BillyCarpenter1

B&B --

It\'s funny and it\'s true. After watching the Colts game I was and AM confused. I want some answers but can\'t find any. Except from some of the geniuses around here.

But yeah it\'s funny -- I have to keep you guys entertained !!

lumm0x

I will be the first to agree that plugging in a back-up QB is a fairly standard method of bringing an offense back to life. There are alot of success stories to prove that. But I think the question here is whether or not Brooks is \"in-effective\". Given the exact same plays to run, the same quality of blocking, and the same consistency of pass-catching, does Bouman be more effective? With the exception of the Colts game, I can\'t lay enough blame Brook\'s way to justify it.

TheOriginalSwampdog

Saintsfan, I can add and subtract, can you? 4 touchdowns and 3 interceptions in 4 games. Now, if that\'s not INEFFECTIVE, I don\'t know what is. How many points is our offense averaging compared to last year? Do me a favor and get to a Webster\'s Dictionary and look up the definition of \"ineffective\" and tell me what you come up with. Apparentley, you don\'t understand the meaning of the word.

TheOriginalSwampdog

Saintsfan, being that you are so slow, I thought I\'d help you out. Please tell me if this definition not only applies to Brooks, but the Saints team as a whole:

One entry found for ineffective.


Main Entry: in·ef·fec·tive
Pronunciation: \"i-n&-\'fek-tiv
Function: adjective
Date: 1649
1 : not producing an intended effect : INEFFECTUAL <ineffective lighting>
2 : not capable of performing efficiently or as expected : INCAPABLE <an ineffective executive>
- in·ef·fec·tive·ly adverb
- in·ef·fec·tive·ness noun

See, apparentley, guys like you don\'t have the education to understand particular words because you weren\'t into all that \"book learnin\" when you were in school. What a shame, another example of our public school system failing. Hey, Saintsfan, I hear tell Hooked on Phonic helps a lot of people like you. Maybe you should give them a call.

http://sportsmed.starwave.com/media/...manning_vi.jpg

BlackandBlue

Since you go to the games, you don\'t need me to remind you that 2 of those 3 interceptions were a direct result of the reciever allowing the ball to pop out of their hands, straight up in the air. Not making excuses for AB, since he looked horrible in the last game, but that little point seems to be overlooked here lately.

lumm0x

Everything has to come in context. By this arguement, then Delhomme, Brady, Bledsoe, Maddox, Trent Green, and Jay Fiedler are ineffective QB\'s this year. They have the same TD to INT ratio or worse than Brooks, they have the same or worse QB ratings, and they have the same or less pass yards with the exception of Maddox.
The difference is the current record, the overall offensive production, and the quality of defense that each of these teams have. Each one of these teams has not seen a drop off in offensive production, not because this level of performance by the QB is keeping it there. The stats Brooks has this year should be enough to win games. There are so many factors that contribute to success. Place any one of the above mentioned QB\'s in the situations that Brooks has played in, and in all likelihood the results would be similar.
Very little is effective on offense right now, schematically and individually. The individual performance of a single person will not have a drastic enough effect to turn it around. Take McAllister for example. I think he\'s running with as much or more power and fire as I\'ve ever seen. The problem is we are not executing run blocks, nor is the playcalling allowing the running game to be effective. Do we blame Deuce for his lack of effectiveness. The finger has to point to the whole unit, coach, coordinator and offensive players.

TheOriginalSwampdog

B and B, while I agree with your assessment about some of the int\'s, you have to also calculate the tds that were given to Brooks in the Seattle and Titans game. He was playing against prevent D\'s that were in place to make us eat up clock. Not to mention the 2 yarder to Conwell that my grandmother could have thrown. Listen, I hear what you\'re saying, but we need more production from the qb positon, period.

TheOriginalSwampdog

Lummox that was a great post. I agree totally. However, since the dawn of time, when offenses struggle (whether it\'s the offensive line, the running back or wr\'s fault) it\'s the qb that is under the biggest microscope. If the offense can\'t score and move the ball, it ultimately comes down to the qb because he\'s on the field. I do agree, that our scheme right now SUCKS and the coaching leaves A WHOLE LOT to be desired. It\'s not all Brooks\' fault, but his demeanor and lack of production BEGS for a change at that position. If not only to try to shake things up. If Bouman goes in and does nothing then fine. At least we can say we fired every bullet we had. Like we should have done in the last three games of last year.

http://sportsmed.starwave.com/media/...manning_vi.jpg

lumm0x

Thank you. And I\'m not thanking you because we have met closely in opinion on this one, but because that was also a good post.
My post in response to you was that I didn\'t believe the stats you used to promote the position of ineffectiveness were justifiable back-up. The leadership qualities and the need for something/anything are justifiable in my mind and deserve to be explored.
I believe that this organization has to decide in what direction they wish to go. If they want to try to salvage this season then it may have to be done. It may come at the expense of Brook\'s future here, or it may serve the exact opposite and make him a better player. Only the front office staff and coaching staff are in position to make that call and expect the consequences of that choice.

saintfan

The problem \"swampie\" is you\'re shortsighted. Ask around...

You wanna bench the QB to \"shake things up\"...is that right? OR, do you wanna bench the QB because you think he sucks. Which is it swamp rat...umm...I mean doggie. Get off the freakin fence and make a statement and back it up with something.

On second thought, nevermind. Eventually you\'ll post something intelligent (I have faith in even the lowest life forms) and then what you say might matter, but \'til then, never you mind.