Brooks"I owned them pretty much the whole night with my eyes

WhoDat · 09-11-2003, 11:58 AM

You\'re reaching again Whodat, and so are all the other people in this thread who simply cannot seem to get over the fact that Brooks is the starter. NOW you people are talkin\' about O\'Sullivan and \"BO-MAN\"? Are you serious? I can\'t help but to laugh at the shortsightedness that goes on in here sometimes. I\'d like to say I can\'t believe what I\'m hearing, but from certain posters it\'s nothing new. You guys hide behind statistics when it suits you and then toss \'em out the window when it doesn\'t.

First of all Saintfan - find me one time that I ever called for Bouman or O\'Sullivan.

Second - Apparently, from your post, you don\'t believe that 38 games as a starter, 2 playoff games, and 5 seasons in the league is enough time for a QB to develop - is that correct? If we\'re paying Brooks to be a TOP 5 quarterback, how long do we have to wait before we can expect him to be one? I think you\'d have us wait until the man retires from the league, all the while suggesting that he IS a top 5 qb right now. Is that what you believe? Do you feel that he is an elite QB in the league RIGHT NOW?

If you were Eagles fans you\'d be ready to get rid of McNab...after all he\'s never won a superbowl...you\'d be ready to fire the coach for the same reason, but you\'d completely ignore all the dropped passes and Lack of protection he got...or wait...maybe you\'d give Tampa\'s defense the credit and cut Donovan and the coach some slack. Afterall, it\'s Brooks you guys seem to have the vendeta against. Anyone else is given the benefit of the doubt.

Interesting - do you want to tell me how I think or feel about anything else while you\'re at it Saintfan? The fact that you\'re comparing Brooks to McNabb favorably makes me sick to my stomach. Are you suggesting that Brooks is as good a QB as McNabb? Oh, and who are McNabb\'s receivers? Don\'t look them up, just tell me right now off the top of your head - who are the three top receivers for Philly and are they ANYWHERE near as talented as Horn, Stallworth, and Pathon? And is their Duce anywhere close to our Deuce? Face it, McNabb has done more with less b/c he is a better quarterback, hands down.

Now, I also find it interesting that you single me out and come after me. I did not say ONE thing about Brooks in my post that was negative. All I suggested was that he has plenty of time to develop and now it\'s time for him to start playing like a top 5 QB - as we\'re paying him. You construed that to be some bash of Brooks, when in fact, it isn\'t - again unless of course you believe Brooks is a top 5 QB RIGHT NOW.

If you remember Saintfan, I was THE FIRST person to support YOUR COMMENTS about Brooks after the Seattle game. I gave the shush to many fans on this board just as you did. If I remember correctly, I placed blame on the defense, coordinators (play-calls), o-line, and special teams ALL ahead of Brooks. Apparently, that was just me bashing brooks again huh?

What I find interesting is that when I call \'em like I see them and say Brooks played fairly well, that doesn\'t count. When I criticize, it\'s obviously b/c I have some vendetta. It sounds an awful lot to me like you areclinging to this belief that Brooks id the best QB that the Saints have ever had ALREADY, and that he is an elite NFL QB REGARDLESS of how he actually plays. Now, I won\'t put words in your mouth, as you did to me. Go ahead and speak your piece, but please address my questions. I\'m not throwing out any stats other than his time in the league. So, you tell me, is nearly 5 years in the league and 4 as a starter not enough time for Brooks to have at least progressed? How much longer do we have to wait until we can expect him to be a TOP 5 qb in the league?

09-11-2003, 11:58 AM	#11
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631	Brooks"I owned them pretty much the whole night with my eyes You\'re reaching again Whodat, and so are all the other people in this thread who simply cannot seem to get over the fact that Brooks is the starter. NOW you people are talkin\' about O\'Sullivan and \"BO-MAN\"? Are you serious? I can\'t help but to laugh at the shortsightedness that goes on in here sometimes. I\'d like to say I can\'t believe what I\'m hearing, but from certain posters it\'s nothing new. You guys hide behind statistics when it suits you and then toss \'em out the window when it doesn\'t. First of all Saintfan - find me one time that I ever called for Bouman or O\'Sullivan. Second - Apparently, from your post, you don\'t believe that 38 games as a starter, 2 playoff games, and 5 seasons in the league is enough time for a QB to develop - is that correct? If we\'re paying Brooks to be a TOP 5 quarterback, how long do we have to wait before we can expect him to be one? I think you\'d have us wait until the man retires from the league, all the while suggesting that he IS a top 5 qb right now. Is that what you believe? Do you feel that he is an elite QB in the league RIGHT NOW? If you were Eagles fans you\'d be ready to get rid of McNab...after all he\'s never won a superbowl...you\'d be ready to fire the coach for the same reason, but you\'d completely ignore all the dropped passes and Lack of protection he got...or wait...maybe you\'d give Tampa\'s defense the credit and cut Donovan and the coach some slack. Afterall, it\'s Brooks you guys seem to have the vendeta against. Anyone else is given the benefit of the doubt. Interesting - do you want to tell me how I think or feel about anything else while you\'re at it Saintfan? The fact that you\'re comparing Brooks to McNabb favorably makes me sick to my stomach. Are you suggesting that Brooks is as good a QB as McNabb? Oh, and who are McNabb\'s receivers? Don\'t look them up, just tell me right now off the top of your head - who are the three top receivers for Philly and are they ANYWHERE near as talented as Horn, Stallworth, and Pathon? And is their Duce anywhere close to our Deuce? Face it, McNabb has done more with less b/c he is a better quarterback, hands down. Now, I also find it interesting that you single me out and come after me. I did not say ONE thing about Brooks in my post that was negative. All I suggested was that he has plenty of time to develop and now it\'s time for him to start playing like a top 5 QB - as we\'re paying him. You construed that to be some bash of Brooks, when in fact, it isn\'t - again unless of course you believe Brooks is a top 5 QB RIGHT NOW. If you remember Saintfan, I was THE FIRST person to support YOUR COMMENTS about Brooks after the Seattle game. I gave the shush to many fans on this board just as you did. If I remember correctly, I placed blame on the defense, coordinators (play-calls), o-line, and special teams ALL ahead of Brooks. Apparently, that was just me bashing brooks again huh? What I find interesting is that when I call \'em like I see them and say Brooks played fairly well, that doesn\'t count. When I criticize, it\'s obviously b/c I have some vendetta. It sounds an awful lot to me like you areclinging to this belief that Brooks id the best QB that the Saints have ever had ALREADY, and that he is an elite NFL QB REGARDLESS of how he actually plays. Now, I won\'t put words in your mouth, as you did to me. Go ahead and speak your piece, but please address my questions. I\'m not throwing out any stats other than his time in the league. So, you tell me, is nearly 5 years in the league and 4 as a starter not enough time for Brooks to have at least progressed? How much longer do we have to wait until we can expect him to be a TOP 5 qb in the league?
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631	\"Excuses, excuses, excuses. ThatÃ¢Â€Â™s all anyone ever makes for the New Orleans SaintsÃ¢Â€Â™ organization.\" - Eric Narcisse \"Being a Saints fan is almost like being addicted to crack,\" he said.[i]\"You know you should stop, but you just can\'t.\"