If we had that kind of defense this year we would have made it. Of course you\'d still be complaining about Brooks. Maybe you\'re just not happy with the economy. Yeah, thats it. Or was it the stockmarket? Whatever the case, you would have blamed Aaron sure as shootin\'.

WhoDat and Saintfan sound off on Brooks
 

I don\'t understand why you think that I have some vendetta against Aaron Brooks. I can be convinced, I haven\'t been yet. I was in awe of what he did in the second half of 2000, and like the rest of you I thought he was the guy. I pulled for him over Blake. However, after seeing more of him, my opinion has changed. We value different things at the quarterback position, apparently, and I think we have different ideas about what type of player the Saints QB should be.

In a west coast offense you don\'t need a guy with quick feet or a great arm. Those things certainly make a QB better. However, the most important things in a west coast offense are smarts and efficiency. A good west coast QB reads the defense well, knows where to go with the ball before the play starts, and gets rid of the ball quickly, never expecting to be the star, but letting his playmakers make plays. Does that sound like Aaron Brooks to you?

Aaron\'s weak spots are the two most important things in the Saints\' system. He is strong in a lot of other areas, but they are ancillary. Also, I\'m confused Saintfan - the dropped passes and the fumbles are the receivers and backs fault, but the completions and touchdowns are all Brooks? Stallworth probably scored 5 touchdowns this past season by himself. Did he drop five passes that cost us the game? Did he drop five catchable passes period?

Dude, I\'m not blaming Brooks for the late season collapse. I think he was certainly part of it, but there were a lot of other things that contributed to that collapse. You want to talk about how Boo Williams or Jake Reed dropped sure touchdowns, nevermind the fact that Aaron was 0-11 in his last 11 against the Bengals. Seriously, think about it. Give him five more completions a game in both of the last two games (were there more than 5 dropped passes in each of those games?) That brings his QB rating up to what, 40, 50? That still sucks.