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

saintfan · 06-08-2010, 03:06 PM

Originally Posted by 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.

You brought it up, backtracked in the very next sentence, and are left to explain it. Yes, as you confess, Rose is an extreme case. If your point is that you have to look at more than stats, then good for you. You have mastered the obvious, only you could have done that without insinuating Brooks=Rose. Stats are part of the equation - not the end all. Even you agree his Stats are up to snuff. You seem to dislike his attitude as presumed by you. If you look at the points of those for it versus those against it, you'll see that those for it generally think his stats along with the playoff win and that fact that at the time he was far and away the second best player we'd ever had at that position are enough. Those against even make reference to his numbers but didn't like HIM, primarily because he didn't whine his way off the field after a bad play.

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?

Overall, and you MUST look at the overall picture and NOT just one game, or a season, or a handful of losses, yes, OVERALL, while Brooks was here, our lines, our secondary, our Wr's, and our coaching are very suspect, and through it all Brooks was able to put up pretty damn good numbers, especially when those numbers are compared to players that came before him. Fact is we had some damn good teams that never won a playoff game. You can get as granular as you'd like as you try to mis-represent the spirit of my post when I say those teams that Brooks was on weren't very good. Knock yourself out. It doesn't change the fact that those teams, overall, were not very good teams. If I were arguing the same about Joe Horn would you disagree? I doubt you'd even bother, and that's called bias.

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.

Your 'factual' points aren't relevant to the topic are they? Nope. You're tying to spin my comments in a way that make it seem that I think Brooks alone won that game. I never said that, and no spin by you will make it any different.

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.

Look at it any way you want. We had a GOOD offense with Brooks, and we typically needed to outscore people because in general our defenses weren't that good. If you disagree that's fine. Ask around if you don't believe me, or average it out. I know what I saw, and I watched every game.

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.

How much money did Brooks invest in the Children of New Orleans and to charities in general? No, it's not all about stats, but you might want to slow your roll a bit about his community and charity work in New Orleans.

Players Stories

"New Orleans Saints quarterback Aaron Brooks will receive the Humanitarian of the Year Award for his efforts in the community. Brooks started a literacy program in New Orleans in conjunction with the public library, promoting the use of libraries during the summer months when school is not in session and some students may not have access to books. Last summer Brooks told students, "If you want to be like me, you'd better read like me." And they took his words to heart. It is estimated the program, "Read to Pass" motivated 15,000 children to read 80,000 books from May 24 to August 8, 2003.
"I was able to help create an environment for the kids to better themselves for the future through literacy programs," said Brooks, who believes reading can open doors for young people. "I just try to stay involved. There's a great need of leadership and support from the role models that kids look up to, and that is what I am trying to do."

And here's a link you might want to visit:
Aaron Brooks Family Foundation | Home

Now, I submit to you that without desire and dedication you are not very likely to rise from where Brooks came from to be a Starting QB in the NFL. Brooks was not the leader on the field that a Manning or a Brees is, but if you're focusing on that you're sadly misguided.

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.

Are you a hater? I didn't call you one, but you sure as hell seem offended by the potential of that label. You can wear your feelings on your sleeve if you'd like, but you've taken a pretty strong stand against Brooks. Maybe you shouldn't be so thin-skinned if you want to participate in a discussion about Brooks with someone that feels differently.

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.

I do think Brees gives 100%. Beuller? Hasn't got anything to do with anything. I think Randy Moss doesn't give 100% and yet he will make the NFL HOF based on his numbers alone - even though he isn't a great leader. In fact I think TO will make the HOF as well, and I cannot say he gives 100%, but he DOES whine and pout a lot, so he's instantly qualified!

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 didn't drag Delhomme into it. He is a part of it. When did you start watching Saints games? God man, Jake and the Louisiana connection was half the reason people wanted to get rid of Brooks. I mean...seriously?

And Brees is beyond reproach, he is special in a way that places him above even the typically special people in this world. He's a slam dunk, so there's really no point in bringing that to the discussion, unless of course you think every player in the Saints HOF should measure up to that standard, in which case you better empty out those already in the Saints HOF and go ahead and close the doors, because you probably won't find many candidates worthy of induction in the future.

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.

And you may be right, but then again, after 43 years most teams have a bit more to choose from huh? L...O...L

View Poll Results: Should Brooks one day be in Saints HOF?
Yes.	32	41.56%
No.	45	58.44%
Voters: 77. You may not vote on this poll

06-08-2010, 03:06 PM	#11
saintfan Donated Plasma Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 18,556 Blog Entries: 5	Re: Should Aaron Brooks make the Saints Hall of Fame one day? Originally Posted by 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. You brought it up, backtracked in the very next sentence, and are left to explain it. Yes, as you confess, Rose is an extreme case. If your point is that you have to look at more than stats, then good for you. You have mastered the obvious, only you could have done that without insinuating Brooks=Rose. Stats are part of the equation - not the end all. Even you agree his Stats are up to snuff. You seem to dislike his attitude as presumed by you. If you look at the points of those for it versus those against it, you'll see that those for it generally think his stats along with the playoff win and that fact that at the time he was far and away the second best player we'd ever had at that position are enough. Those against even make reference to his numbers but didn't like HIM, primarily because he didn't whine his way off the field after a bad play. 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? Overall, and you MUST look at the overall picture and NOT just one game, or a season, or a handful of losses, yes, OVERALL, while Brooks was here, our lines, our secondary, our Wr's, and our coaching are very suspect, and through it all Brooks was able to put up pretty damn good numbers, especially when those numbers are compared to players that came before him. Fact is we had some damn good teams that never won a playoff game. You can get as granular as you'd like as you try to mis-represent the spirit of my post when I say those teams that Brooks was on weren't very good. Knock yourself out. It doesn't change the fact that those teams, overall, were not very good teams. If I were arguing the same about Joe Horn would you disagree? I doubt you'd even bother, and that's called bias. 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. Your 'factual' points aren't relevant to the topic are they? Nope. You're tying to spin my comments in a way that make it seem that I think Brooks alone won that game. I never said that, and no spin by you will make it any different. 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. Look at it any way you want. We had a GOOD offense with Brooks, and we typically needed to outscore people because in general our defenses weren't that good. If you disagree that's fine. Ask around if you don't believe me, or average it out. I know what I saw, and I watched every game. 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. How much money did Brooks invest in the Children of New Orleans and to charities in general? No, it's not all about stats, but you might want to slow your roll a bit about his community and charity work in New Orleans. Players Stories "New Orleans Saints quarterback Aaron Brooks will receive the Humanitarian of the Year Award for his efforts in the community. Brooks started a literacy program in New Orleans in conjunction with the public library, promoting the use of libraries during the summer months when school is not in session and some students may not have access to books. Last summer Brooks told students, "If you want to be like me, you'd better read like me." And they took his words to heart. It is estimated the program, "Read to Pass" motivated 15,000 children to read 80,000 books from May 24 to August 8, 2003. "I was able to help create an environment for the kids to better themselves for the future through literacy programs," said Brooks, who believes reading can open doors for young people. "I just try to stay involved. There's a great need of leadership and support from the role models that kids look up to, and that is what I am trying to do." And here's a link you might want to visit: Aaron Brooks Family Foundation \| Home Now, I submit to you that without desire and dedication you are not very likely to rise from where Brooks came from to be a Starting QB in the NFL. Brooks was not the leader on the field that a Manning or a Brees is, but if you're focusing on that you're sadly misguided. 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. Are you a hater? I didn't call you one, but you sure as hell seem offended by the potential of that label. You can wear your feelings on your sleeve if you'd like, but you've taken a pretty strong stand against Brooks. Maybe you shouldn't be so thin-skinned if you want to participate in a discussion about Brooks with someone that feels differently. 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. I do think Brees gives 100%. Beuller? Hasn't got anything to do with anything. I think Randy Moss doesn't give 100% and yet he will make the NFL HOF based on his numbers alone - even though he isn't a great leader. In fact I think TO will make the HOF as well, and I cannot say he gives 100%, but he DOES whine and pout a lot, so he's instantly qualified! 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 didn't drag Delhomme into it. He is a part of it. When did you start watching Saints games? God man, Jake and the Louisiana connection was half the reason people wanted to get rid of Brooks. I mean...seriously? And Brees is beyond reproach, he is special in a way that places him above even the typically special people in this world. He's a slam dunk, so there's really no point in bringing that to the discussion, unless of course you think every player in the Saints HOF should measure up to that standard, in which case you better empty out those already in the Saints HOF and go ahead and close the doors, because you probably won't find many candidates worthy of induction in the future. 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. And you may be right, but then again, after 43 years most teams have a bit more to choose from huh? L...O...L
	C'mon Man... Last edited by saintfan; 06-08-2010 at 03:13 PM..

LinkBacks (?) LinkBack to this Thread: https://blackandgold.com/saints/26724-should-aaron-brooks-make-saints-hall-fame-one-day.html
Posted By	For	Type	Date	Hits
Should Aaron Brooks make the Saints Hall of Fame one day?	This thread	Refback	06-11-2010 07:02 PM	3