Comparisons
 

5. QB Brooks (NO) Groomed For Bigger Leadership Role

Clipped from Nick Wishart article in the St. Louis Post-Dispatch:

The club is doing everything it can to help quarterback Aaron Brooks
further develop his leadership skills. Last week, Brooks and a few
of his coaches and teammates attended a two-day leadership seminar
at the team\'s facility. Brooks has also been drilled on the side
with reminders placed in his locker.

\"Win each sprint drill.\"

\"Always be on time.\"

\"Be the first one to film study and the last one to leave.\"

Next up for Brooks will be a few days being mentored by Hall of
Famer Joe Montana in training camp.

But when you hear Brooks talk it sounds like he thinks he\'s already
there.

\"I know who I am and what I\'ve got to offer,\" Brooks said. \"People
in this locker room, the team, the coaches, they know what\'s up.

\"They know it\'s my team, and it\'s going to be like that as long as
I\'m here. I\'ve always been a leader in my own way.\"

http://www.footballguys.com/03update39.htm

Sems like Brooks leadership is all in his own mind ... ;)

Comparisons
 

As I have said many many many times before, people (in general) on this particular board that don\'t like Brooks don\'t generally dislike him because of his performance. Ya\'ll know who you are. All this bickering about his numbers here or his number there is just their attempt to prove an opinion. The Saints, quite simply, score enough to win. They have the last two years, even with the drop in performance last year. Brooks\' number go up...point total goes down. STILL, the Saints were scoring enough to win in the NFL. The problem is elsewhere. This debate continues, not because of any particular love for Brooks by anyone here, but because of the persistance of certain people who think this team needs a new QB. Can anyone tell me that Brooks numbers aren\'t good enough to win?

Comparisons
 

Win 8 games or the play offs ???

The point is simple , a team has to decide the power scheme . Do the Saints have an offensive philosophy or a defensive philosophy ???

Comparisons
 

08, your insistance to hold Aaron Brooks responsible for everything is laughable.

You\'re as bad as Whodat. Can you really tell me that Brooks numbers, regardless of whether or not your feelings are hurt over Jake Delhomme playing elsewhere, aren\'t good enough to win? No, you can\'t. You never have been able to because his numbers are good enough, and even better than they\'d need to be.

The simple FACT is that with AB as the QB the Saints score enough to win. You can continue to focus on the wrong position if it helps you sleep at night, but you obviously can\'t see the forest for the trees.

Comparisons
 

It is really a simple question ???

Can you answer it without going into some tirade about an agenda or my sleep patterns ???

Comparisons
 

You didn\'t answer the question, you asked a question. I think you and whodat are the same person.

Here\'s the question again 08...only a few grades lower...the added part at the end of the original question is there so that maybe we can get a specific answer.

Can anyone tell me that Brooks numbers aren\'t good enough to win (it all)?

Comparisons
 

So let me get this straight .

( it all ) Means the Super Bowl ???

Are we basing this on the current Defense ???

Are we going with the majority of cap spending on the offensive side of the Ball ??

Comparisons
 

Is the question not presented in a simple enough form?

1. Look at Brooks number\'s from the previous season.

2. From those numbers, see if you can determine whether or not a team who\'s QB had those numbers (or worse numbers) could win the Superbowl.

I really don\'t know if I can be any more straight forward than that.

Comparisons
 

Sure you can .

You can tell me whether you want the correlation to an offensive or a defensive schemed team .

To make it simpler for you :

A. Bucs - Defensive schemed team
B. Rams - Offensive schemed team

Pick one ........ Pretty simple....A or B

Comparisons
 

Please forgive me for backing you into a corner 08. My only intention was to get you to answer a simple question. You can\'t. It\'s ok.

Comparisons
 

Collins, Culpepper, Maddux, Kitna and Brad Johnson all had similar numbers and none of them made the playoffs.

Johnson was even 5th in the league in yardage.

Tom Brady had about the same yardage as Brooks but with a higher completion percentage though. Delhomme threw for fewer yards and he\'s in the big game too.

So I guess that yes, Brooks numbers could be the same as those of a superbowl QB. But then Brooks numbers could be the same as those of a 6-10 QB too.

Comparisons
 

Thank you Thank you Thank you BMG. See the point? People wanna make Brooks the reason the Saints didn\'t make the playoffs. I think that based on your response it ain\'t all about the QB and that Brooks\' numbers are fine. Thank You ! ;)

Comparisons
 

My problem with Brooks has never really been his numbers, it\'s been his head and his heart. And yea, I think he\'s a big reason we don\'t go to the playoffs.

Comparisons
 

Really? His numbers indicate otherwise. You can question his heart all day. That\'s fine...but unless you\'re in the huddle with him I\'m not sure how you quantify that. I think the defense is a far bigger reason this team didn\'t make the playoffs. I guess we can just agree to disagree. ;)

Comparisons
 

I\'ve seen Brooks LEAD big come backs in several games. I\'ve seen Brooks make key plays in critical situations. I\'ve seen Brooks have monster games against great defenses and not-so-great defenses.

I\'ve also seen Brooks make mistakes. Hey, Brooks is not perfect and he has cost the Saints games in the past. But, all QB\'s have cost their teams games. Overall Brooks has carried his weight. Which is why I don\'t see why folks are pointing the finger at Brooks. There are REAL problems on this team that need to be addressed that are keeping us out of the playoffs. And Brooks is far from being one of those problems. Brooks is definately a playoff caliber QB, at the very least, but some treat him like he\'s holding this team back and have no EVIDENCE that is the case.

I\'ve asked for facts and all I get are opinions. Last year folks wanted to look at stats. This year they don\'t want to talk about stats or completion percentage. They want to talk about leadership. Is leadership what\'s holding us back? Or, is defense holding us back and also holding Aaron Brooks back from truly becoming an elite QB in this league?

I think the Saints are holding Brooks back and not the other way around!!

Comparisons
 

No one is presenting any FACTS, merely statistics. Some people are presenting statistics and stating their OPINION that these stats support their OPINION. When people with the opposing OPINION posts statistics they believe support their OPINION, all of a sudden statistics don\'t mean anything.

What is ridiculous is the constantly changing \"importance\" of individual stats to whatever the flavor-of-the-month is for evaluating whether a QB is \"good\". Last year our scoring a billion points all year long and AB\'s involvement in that stat made him \"good.\" This year his completion percentage and low number of interceptions (despite setting an NFL record for fumbles lost) make him \"good.\" The point is that regardless of pulling a stat out of your @*& to support it, IT IS ALL JUST OPINION!

It would be great if everyone would quit knocking other people\'s opinion as \"dumb\", \"unsupported\", \"crazy\" or an \"agenda.\" Your OWN OPINION is no more valid, nor any more \"dumb\", \"unsupported\", \"crazy\" or an \"agenda.\"

This message has been brought to you by my opinion, and hold no more nor less value than anyone elses.

Comparisons
 

Well said FF.

Comparisons
 

My opinion may not be more valid than anyone else\'s on this board, but it is my opinion that their are plenty of dumb opinions on this board. However, I hate almost everyone, so I might be biased. :P

Comparisons
 

What\'s well said about it?

FF said this:


Now here\'s a FACT and not an opinion. NO WHERE in this thread did anyone say someone was:

\"dumb\", \"unsupported\", \"crazy\" or an \"agenda.\" Your OWN OPINION is no more valid, nor any more \"dumb\", \"unsupported\", \"crazy\" or an \"agenda.

To me it was neither \"well said\" or the truth, but just an attempt to post something that hadn\'t been said at all.

Comparisons
 

Leave it to you to take it as a personal attack and get defensive....

The post I made did not quote anyone in this thread, but now that it is out there - all of those things have been said by various people on this board. Enough is enough, we are all adults here. I can disagree with your opinion (and almost always do) without dogging your opinion out. It takes some self-control and some consideration for others, but it can be done.

Comparisons
 

I didn\'t take it as a personal attack. I did however take it as you posting in a thread that was going fine until you made reference to people saying;



[Edited on 27/1/2004 by BillyC]

[Edited on 27/1/2004 by ColdFusion]

Comparisons
 

I sure am sorry you took my post as something negative. I didn\'t see anything negative in it, but each person is entitled to their opinion. I respectfully disagree with your implication that I somehow started trouble by asking people to be nice to one another.

Comparisons
 

FrenzyFan --

Look, this is nothing personal towards you. It\'s just this board has more drama than a soap opera. Most of the drama is caused not by what someone originally posts, but by other members carring it on and on and on. It starts in one thread and carries over into the next thread, and personally, I\'m tired of all the whining. People need to get over themselves and realize that everything isn\'t personal. ( I\'m not talking about you FF)

People have the right to question anything I think. As long as it\'s not insulting. Why does everyone feel compelled to do the moderator\'s job? Everyone knows what the rules are and I think if certain members would quit trying to be the \"BOARD POLICE\" that it wouldn\'t be nearly as much trouble on this board. No hard feelings.

Comparisons
 

Is this not being the \"board police\"??

I have another question:

Why is it that when you look at statistics and make some inference that becomes a \"FACT\", but when we do the same it is an \"OPINION\"? Hey BC, you show me some hard facts that this team is holding the Brooks back. Stop, before you even try, don\'t do it. You can\'t. You cannot prove a negative and it\'s subjective anyway. I could say that you are the most disruptive member on this board. I could post some of your previous comments as proof. Would that make it true? Of course not. My advice is to stop talking about the \"facts\" b/c there are none here. There are opinions. Arguing the facts you be member A saying, \"AB\'s efficiency rating was 88.8 this season.\" Member B: \"No it wasn\'t.\" That\'s an argument about fact b/c it can be determined without inferences or assumptions or analysis. Everything else is an OPINION, including everything you post.


Finally,

Who said that? I said that last season... or maybe more accurately, Haslett\'s decision to play Brooks is the reason we missed the playoffs. Can you show me where someone said that about this season?

Comparisons
 

WhoDat --

Look dude, I\'m tired of all of these games. I know what\'s fair and what isn\'t. You never hear me saying someone can\'t post their opinions. Hell, the more the merrier. What I am getting tired of is all the BS. I\'m going to call it like I see it and I will do it without insulting anyone. If you want to debate ANYTHING I say, then feel free to jump in.

But, don\'t insult my intelligence by telling me there are NO facts. There are theories, but when evidence proves those theories out, they then become facts.... Not that that relates to any one particular debate on here, but please don\'t try to tell me there are no facts when it comes to football.

This board has become about: I\'m tired or reading about this.
Or, Don\'t question me about this.
Or, you hurt my feelings.
Or, you are being antagonistic.

Just a bunch of whining in general, when I see no one really causing any trouble on here. If I\'m guilty of it, then so is EVERYONE else. Yet, I get singled out. What gives?









[Edited on 27/1/2004 by BillyC]

Comparisons
 

It is not your place to worry about things like this.