Don't take MY word for it...

WhoDat · 10-21-2003, 10:36 PM

Herein lies the problem Billy. To 08, his approximation of Brooks is just as valid as yours is to you. And because Brooks has not proved undoubtedly that he is great or terrible, no one is more or less right.

Everyone watched the same plays, reads the same articles, and see the same stats. We all come to different conclusions about those stats and plays and articles ourselves. Those conclusions are opinions, and no one is more right than the other.

Your problem is simple. You watch the game and think, \"Brooks had a good day.\" Someone else sees the same game and thinks, \"Brooks played poorly.\" Now, unless he had a particularly spectacular or terrible game, it\'s hard to determine either way. Therefore, YOU are NOT right. Neither is 08 or whoever. You simply both have opinions, which seem to differ.

Now, you seem to want members of this board to ignore Brooks\' poor play at times b/c he has potential. If Brooks isn\'t playing well and I say he sucks, I\'M RIGHT. Why? B/c I\'m talking about now. If I say he\'s a bum and he\'ll never get it and he will always be terrible, well, then your argument has some merit. Still, you need to learn that two people can watch the same events and look at the same numbers and come to COMPLETELY different conclusions. Yours aren\'t right, they\'re yours. Nothing more, nothing less.

BillyCarpenter1 · 10-21-2003, 10:57 PM

Very weak WhoDat --

I\'m not talking about someone who judges Brooks on a game by game basis and you KNOW that. I\'m talking about the folks who say cut him, bench him, he\'s a bum, he\'s too stupid, etc, etc..

My point is correct and like I said, if you are honest, you will admit that these critcisms are UNJUST. Including some of yours !! ?? !! ??

saintz08 · 10-22-2003, 12:53 AM

How nice ,

Saintsfan wrote one just for me .

At no point that I have read does it say , \" Delhomme could not have filled in for a quarterback requireing surgery to a passing arm \" .

Jake Delhomme has in fact proven he was capable to fill in last year , rather then start an injured rather ineffective Brooks . Delhomme is in an unfamiliar offense as in comparison to his study time in New Orleans and should at this point be considered a rookie to the system .

If Jake had gone to San Francisco , under Walsh he would be in a much better position . He is in Carolina , running an offense that has less talent then the Saints and has not done bad for his first year .

One rather amusing point is that in the loss to the Titans , Delhomme threw the ball 49 times and not one interception . With the running game stopped for the Panthers and the Titans knowing Delhomme was gonna have to air it out , not 1 interception . Took Brooks a couple of years to figure that one out .

Jake Delhomme had a great game with 362 yards passing and two touchdowns and no interceptions, but that was mostly as Carolina had to catch up due to the large first-half deficit. The running game was taken out of commission early and only managed 44 total yards.

Duece gets only 44 yards in one game and Brooks has usually thrown a couple of picks .

[Edited on 22/10/2003 by saintz08]

seraph33 · 10-22-2003, 03:09 AM

Enough with the Brooks/Delhomme debate. Jesus it has been 4 weeks of it and it needs to end. I personally love Jake. This is his first year with the Panthers, first year as a starter. I think that if Carolina sticks with him, he will develop into a nice starter. He just works too damn hard not to.

Brooks played very well this week. I hope he keeps on playing this way. Still we played very bad teams 2 weeks in a row and I am not sure if the Saints can do this to some quality opponents. If they pull off wins against Carolina and Tampa then I\'ll be impressed. Back to Brooks, as I have said before I don\'t feel that he has made sufficient progress as a starter. He has had the starting job for 3 years now and he still makes many of the boneheaded plays he did in his first year as a starter. Really I haven\'t seem much in the way of progression from him. He looked truly amazing when he came in after Blake went down to injury but hasn\'t looked that good since that season. Now I wouldn\'t mind it so much if he would be on the sidelines looking over coverage packages with McCarthy or something, but he doesn\'t. When he is on the sideline, he just stands there with his towel around his neck. It\'s almost as if he puts it all in McCarthy\'s hands. I don\'t know maybe that\'s how he wants it so he doesn\'t have to be held accountable. It just seems like he lacks so many of the intangibles that great quarterbacks have.

Now to his credit something has stirred a fire under his *$3 the past two weeks cus I saw him actually getting somewhat passionate and audibling. That is an incouraging sign. With that said if Aaron Brooks is finally going to stand up and start walking the walk of a franchise QB (which is what we are paying him as) then by all means step up and we don\'t have to go looking for a replacement; however, if he doesn\'t PROGRESS then I\'m not satisfied with him as our long term answer. I\'m not saying cut him or anything like that. He is certainly better than all the Shulers, Billy Joe\'s, and other flake quarterbacks we have had here. Still if he doesn\'t show overall improvement by the season\'s end . . . then we should start looking for a young QB we can groom behind him for a couple years, similiar to what the JETS did with Pennington.

In parting I know someone is going to jump on this post screaming to \"look at Brooks\' numbers from the past two weeks. That\'s not improvement?\" Yes good numbers and good performances as well, but against teams that are a combined 2-11 this season. I\'m sorry but that isn\'t much of a statement for Brooks or the rest of this team. Do this against some quality opponents then we are turning some heads.

saintfan · 10-22-2003, 09:55 AM

Oh, I\'m sorry \"08\". Did you say something about interceptions? Hmmmm.....

Jake 162 Pass attempts -- 96 Completions -- 7 Touchdowns -- 5 Interceptoins
Brooks 215 Pass attempts -- 131 Completions -- 10 Touchdowns -- 4 Interceptions

Lets see...one fewer INT\'S and 53 more attempts. How you think you can argue those numbers in Jake\'s favor is...well...tell me how you can do that again?

Oh, by the way, the ratings are 80.1 and 89.8 respectively. Too bad they don\'t keep a stat for dropped passes...or do they? That\'ll give you something to do today. Lets see which team has dropped more. No tellin\' how much better Brooks\' numbers would be if the Saints receivers had been catching the balls they should catch huh?

Put down the Kool-Aid and tell me again what your point was.

WhoDat · 10-22-2003, 10:44 AM

I\'m not arguing either side here, but...

Saintfan - 08\'s point was that Delhomme threw 50 passes in one game with the defense knowing it was coming and he didn\'t throw a pick. We\'re not talking season stats.

However, if you do want to talk season stats, and again, remember, I think Brooks is playing well, should be the starter, I don\'t want Delhomme in NO, and think Brooks is showing plenty of signs that he can be the real deal, but, how many TURNOVERS does Brooks have versus Jake? AB may have fewer INTS, but I\'d bet he has more fumbles. Didn\'t he have two or three in one game at the beginning of the season?

Again, just playing devil\'s advocate here...

saintfan · 10-22-2003, 11:22 AM

Whodat is the devil...

:P

BillyCarpenter1 · 10-22-2003, 11:31 AM

This is amusing. I SHOULD go pull up some old posts to show what was being said by some members here about Jake. But, they don\'t and won\'t admit the truth. It used to be challenging to debate the Brooks/Delhomme issue, but Jake is clearly not in the same league with Brooks. We need to go back to the Brooks/Peyton debate -- It\'s more credible --

saintfan · 10-22-2003, 11:33 AM

Billy is the Devil...

:P

BillyCarpenter1 · 10-22-2003, 11:37 AM

No Devil here -- I\'m really cuttin\' the Delhommites a lot of slack here. I COULD bring up lots of stuff. I probably SHOULD, because they certainly haven\'t cut Brooks any slack or me for standing up for him. I also know that when Brooks has an average or a bad day, they will be right back to their bashing ways.

[Edited on 22/10/2003 by BillyCarpenter1]

10-21-2003, 10:36 PM	#11
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631	Don't take MY word for it... Herein lies the problem Billy. To 08, his approximation of Brooks is just as valid as yours is to you. And because Brooks has not proved undoubtedly that he is great or terrible, no one is more or less right. Everyone watched the same plays, reads the same articles, and see the same stats. We all come to different conclusions about those stats and plays and articles ourselves. Those conclusions are opinions, and no one is more right than the other. Your problem is simple. You watch the game and think, \"Brooks had a good day.\" Someone else sees the same game and thinks, \"Brooks played poorly.\" Now, unless he had a particularly spectacular or terrible game, it\'s hard to determine either way. Therefore, YOU are NOT right. Neither is 08 or whoever. You simply both have opinions, which seem to differ. Now, you seem to want members of this board to ignore Brooks\' poor play at times b/c he has potential. If Brooks isn\'t playing well and I say he sucks, I\'M RIGHT. Why? B/c I\'m talking about now. If I say he\'s a bum and he\'ll never get it and he will always be terrible, well, then your argument has some merit. Still, you need to learn that two people can watch the same events and look at the same numbers and come to COMPLETELY different conclusions. Yours aren\'t right, they\'re yours. Nothing more, nothing less.
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631	\"Excuses, excuses, excuses. ThatÃ¢Â€Â™s all anyone ever makes for the New Orleans SaintsÃ¢Â€Â™ organization.\" - Eric Narcisse \"Being a Saints fan is almost like being addicted to crack,\" he said.[i]\"You know you should stop, but you just can\'t.\"

10-21-2003, 10:57 PM	#12
BillyCarpenter1 Banned Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 2,209	Don't take MY word for it... Very weak WhoDat -- I\'m not talking about someone who judges Brooks on a game by game basis and you KNOW that. I\'m talking about the folks who say cut him, bench him, he\'s a bum, he\'s too stupid, etc, etc.. My point is correct and like I said, if you are honest, you will admit that these critcisms are UNJUST. Including some of yours !! ?? !! ??
BillyCarpenter1 Banned Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 2,209

10-22-2003, 12:53 AM	#13
saintz08 1000 Posts + Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 3,020	Don't take MY word for it... How nice , Saintsfan wrote one just for me . At no point that I have read does it say , \" Delhomme could not have filled in for a quarterback requireing surgery to a passing arm \" . Jake Delhomme has in fact proven he was capable to fill in last year , rather then start an injured rather ineffective Brooks . Delhomme is in an unfamiliar offense as in comparison to his study time in New Orleans and should at this point be considered a rookie to the system . If Jake had gone to San Francisco , under Walsh he would be in a much better position . He is in Carolina , running an offense that has less talent then the Saints and has not done bad for his first year . One rather amusing point is that in the loss to the Titans , Delhomme threw the ball 49 times and not one interception . With the running game stopped for the Panthers and the Titans knowing Delhomme was gonna have to air it out , not 1 interception . Took Brooks a couple of years to figure that one out . Jake Delhomme had a great game with 362 yards passing and two touchdowns and no interceptions, but that was mostly as Carolina had to catch up due to the large first-half deficit. The running game was taken out of commission early and only managed 44 total yards. Duece gets only 44 yards in one game and Brooks has usually thrown a couple of picks . [Edited on 22/10/2003 by saintz08]
saintz08 1000 Posts + Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 3,020	\"Americans play to win at all times. I wouldn\'t give a hoot in hell for a man who lost and laughed.\" - George S. Patton On another note, I\'ll take a bite of that crow 08. - Saintfan Brooks is a moron!! - Halo

10-22-2003, 03:09 AM	#14
seraph33 Registered Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Baton Rouge Posts: 68	Don't take MY word for it... Enough with the Brooks/Delhomme debate. Jesus it has been 4 weeks of it and it needs to end. I personally love Jake. This is his first year with the Panthers, first year as a starter. I think that if Carolina sticks with him, he will develop into a nice starter. He just works too damn hard not to. Brooks played very well this week. I hope he keeps on playing this way. Still we played very bad teams 2 weeks in a row and I am not sure if the Saints can do this to some quality opponents. If they pull off wins against Carolina and Tampa then I\'ll be impressed. Back to Brooks, as I have said before I don\'t feel that he has made sufficient progress as a starter. He has had the starting job for 3 years now and he still makes many of the boneheaded plays he did in his first year as a starter. Really I haven\'t seem much in the way of progression from him. He looked truly amazing when he came in after Blake went down to injury but hasn\'t looked that good since that season. Now I wouldn\'t mind it so much if he would be on the sidelines looking over coverage packages with McCarthy or something, but he doesn\'t. When he is on the sideline, he just stands there with his towel around his neck. It\'s almost as if he puts it all in McCarthy\'s hands. I don\'t know maybe that\'s how he wants it so he doesn\'t have to be held accountable. It just seems like he lacks so many of the intangibles that great quarterbacks have. Now to his credit something has stirred a fire under his *$3 the past two weeks cus I saw him actually getting somewhat passionate and audibling. That is an incouraging sign. With that said if Aaron Brooks is finally going to stand up and start walking the walk of a franchise QB (which is what we are paying him as) then by all means step up and we don\'t have to go looking for a replacement; however, if he doesn\'t PROGRESS then I\'m not satisfied with him as our long term answer. I\'m not saying cut him or anything like that. He is certainly better than all the Shulers, Billy Joe\'s, and other flake quarterbacks we have had here. Still if he doesn\'t show overall improvement by the season\'s end . . . then we should start looking for a young QB we can groom behind him for a couple years, similiar to what the JETS did with Pennington. In parting I know someone is going to jump on this post screaming to \"look at Brooks\' numbers from the past two weeks. That\'s not improvement?\" Yes good numbers and good performances as well, but against teams that are a combined 2-11 this season. I\'m sorry but that isn\'t much of a statement for Brooks or the rest of this team. Do this against some quality opponents then we are turning some heads.

10-22-2003, 09:55 AM	#15
saintfan Donated Plasma Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 18,556 Blog Entries: 5	Don't take MY word for it... Oh, I\'m sorry \"08\". Did you say something about interceptions? Hmmmm..... Jake 162 Pass attempts -- 96 Completions -- 7 Touchdowns -- 5 Interceptoins Brooks 215 Pass attempts -- 131 Completions -- 10 Touchdowns -- 4 Interceptions Lets see...one fewer INT\'S and 53 more attempts. How you think you can argue those numbers in Jake\'s favor is...well...tell me how you can do that again? Oh, by the way, the ratings are 80.1 and 89.8 respectively. Too bad they don\'t keep a stat for dropped passes...or do they? That\'ll give you something to do today. Lets see which team has dropped more. No tellin\' how much better Brooks\' numbers would be if the Saints receivers had been catching the balls they should catch huh? Put down the Kool-Aid and tell me again what your point was.
	C'mon Man...

Latest Blogs
2023 New Orleans Saints: Training Camp Last Blog: 08-01-2023 By: MarchingOn Puck the Fro Browl! Last Blog: 02-05-2023 By: neugey CFP: "Just Keep Doing What You're Doing" Last Blog: 12-08-2022 By: neugey

10-22-2003, 10:44 AM	#16
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631	Don't take MY word for it... I\'m not arguing either side here, but... Saintfan - 08\'s point was that Delhomme threw 50 passes in one game with the defense knowing it was coming and he didn\'t throw a pick. We\'re not talking season stats. However, if you do want to talk season stats, and again, remember, I think Brooks is playing well, should be the starter, I don\'t want Delhomme in NO, and think Brooks is showing plenty of signs that he can be the real deal, but, how many TURNOVERS does Brooks have versus Jake? AB may have fewer INTS, but I\'d bet he has more fumbles. Didn\'t he have two or three in one game at the beginning of the season? Again, just playing devil\'s advocate here...
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631	\"Excuses, excuses, excuses. ThatÃ¢Â€Â™s all anyone ever makes for the New Orleans SaintsÃ¢Â€Â™ organization.\" - Eric Narcisse \"Being a Saints fan is almost like being addicted to crack,\" he said.[i]\"You know you should stop, but you just can\'t.\"

10-22-2003, 11:22 AM	#17
saintfan Donated Plasma Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 18,556 Blog Entries: 5	Don't take MY word for it... Whodat is the devil... :P

10-22-2003, 11:31 AM	#18
BillyCarpenter1 Banned Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 2,209	Don't take MY word for it... This is amusing. I SHOULD go pull up some old posts to show what was being said by some members here about Jake. But, they don\'t and won\'t admit the truth. It used to be challenging to debate the Brooks/Delhomme issue, but Jake is clearly not in the same league with Brooks. We need to go back to the Brooks/Peyton debate -- It\'s more credible --
BillyCarpenter1 Banned Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 2,209

10-22-2003, 11:33 AM	#19
saintfan Donated Plasma Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 18,556 Blog Entries: 5	Don't take MY word for it... Billy is the Devil... :P

10-22-2003, 11:37 AM	#20
BillyCarpenter1 Banned Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 2,209	Don't take MY word for it... No Devil here -- I\'m really cuttin\' the Delhommites a lot of slack here. I COULD bring up lots of stuff. I probably SHOULD, because they certainly haven\'t cut Brooks any slack or me for standing up for him. I also know that when Brooks has an average or a bad day, they will be right back to their bashing ways. [Edited on 22/10/2003 by BillyCarpenter1]
BillyCarpenter1 Banned Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 2,209