SAINT_MICHAEL

You and others have said he has the stats to get in. Apart from disagreeing with the quality of his stats, my point is that you have to look at more than stats. Obviously Rose is an extreme case, but he demonstates that you can't look at just stats. character/moxy/attitude or whatever IS part of the equation. No Brooks wasn't banned like Rose was, but his stats are nowhere near where Rose's were for his sport either. So my point is I disagree with your assertation that he gets in "because he has the stats". Unlike Rose whose stats were so important it took a major issue like betting to keep him out, Brooks' stats are nowhere near good enough to get him in without considering the other facet of his game-the one outside the numbers. You like to blow it off because you say it cannot be measured. I say it is an intrgral part of a player's legacy to their sport and a good yardstick of HOF credentials.


Yeah, I was poking fun at you about the kicking game. But my logic is not flawed. The fact is you have made comments about how bad the coaching, the defense, the o-line, and the receivers were for him. That leaves the RBs, TE's, special teams, and Brooks that you did not criticize. So back up what YOU say. By logic, your comments say you think the TEs, Brooks, RB's and kicking game were the strong parts of our team team during his time here. Otherwise what is the point of hacking on the other parts of the team if it is not to say that Brooks was carrying us?



I love how you try to make your points look better by adding LOL as a response to valid, factual points I bring up. I guess you fall back on giggles when you have little else. I pointed out this one season because this is the one magical season you give him credit for in winning our first playoff game. You use this as a main benchmark for HOF worth. I point out that in this ONE season we had a very good team around him and giving him as much credit for the win as you do is a disservice to the rest of the team.

I also love the slant you put in your line "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."

More accurately would be for you to say the defense at times gave up 20 + points a game while the offense was at times scoring like we did last year. Or, the D was giving up 20+ points a game and our O was scoring X pts +. But qualifying the O's performance with "at times" while quoting an actual stat for the D is shoddy and proves nothing.

Since you are so stuck on career stats, lets look at some basics. Here are some of Brooks' career stats with the Saints:

Games Yards TDs INTs Fumbles Sack W-L
93 19156 120 84 59 209 38-44


Which gives us a Per game average of:
Yards TDs TO's (INT + Fum) Sack
206 1.3 1.53 2.24

Those stats do not add up to a Saints HOF career for a player that was not known for his leadership, desire, dedication, and did not go out of his way to establish himself in the community.





Take some responsability for your words. You said in a direct response to my earlier post "I'm not discounting them, but the Brooks haters are focused on them"

And then in this post....

"Is your dislike of Brooks so strong..."

So, yeah, I consider that to be calling me a hater when all I've said is he was a good QB but not HOF worthy. You used the word hate fist. How is that hate? If you did not mean it that way, then say so, but have the integrity to not deny you said it.





I'm thinking you might be in politics from the way you avoid my question, answer a differnt question entirely, then act condescending with your response.

Let me ask this then. Replace Brooks with Brees in my question. So, do you think Brees gave/gives 100 % effort to win games and be the best football player he could be? Is your answer still "I don't know"? I didn't think so.



And so you are giving me a bad time for making a joke. Ok......



For the life of me I can't see why you keep dragging Delhomme into this. If Delhomme would have had the same career for us that Brooks did, no he's not in our HOF. But I will counter with this.....considering his attitude, his comeback story, how he represents himself on the field and what he has done for the Saints organization and the community I would say I would put Breese in with the same stats as Brooks. But he did a lot more than Brooks both on and off the field.


I'd bet you 10 bucks that any other QB in any other team's HOF has one of these three things (if not more than one)

a) Significantly better stats than he does
b) Signifcantly more playoff wins/championships than he does
c) Significantly more attachment to and identity with his team and community than he does.