Food for thought

saintswhodi · 11-14-2005, 04:36 PM

Originally Posted by papz

I agree with your diagnosis Dr. LoE. That explains everything.

How about pathological liar? Can you add that disorder Dr. LOE? Don't people with this disorder usually make an attempt to explain away their lies, like making a thread called my explanation for blatantly lying to back up a false point?

yasoon · 11-14-2005, 04:36 PM

I don't rememeber posting anything about what Aaron Brooks numbers are. That was never in my discussion...

Hmmmm.....I'm not sure if you read the post that started this thread. It was relative to ABs forthcoming outing against the Pats.

You said:

I'm thinking he'll have a Jake Delhomme type game...He'll f*-up.

Which in turn leads people to explore which of the 2 guys are playing better because you chose to attack Jake as part of an AB discussion. I posted the numbers. They speak for themselves.

I said a long time ago that people should get over the fact that Jake is gone. What's done is done, right or wrong.

In this case, you slammed Jake outside of the context of the discussion. (Nobody mentioned Jake....he will probably have nothing to do with ABs game this week.) I retorted with what I like to call a series of facts. They don't support a forthcoming Jake-like performance as being worse than a forthcoming AB-like performance.

If you polled coaches and GMs around the league as to which QB they want on their team, I think you would find Jake would get at least 90% of the responses. You using him to either deflect criticism or support AB, is futile and pathetic.

Jake is in a better situation. I'll give him that..... But, that doesn't mean AB would not lose games for the Cats if given the chance. Such hypothetical crap is a waste of time. Every situation is different. But AB has regressed to a turd who is the mascot for Saints underachievement in the new millenium.

I'm not a basher. Last night someone said we beat the Rams in the playoffs cuz Hakim dropped the ball. That's not correct. AB played well and got us a lead, the defense gave it up and we got a break late. I give AB credit when he deserves it. I'm not a one trick pony like some folks. The problem is that AB doesn't deserve credit for much of anything this year. He's not getting better, he's regressing. Face the facts big daddy.

saintswhodi · 11-14-2005, 04:37 PM

Originally Posted by BlackonBlack

For a first year starter? Possibly in the Superbowl. Why yes in the superbowl. Throwing three TDs and no INTs against a dynasty. Let's look at a 4 year starter since you like to live in the past, since NOTHING from the past two years remotely justifies what you are saying:

13 fumbles/16INts/21TDs. What do you expect a team's record to be when their FOUR YEAR STARTER has these numbers? LMAO!!! You lose again. Just quit doing it to yourself. We can look at Jake in his second year as a starter if you want:

29 TDs 15NTs, on a team without it's number one receiver, and two starting RBs, losing a starting offensive lineman to retirement, and two more to injury. YOU LOSE!!!!! Give it up. Nobody buys that BS explanation to explain your lies, nobody is buying this crap you are spitting now. F-R-A-U-D.

My post wasn't meant for you, it was meant for the sane. You Sir don't speak for anyone other than yourself, so don't respond to my posts as nobody buys that b.s. (you are the only nobody).

My posts don't reflect any mention of Brooks's numbers are what he's done...First year starter, or not doesn't account for where that team ended up with the porous play by their QB. And since 2003 he's gotten no better.

Oh, I see. F-R-A-U-D.

saintswhodi · 11-14-2005, 05:00 PM

Originally Posted by BlackonBlack

But AB has regressed to a turd who is the mascot for Saints underachievement in the new millenium.

And Jake has regressed as well...

Yet another lie. His passer rating has gone up for 3 straight years, while Brooks' has gone down. Noone takes you seriously cause you lie to make false points. Tell the truth for once, and half the board wouldn't be riding your ignorant statements.

saintswhodi · 11-14-2005, 05:30 PM

Once again, you have NO IDEA what you are talking about. Carolina is 24th in the league in rushing, we are 13th. They only attempt three more rushes per game than us. How can you look at Jake Delhomme and say he has gotten WORSE, and look at Aaron Brooks and not see he has gone from bad to terrible? So we rush the ball WAY better than they do, and Aaron Brooks still has a bottom feeder of a passer rating, while Jake is near the top. Stop embarrassing yourself. And what does passing for less than 200 yards have to do with anything? I bet Kyle Orton passes for under two hundred yards every week, and the Bears still win. So what? that's no point at all. The mighty Aaron Brooks has passed for under 200 yards 6 times this season. SIX OUTOF NINE GAMES!! Delhomme has only done it twice. On 40 less attempts he has more yards and TDs than Aaron Brooks. Just go away.

And the reason you ran from that other thread to make that dumb arse "my explanation" thread is cause half the board was slamming that BS. Get real.

saintswhodi · 11-14-2005, 05:39 PM

and he regularly has under 200 yard games which may account for his stellar rating because his team won't let him throw the ball.

What's your point again? you said this, and now can;t back it up. What is regularly, 2 out of nine games? I think for soem reasonwhen you watch the Saints play, you see Delhomme instead of Brooks. You want embarrassing?

27/45 1 TD 3 INTs and a fumble
http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/live/NFL_20050919_NYG@NO

12/32 199 yards 1 TD 2 INTs
http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/live/NFL_20050925_NO@MIN

Quit embarrassing yourself. That's just week two and three.

saintswhodi · 11-14-2005, 05:40 PM

Two out of 9 games under 200 yards, as opposed to 6 out of 9 games under 200 yards. I killed you with your own BS stat. You are too funny.

saintswhodi · 11-14-2005, 05:42 PM

Originally Posted by BlackonBlack

Slightly over embarassment. 11/18 for 216 yards and a TD.

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/live/NFL_20051106_CAR@TB

Wait, that's over 200 yards. What you said was:

and he regularly has under 200 yard games which may account for his stellar rating because his team won't let him throw the ball.

As normal, you can't back it up. Dude, you are sorry.

saintswhodi · 11-14-2005, 05:44 PM

Wait, that is NOT UNDER 200 YARDS, like you said happened REGULARLY. Do you realize the more you post stats over 200 yards, the dumber you look? Nope, I don't think you realize, whichmakes it even funnier. By all means, continue. LMAO!!!

saintswhodi · 11-14-2005, 05:46 PM

Wait, so I am about to kill this stupidity once and for all: If those stats are embarrassing for Jake, and he has twice as many TDs and LESS INTs than AB, who is really getting embarrassed by you posting that? You're done.

11-14-2005, 04:36 PM	#11
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	Originally Posted by papz I agree with your diagnosis Dr. LoE. That explains everything. How about pathological liar? Can you add that disorder Dr. LOE? Don't people with this disorder usually make an attempt to explain away their lies, like making a thread called my explanation for blatantly lying to back up a false point?

11-14-2005, 04:36 PM	#12
yasoon 500th Post Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 594	I don't rememeber posting anything about what Aaron Brooks numbers are. That was never in my discussion... Hmmmm.....I'm not sure if you read the post that started this thread. It was relative to ABs forthcoming outing against the Pats. You said: I'm thinking he'll have a Jake Delhomme type game...He'll f*-up. Which in turn leads people to explore which of the 2 guys are playing better because you chose to attack Jake as part of an AB discussion. I posted the numbers. They speak for themselves. I said a long time ago that people should get over the fact that Jake is gone. What's done is done, right or wrong. In this case, you slammed Jake outside of the context of the discussion. (Nobody mentioned Jake....he will probably have nothing to do with ABs game this week.) I retorted with what I like to call a series of facts. They don't support a forthcoming Jake-like performance as being worse than a forthcoming AB-like performance. If you polled coaches and GMs around the league as to which QB they want on their team, I think you would find Jake would get at least 90% of the responses. You using him to either deflect criticism or support AB, is futile and pathetic. Jake is in a better situation. I'll give him that..... But, that doesn't mean AB would not lose games for the Cats if given the chance. Such hypothetical crap is a waste of time. Every situation is different. But AB has regressed to a turd who is the mascot for Saints underachievement in the new millenium. I'm not a basher. Last night someone said we beat the Rams in the playoffs cuz Hakim dropped the ball. That's not correct. AB played well and got us a lead, the defense gave it up and we got a break late. I give AB credit when he deserves it. I'm not a one trick pony like some folks. The problem is that AB doesn't deserve credit for much of anything this year. He's not getting better, he's regressing. Face the facts big daddy.
yasoon 500th Post Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 594

11-14-2005, 04:37 PM	#13
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	Originally Posted by BlackonBlack For a first year starter? Possibly in the Superbowl. Why yes in the superbowl. Throwing three TDs and no INTs against a dynasty. Let's look at a 4 year starter since you like to live in the past, since NOTHING from the past two years remotely justifies what you are saying: 13 fumbles/16INts/21TDs. What do you expect a team's record to be when their FOUR YEAR STARTER has these numbers? LMAO!!! You lose again. Just quit doing it to yourself. We can look at Jake in his second year as a starter if you want: 29 TDs 15NTs, on a team without it's number one receiver, and two starting RBs, losing a starting offensive lineman to retirement, and two more to injury. YOU LOSE!!!!! Give it up. Nobody buys that BS explanation to explain your lies, nobody is buying this crap you are spitting now. F-R-A-U-D. My post wasn't meant for you, it was meant for the sane. You Sir don't speak for anyone other than yourself, so don't respond to my posts as nobody buys that b.s. (you are the only nobody). My posts don't reflect any mention of Brooks's numbers are what he's done...First year starter, or not doesn't account for where that team ended up with the porous play by their QB. And since 2003 he's gotten no better. Oh, I see. F-R-A-U-D.

11-14-2005, 05:00 PM	#14
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	Originally Posted by BlackonBlack But AB has regressed to a turd who is the mascot for Saints underachievement in the new millenium. And Jake has regressed as well... Yet another lie. His passer rating has gone up for 3 straight years, while Brooks' has gone down. Noone takes you seriously cause you lie to make false points. Tell the truth for once, and half the board wouldn't be riding your ignorant statements.

11-14-2005, 05:42 PM	#18
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	Originally Posted by BlackonBlack Slightly over embarassment. 11/18 for 216 yards and a TD. http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/live/NFL_20051106_CAR@TB Wait, that's over 200 yards. What you said was: and he regularly has under 200 yard games which may account for his stellar rating because his team won't let him throw the ball. As normal, you can't back it up. Dude, you are sorry.

Latest Blogs
2023 New Orleans Saints: Training Camp Last Blog: 08-01-2023 By: MarchingOn Puck the Fro Browl! Last Blog: 02-05-2023 By: neugey CFP: "Just Keep Doing What You're Doing" Last Blog: 12-08-2022 By: neugey

11-14-2005, 05:30 PM	#15
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	Once again, you have NO IDEA what you are talking about. Carolina is 24th in the league in rushing, we are 13th. They only attempt three more rushes per game than us. How can you look at Jake Delhomme and say he has gotten WORSE, and look at Aaron Brooks and not see he has gone from bad to terrible? So we rush the ball WAY better than they do, and Aaron Brooks still has a bottom feeder of a passer rating, while Jake is near the top. Stop embarrassing yourself. And what does passing for less than 200 yards have to do with anything? I bet Kyle Orton passes for under two hundred yards every week, and the Bears still win. So what? that's no point at all. The mighty Aaron Brooks has passed for under 200 yards 6 times this season. SIX OUTOF NINE GAMES!! Delhomme has only done it twice. On 40 less attempts he has more yards and TDs than Aaron Brooks. Just go away. And the reason you ran from that other thread to make that dumb arse "my explanation" thread is cause half the board was slamming that BS. Get real.

11-14-2005, 05:39 PM	#16
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	and he regularly has under 200 yard games which may account for his stellar rating because his team won't let him throw the ball. What's your point again? you said this, and now can;t back it up. What is regularly, 2 out of nine games? I think for soem reasonwhen you watch the Saints play, you see Delhomme instead of Brooks. You want embarrassing? 27/45 1 TD 3 INTs and a fumble http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/live/NFL_20050919_NYG@NO 12/32 199 yards 1 TD 2 INTs http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/live/NFL_20050925_NO@MIN Quit embarrassing yourself. That's just week two and three.

11-14-2005, 05:40 PM	#17
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	Two out of 9 games under 200 yards, as opposed to 6 out of 9 games under 200 yards. I killed you with your own BS stat. You are too funny.

11-14-2005, 05:44 PM	#19
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	Wait, that is NOT UNDER 200 YARDS, like you said happened REGULARLY. Do you realize the more you post stats over 200 yards, the dumber you look? Nope, I don't think you realize, whichmakes it even funnier. By all means, continue. LMAO!!!

11-14-2005, 05:46 PM	#20
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	Wait, so I am about to kill this stupidity once and for all: If those stats are embarrassing for Jake, and he has twice as many TDs and LESS INTs than AB, who is really getting embarrassed by you posting that? You're done.