Should Aaron Brooks make the Saints Hall of Fame one day?

foreverfan · 06-08-2010, 07:38 AM

Budsdrinker · 06-08-2010, 10:21 AM

[quote]Yep. And Brooks was the QB. A Saints "Record-Setting" one at that. Good call...we had a pretty good team that year...

Only...if you look at the Career, which by the way is what makes or breaks someone for a HOF, you'll see that over the course of Brooks' CAREER in N.O. the defense was surrendering 20+ points a game while the offense was scoring, at times, like we did last year. Take a look at the year after the Season you picked...the best season the team had while Brooks was here, or even the one after that and you'll have no choice but to say, "Oh, I get it now." LOL

I think you need to look at some of the game stats again.
2001 we had 6 loses where we averaged 10 pts per game.
2002 we had 4 loses that averaged 13 pts per game not to mention the last 3games when he was hurt and should have been benched. We win 1 out of the 3 and we were in the playoffs. (This is the year that got me upset the most)
2003 5 loses averaged 12 pts per game.
2004 5 loses averaged 13 pts per game.
Won't do 2005 which was his last season here and what most people remember.
So the stats on points per game average are misleading when you take in account how many points we scored in the losses.

[QUOTE]I did tell you what I think, but for the sake of Clarity I'll tell you yet again. Brooks won our first playoff game and his stats are worthy. The fact that you don't seem to think he gave a hundred percent isn't something you can measure, while we CAN measure his numbers and take a look at the team around him OVER HIS CAREER and logically say we might have won more had we been able to stop anyone. You're argument against that is to pull stats from the ONE season we made the playoffs. LOL.

I'll have to disagree on this statement Brooks won our first playoff game. I'll admit he had a good game with 4 TD's but he also fumbled twice but we did get them back and he threw a pick. The win was a team win. We had crucial defensive stops when needed (Sammy Knight 2 picks) and the famous Hakim drops the ball and Brian Milne the long snapper recovers which we had to punt because of a 3 and out. Here is his line from that game.
Comp Att Pct Yds Avg TD Int Sck SckY Rate Att Yds Avg TD FUM Lost
12/30 16 29 55.2 266 9.2 4 1 2 15 111.5 10 26 2.6 0 2 0

What if it had been Delhomme with our first playoff win and Brooks' numbers over the same span. Jake is a whiner. He screams at his teammates and the refs every chance he gets. He pouts his way off the field. It's obvious he's upset. I guess then that had it been Jake or some other 'angry-acting' QB you'd be all for it? WTF?

If it would have been Jake with the same outcome, I would be saying the same thing. No he doesn't belong in the Saints HOF. And I view his emotions as passion for the game and a desire to win something Brooks never showed.
But everyone is entitled to their opinions and although I disagree with yours on Brooks I still respect it.

saintfan · 06-08-2010, 02:40 PM

[quote=Budsdrinker;229337]

I think you need to look at some of the game stats again.
2001 we had 6 loses where we averaged 10 pts per game.
2002 we had 4 loses that averaged 13 pts per game not to mention the last 3games when he was hurt and should have been benched. We win 1 out of the 3 and we were in the playoffs. (This is the year that got me upset the most)
2003 5 loses averaged 12 pts per game.
2004 5 loses averaged 13 pts per game.
Won't do 2005 which was his last season here and what most people remember.
So the stats on points per game average are misleading when you take in account how many points we scored in the losses.

Why do I need to look again? Like SM you are picking and choosing. That's not how it's done. Why did we lose those games? Can you remember? You want to pick and choose how you manipulate the numbers. I don't. I look at the Body Of Work over the course of his career here. Those numbers are pretty damn good numbers UNTIL people start to spin it, which is what lots of folks do when it comes to Brooks...

Oh and by the way, in that Carolina game to end the year, our WR's dropped two passes that hit 'em right in the hands that would have won that game. I guess I'm the only person who remembers that? Doubtful, but I am one of the few that will bring it up. I was never so hacked at my fellow Saints fans for the "We want Jake" chants during that game. They became the 12th man for the Panthers. Too bad Jake wasn't from way up North around Shreveport or something. It might have been different.

There are too many factors that go into a team sport like football to pick and choose games from which to manipulate statistics to prove a point. I'm saying when you look at the numbers as a whole there's not much to argue, and not many people do really. When it comes down to Brooks they don't like his smile. Take a look at the negative comments in this thread alone. It isn't the numbers, it's just that folks like to bash Brooks or make assumptions about his effort because of his style. Either way, he still won our first playoff game...oh, wait...let me be very careful since the spin doctors are in the house...HE WAS THE WINNING QB FOR OUR FIRST PLAYOFF GAME...and good for him the team was there to bail him out over and over again otherwise that great team we had might have been a Brooks victim right? LMAO

I'll have to disagree on this statement Brooks won our first playoff game. I'll admit he had a good game with 4 TD's but he also fumbled twice but we did get them back and he threw a pick. The win was a team win. We had crucial defensive stops when needed (Sammy Knight 2 picks) and the famous Hakim drops the ball and Brian Milne the long snapper recovers which we had to punt because of a 3 and out. Here is his line from that game.
Comp Att Pct Yds Avg TD Int Sck SckY Rate Att Yds Avg TD FUM Lost
12/30 16 29 55.2 266 9.2 4 1 2 15 111.5 10 26 2.6 0 2 0

You can disagree until the dry cows come home, but it won't change anything. I never said Brooks won it all by his lonesome. That's what SM says I said, because he needs me to think that way I guess, but that's not what I said. But just for fun, what do you remember as the theme of that playoff win? Why did we need the miracle recovery? Need some help? We needed that miracle recovery because we couldn't stop the Rams, and me and you and everyone else rooting for the Saints knew damn well when the Rams got the ball back there was a very good change they'd shove it down our throats.

If it would have been Jake with the same outcome, I would be saying the same thing. No he doesn't belong in the Saints HOF. And I view his emotions as passion for the game and a desire to win something Brooks never showed.
But everyone is entitled to their opinions and although I disagree with yours on Brooks I still respect it.

It wouldn't have been the same with Jake if you use the criteria SM is using, since it was Brooks' assumed attitude and his presumed lack of interest that makes the difference...so for SM at least, if he's telling the truth, stats being equal, replace the name Brooks with Delhomme, and replace the smiles with a whiny baby attitude, and that's all that's missing.

saintfan · 06-08-2010, 03:02 PM

Just a sample taken from this thread of those that think he should be in the Saints HOF.

Originally Posted by Saintswrath

I don't like the dude personally but can't deny what he did at one point do for this team so i say yes..

Originally Posted by CantonLegend

easily our best QB in franchise history up until the last 4 seasons

why shouldnt he be in it?

there isnt a single reason why someone could say he doesnt deserve it

because he was emotional? how dare he get upset when 20000 fans are booing him

how dare he throw his helmet and kick water bottles when the team cant manage to hold a lead that he just gave them

aaron brooks was a good QB....not a great QB....not a great football player....but the guy was the best thing we had and now that we are spoiled we forget how much brooks actually did for us

Originally Posted by MatthewT

Yes indeed, Aaron Brooks will be in the Saints Hall of Fame, and deservingly so. That playoff win against the Rams pretty much sealed it. I realize he had an up and down time, but when it came down to the end of a game, he always gave the Saints a chance to win. During that era I never really had the feeling that the Saints were ever doomed, despite trailing in a game. More often than not, Brooks would come through.

Bad coaching decisions throughout his career, like going for two points in those 14-10 games in the second quarter did not help, not putting him on the bench when he was obviously hurt, and not to mention the 2005 season in which he had no chance totally killed his career.

Originally Posted by neugey

I'd put him in, but not on the stats. This isn't fantasy football HOF.

I just can't forget that first season and the playoff win, all after Blake got hurt and most of us probably thought the season was lost. For a guy who we picked up from Green Bay for a song, he had a pretty good career, even with the character and leadership weaknesses.

Originally Posted by KingCutta

Give it to him. What other QB before him didnt anything close to what he did beside Archie?

I think the overall theme of the posters in favor of putting Brooks into the Saints HOF is fairly obvious.

saintfan · 06-08-2010, 03:09 PM

And some from this thread from those that say no.

Originally Posted by Budsdrinker

I say no. Yes he had talent but could not make the right decision. He could have been just like Donovan Mcnaab if he would have tucked the ball and ran more but he didn't want to. For as talented he was he could have and should have ran out of trouble. He was sacked 235 times and only ran 362 times in his career. And as far as the 2000 playoff win, the defense had 5 turnovers in that game including 2 by Sammy Knight 1 of which was inside the 5 yard line if not mistaken. And by the way Delhomme's record against Brooks is 4-2.

Originally Posted by spkb25

The answer is, quite frankly, no. He is a moron, and I hate him.

Okay, I am playing a little up there, but honesty, no- I don't care about his stats- well look @ this, and this isn't even his best

YouTube - Reggie Hayward 76 Yard Interception, Broncos at Saints, Week 11, 2004

someone post the backward pass

Originally Posted by TheDeuce

I voted no. Any player who laughs when we get eliminated from playoff contention does not deserve to be in the HOF.

Originally Posted by QBREES9

No !!! Just SAY NO. Lets end this right now

Originally Posted by UK_WhoDat

Should he? No. He annoyed me big time with his high profile errors.

The site won't let me quote everyone unfortunately, but I think the overall theme of those that don't want Brooks in the Saints HOF is fairly obvious.

strato · 06-08-2010, 03:11 PM

saintfan · 06-08-2010, 03:19 PM

Originally Posted by Budsdrinker

And by the way Delhomme's record against Brooks is 4-2.

But isn't this a team sport? I think you agree on that, right?

Originally Posted by Busdrinker

I'll have to disagree on this statement Brooks won our first playoff game. I'll admit he had a good game with 4 TD's but he also fumbled twice but we did get them back and he threw a pick. The win was a team win. We had crucial defensive stops when needed (Sammy Knight 2 picks) and the famous Hakim drops the ball and Brian Milne the long snapper recovers which we had to punt because of a 3 and out. Here is his line from that game.
Comp Att Pct Yds Avg TD Int Sck SckY Rate Att Yds Avg TD FUM Lost
12/30 16 29 55.2 266 9.2 4 1 2 15 111.5 10 26 2.6 0 2 0

So Jake gets the credit for being 4-2 against Brooks, but Brooks' biggest win (and at the time the Saints biggest win) had less to do with Brooks and more to do with the team?

Interesting thought process I must admit. Like you, I respect your opinion, but in this case I have to question whether or not you're being truly unbiased in your assessment.

SAINT_MICHAEL · 06-08-2010, 03:24 PM