saintswhodi |
02-24-2006 11:05 AM |
Like I said, full of it.
Quote:
You say that a pro QB can't turn his career around after so many years....Payton did it with Bledsoe...why not Brooks?
|
Um, cause Bledsoe was one of the most prolific passers EVER with NE, and even took his team to a SUPERBOWL. And he wasn't bad with Buffalo, until they got rid of Price and his O-line went to swiss cheese, coupled with the fact he is a statue. THAT'S why not Brooks.
Quote:
His first 2-3 years here were pretty good man.
|
FALSE. a 76.4 rating and an 80 rating while barely completing 55% of your passes IS NOT PRETTY GOOD, unless mediocrity is a goal to strive for.
Quote:
He was more accurate, more responsible, and the team was also in better shape.
|
What a load. Brooks has NEVER EVER been described as anyone rational as ACCURATE, or responsible. This is how I know you are full of it. Even guys who jock him don't call him accurate. This may be the first time I have EVER heard that term used to describe Aaron Brooks? And responsible? This has to be a joke.
Quote:
As time went on we lost key players and coaching obviously became a joke
|
Yup, we are the only NFL team that loses players. Excuse.
Quote:
One year we ranked 31 out of 32 in the league in yards alloed by the defense,
|
Excuse.
Quote:
next we lead the league in FALSE STARTS
|
Excuse, but got a link?
Quote:
almost 2 years in a row we lead the league in turnovers( I am aware that Broooks was partially responsible for that part),
|
The guy who committs the MOST turnovers on the team is PARTIALLY responsible? Do you even read what you're typing? 2003, he led the league in lost fumbles(half when he was untouched) 2004 he led the league in red zone turnovers. Last year he was just pathetic, and he is PARTIALLY responsible? Wow.
Quote:
when things were good.....Brooks was more competent but theam was also much more cohesive.
|
BS.
|