Originally Posted by Memnoch_TP (Post 228400)

Sorry FF, but you get -1 Rep just for suggesting this.

Statistics don't lie, but they don't tell the whole story, nor do they say anything but what you want them to say.

Yes, AB won our first playoff game. Thank you, Jeff Blake, for putting the team into position to get into the playoffs before you got injured. If AB had been the started the whole season, your statistic would have merit. Being a late season sub for Blake, winning a playoff game, and never being able to get us to the playoffs again? Yeah, that's HOF material. NOT.

Oh, and yes, he broke several of Archie's records. Big whoop, Archie and Aaron are polar opposites. Archie was a great QB with crappy stats, and Aaron was a crappy QB with great stats. When Archie played, he didn't have half the talent around him that Ab did, and the game of football ran differently back then. It's not a valid comparison.

Not to mention, yes, AB had lots of 3500+ yard seasons. And just how many of those yards were made during garbage time at the end of a hopelessly lost game? That is why AB was a great Fantasy QB, he couldn't get a win, but he always got the garbage time yards.




How can it be hard to ignore meaningless stats? Here is a stat for you. -1 Rep.




I thought better of you Papz, I truly did.




I believe he is retired and out of football, because no one in the NFL thought he was good enough to simply hold a clipboard and warm a bench with his ass.

It isn't like he wasn't wanted after he left the Saints though. Yes, the only person who would give him a job is the same guy who drafted JaMarcus Russel as the savior of his franchise. The same guy who passed on Crabtree. The guy who make people gag at the sheer stupidity of his personnel decisions. THAT guy thought Aaron Brooks was a good QB.




Well then, maybe we should hold off on his enshrinement and only put GREAT players in our HOF.




Indeed.

Originally Posted by saintfan (Post 228412)

Go back and look at ANY season where Brooks was the starter at QB and take a look at our Offensive rankings and points scored, then look at the defense and ask yourself, "was it really the Offense's fault, or Brooks, or might we have been a regular in the playoff hunt IF WE COULD HAVE STOPPED ANYBODY?"

HOF or not, either you can recognize where the real problems were with those teams or you cant.

Originally Posted by papz (Post 228414)

On my behalf, it's not my fault we've had such a crappy and pathetic history.

Originally Posted by Memnoch_TP (Post 228400)

Sorry FF, but you get -1 Rep just for suggesting this.

Originally Posted by skymike (Post 228447)

Whether he "smiled" or not has nothing to do with anything.
What do you want your QB to do after a mistake? Lay down and cry himself to sleep? Bear in mind I loved Hebert, and his passion. But I realize people are different, and have differing ways of dealing.

If those stats are considered that off-tha-charts, then I should change my vote to "yes."

He certainly did display a great deal of talent in his early tenure with the Saints, and he seemed to have most of the tools you need, except, perhaps-- and this is just my opinion-- leadership?

From a talent standpoint, and the rare accomplishment of winning a playoff game for us, I'd have to say yes.

I just dont like the guy, because of his indifference to New Orleans itself after the storm. He went out of his way to say that playing here was just a job, and that he wasnt in any way responsible for the emotional leadership of the Gulf Coast. Contrast that with the statements of Drew Brees, who has accepted his importance to our psyche during good times and bad.

Originally Posted by SAINT_MICHAEL (Post 228430)

It's not as cut and dried as that. We surely had problems on D. But we all (old enogh) saw the lack of focus, silly plays, and lazy demeanor Brooks had during his tenure. Compare that to the way Manning played and Drew currently does. When it comes to Focus, desire, and intensity, guys like Mills, Martin, Jackson, Manning, Breese, and Roaf demonstrated it. Brooks did not.

Originally Posted by saintfan (Post 228449)

"Zooey Deschanel was not created by normal genetic means. Instead, she is a roving wet dream cut loose from the mind of God and set free to drift through the world of lesser mortals." - Unknown

Originally Posted by foreverfan (Post 228452)

Dude? Are you serious? We all know who wrote this. :doh:

Originally Posted by skymike (Post 228457)

Saintfan is full O' crap about many things, but he is completely right about Zoooey. The girl is an outstanding specimen of womanness. I dont see how any man could not want her.

Originally Posted by foreverfan (Post 228458)

Yea... he wasn't smart enough to write that. :doh:

Originally Posted by saintfan (Post 228449)

It isn't that I disagree with the spirit of your post, but then there is no HOF criteria set in stone. Joe Horn left on a bad note for our hated enemy and he's in the Saints HOF (as I believe he should be), so shouldn't that matter?

Originally Posted by saintfan (Post 228449)

There were some bad plays, but the good FAR outnumbered the bad regardless of the fact that people (some, many, but not all) latched on to them in a way to promote their argument for Delhomme, and everyone can say what they want, 50% of the Brooks hate (likely more) was because we had a local guy at #2 that everyone wanted so badly to believe was better.

Originally Posted by saintfan (Post 228449)

FACT is Brooks was a talented QB with a sub-standard D, an underachieving O-Line, mediocre WR's, etc. Given a better D and who knows. Had he not been required to run backwards at the immediate snap of the ball more often than not, who knows? In this case, the numbers don't lie. Brooks was not a malcontent. If his numbers warrant it (and I think they do) I don't think he should be kept from the Saints HOF just because he didn't pout and whine after every bad play - I personally like the fact that he laughed it off so many times. It was refreshing when help up against the "Wah wah wah they bumped the WR I always lock on to" crap I saw from Delhomme week after week after week.

Originally Posted by skymike (Post 228457)

Saintfan is full O' crap about many things, but he is completely right about Zoooey. The girl is an outstanding specimen of womanness. I dont see how any man could not want her.

Originally Posted by skymike (Post 228457)

Saintfan is full O' crap about many things, but he is completely right about Zoooey. The girl is an outstanding specimen of womanness. I dont see how any man could not want her.

This is a good discussion, and a most provocative topic.

Change my answer back to "no," because I reserve the right to consider character and intangibles in my judgement. You cant compare his effort to that of a Rickey Jackson.

Feel free to tell me why I am full O' crap, and I will put it in my hat and smoke it.

Originally Posted by Budsdrinker (Post 228539)

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 saintfan (Post 228449)

It isn't that I disagree with the spirit of your post, but then there is no HOF criteria set in stone. Joe Horn left on a bad note for our hated enemy and he's in the Saints HOF (as I believe he should be), so shouldn't that matter?

There were some bad plays, but the good FAR outnumbered the bad regardless of the fact that people (some, many, but not all) latched on to them in a way to promote their argument for Delhomme, and everyone can say what they want, 50% of the Brooks hate (likely more) was because we had a local guy at #2 that everyone wanted so badly to believe was better.

FACT is Brooks was a talented QB with a sub-standard D, an underachieving O-Line, mediocre WR's, etc. Given a better D and who knows. Had he not been required to run backwards at the immediate snap of the ball more often than not, who knows? In this case, the numbers don't lie. Brooks was not a malcontent. If his numbers warrant it (and I think they do) I don't think he should be kept from the Saints HOF just because he didn't pout and whine after every bad play - I personally like the fact that he laughed it off so many times. It was refreshing when help up against the "Wah wah wah they bumped the WR I always lock on to" crap I saw from Delhomme week after week after week.