O'Sullivan, Our Hope for a Super Future

coastalkid · 05-13-2004, 09:50 AM

I find it hard to place ALL of the blam for any of our losses lastyear on Brooks alone. Yes he did have some fumble issues last year but does anyone remember the ONE big fumble by Duece? No one got down on him, and shouldn\'t have either, but Brooks did improve in most statistical category. Holding on to the ball can be corrected. People such as brooksmustgo are quick to point out all of the talented Saints back ups going to the superbowl with another team makes me wonder what they would be saying if we actually did what you say and allowed Brooks to go to the Raiders for Woodson or for whatever we get and then the Raiders go to the superbowl with him??? What would you be saying then? It\'s not the fault of just one guy that is keeping us from the big one it is the chemistry of the team. There has not been a year in recent memory that the Saints had a real \"team\" concept. There seems to be some controversy every year. We need this team to come together. When a group of 11 guys play together on both sides of the ball they are very hard to beat. We have alot of good quality talent and experienced players and also young guys but until they mesh into a well oiled machine we will always fall short. It\'s not Brooks it\'s the chemistry.

saintz08 · 05-13-2004, 11:00 AM

It\'s not Brooks it\'s the chemistry.

Coastalkid

Could this be Leadership ??

When a group of 11 guys play together on both sides of the ball they are very hard to beat.

A leader on defense and a leader on offense .....

BrooksMustGo · 05-13-2004, 12:41 PM

People such as brooksmustgo are quick to point out all of the talented Saints back ups going to the superbowl with another team makes me wonder what they would be saying if we actually did what you say and allowed Brooks to go to the Raiders for Woodson or for whatever we get and then the Raiders go to the superbowl with him???

OK, arguendo let\'s say that we unload Brooks on the Raiders and they go to the superbowl. It would be exactly like Tampa fans griping about letting Dilfer go on to take the Ravens to the superbowl. We all know that the Ravens D took them to the big game. Brooks taking someone to the superbowl is just as likely. If the Raiders got to the superbowl with Brooks, it would be in spite of him. But he is the big armed QB that Davis really likes and he has the big mouth and attitude common to the Raiders. He\'d be a great fit there.

I find this unlikely, but I do think that Norv Turner might be able to get better performances out of Brooks. The major obstacle to Aaron Brooks improvement is Aaron Brooks. They kid is convinced he\'s the best to ever play the game. That sort of attitude precludes honest self appraisal and improvement. But with the Raiders not having a really running game, I don\'t see them going all the way. The Raider receivers are going to keep Brooks from being successful. He absolutely requires fast guys who get separation. He doesn\'t throw timing or crossing routes very well. Brooks shows no signs of staying in his protection and when he does move in the pocket, goes backwards. Brooks is also about to get really expensive. If I\'m going to spend the same kind of money, I\'d rather have Woodson, because he can do the job you pay him for.

As for JT, we have to make a decision on him right now. About a dozen teams are going to be willing to give up a 4th rounder to pick him up as a restricted free agent. An honestly, even if he\'s just moving up to 2nd on the depth chart, it\'s a good move for JT. But if we unload Brooks for value, we can potentially get an elite CB or high draft picks or both in the deal. Then we can simply have open competition for the starting spot in camp between 2 guys who have made a reputation for good decision making, good arms, and great leadership skills. Even if JT lost the starting job to Bouman, I think he could live with that. Bouman\'s like 32 or something, so JT would then become the heir apparant. But to even think for a second that JT will be willing to stay here and be 3rd on the depth chart when he could have a chance to compete for the starting job is a fantasy. Either we do something constructive with JT or we lose him this coming offseason. Brooks is a dead end and has made that abundantly clear in his entire time here. It\'s time to act on the most promising backup in the league right now.

GumboBC · 05-13-2004, 01:20 PM

BMG --

I actually enjoy reading any posts that have legtimate critcisms. Whether that be about Brooks, Haslett, or whoever. But, IMO, a lot of your remarks are just stuff you dream up in your head and you have no proof, and furthermore, you make those remarks and don\'t have anything to support them with. Take this remark on Brooks for example:

But he is the big armed QB that Davis really likes and he has the big mouth and attitude common to the Raiders. He\'d be a great fit there.

Big mouth? You know, Brooks has been highly criticised for not being more vocal. Everyone knows Brooks is not a loud mouth QB. Maybe Brooks is not \"media savvy\" but he\'s definately not a \"loud mouth\" QB.

Then there\'s this remark:

They kid is convinced he\'s the best to ever play the game.

You make this statement, which I feel is another one of those thing you just dreamed up, but you make this statement and don\'t back it up in any kind of way? Do you have any evidence to support this with?? You don\'t have to proof it like you\'re in a court of law, but it would be helpful if you told us why you think this and make an attempt at making a convicing arguement. Which I think is very unlikely you\'ll be able to do.

Now that we have that out of the way, I\'d like to show where I think you are wrong.

He absolutely requires fast guys who get separation.

You might have had a more convincing arguement if you talk about Brooks not being a great \"touch\" passer, but Brooks\' strong arm and passing ability make him one of the better quarterbacks at making throws into tight coverage. We all see Brooks throw those \"darts.\" That\'s far from being one of his problems.

As for JT, we have to make a decision on him right now.

Lord, Lord!! You sure have convinced yourself that a guy who has never played a down in the NFL is going to be something special. Luckily, we have some guys running this team that have the knowledge to know you don\'t go getting rid of a proven starting NFL QB and put the future of your team in the hands of a QB that has never thrown a pass in the NFL. I\'ll say this even if O\'Sullivan came in and took us to the superbowl, it would be the biggest gamble that a GM and coach has ever made in the history of the NFL. And, it would be a foolish decision.

coastalkid · 05-13-2004, 02:09 PM

Not sure if you were defending me, BC or not, but BMG is just opinionated. I don\'t mind him sharing his opinion. I did take insult to being called arguendo though but won\'t allow it to bother me.
His opinions are welcomed just as mine and everyone elses. The difference between a opinion of value and one without values is justification. He has none as you pointedout. Thanks for your reply though.
How anyone can make a statement as fact based upon what they think is not a fact it is a opinion. BMG sounds like one of those who always favors the back up guy and not the starter. I do agree with the leadership verses chemistry part though. We do need more leadership.

BrooksMustGo · 05-13-2004, 04:05 PM

Coastal, \"Arguendo\" = For the sake of argument. It\'s just a shorthand expression I picked up along the way to make sentences shorter. I apologize for giving offense though. I want everyone to be able to have their say here and I don\'t expect anyone to totally buy in to my admittedly biased take on Brooks. Billy is probably my favorite poster here because he generally represents the polar opposite of whatever view I tend to be advocating.

I think it\'s OK to say that everyone on this board is opinionated. Folks that aren\'t don\'t spend a lot of time thinking about the Saints in May. So I embrace my opinionated-ness.

As for substantiating my claims William:

\"Al\'s a big-arm guy,\" Baltimore player personnel director Ozzie Newsome says. \"No way he lets a gunner like Roethlisberger get by him.\"

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...immerman.draft

Even though he was wrong on the specific draft pick, I\'m thinking that Ozzie Newsome knows a fair bit about what Al Davis does and doesn\'t like in his QB\'s.

As for Brooks, we\'re all aware of his statements like, \" I pretty much owned them with my eyes the whole night.\" But I\'ll point back to his 1st contract holdout with us. (Remember he held out on the Packers too, as a 4th rounder, unbelievable. http://www.jsonline.com/packer/news/jul99/pack72799.asp)

http://cbs.sportsline.com/b/page/pre...573968,00.html

\"The quarterback should be the first priority,\" Brooks said as he sat leaning back on a chair inside Alltel Stadium. \"It\'s disrespectful to me not to have a new deal done. They look at me like I\'m a -- third-string quarterback. I\'m worth millions of dollars to this football team in revenue. I did what no other quarterback has done in Saints history, which is win a playoff game.
\"The more I talk about it, the more frustrated I get. I\'m a top-five quarterback in this league and I should be treated like one. I\'m not going to be in New Orleans if I\'m treated like this. They have their opportunity to do it now. If they don\'t, it\'s their fault.\"

He has a cockiness about him that helps him place himself on a level that he has not yet reached.

\"They all feel my pain,\" he said.
Believe this: They can hear it, too

I would agree that Brooks provides no leadership on the field, but get between him and his top 5 money and he makes an enormous amount of noise. This sort of thing I what I mean when I refer to big ego and big mouth.

As for the passing stuff. I have to admit, my good friend 08 has been a tremendous help in recognizing that Brooks doesn\'t throw timing patterns. He is a decent sandlot QB, but it isn\'t a sandlot league. It isn\'t like he can go into the huddle and say, \"OK, Joe, Donte, Jerome, Boo, go long and whoever gets open I\'ll throw to.\" And since you mention it, he can\'t throw a touch pass to save his life. I swear, has no one on the Saints staff ever heard of a bucket drill?

[Edited on 13/5/2004 by BrooksMustGo]

[Edited on 13/5/2004 by BrooksMustGo]

[Edited on 13/5/2004 by BrooksMustGo]

WhoDat · 05-13-2004, 06:00 PM

\"The quarterback should be the first priority,\" Brooks said as he sat leaning back on a chair inside Alltel Stadium. \"It\'s disrespectful to me not to have a new deal done. They look at me like I\'m a -- third-string quarterback. I\'m worth millions of dollars to this football team in revenue. I did what no other quarterback has done in Saints history, which is win a playoff game. \"

\"The more I talk about it, the more frustrated I get. I\'m a top-five quarterback in this league and I should be treated like one. I\'m not going to be in New Orleans if I\'m treated like this. They have their opportunity to do it now. If they don\'t, it\'s their fault.\"

You know if Peyton Manning said that I would think it was trashy and that guy is deserving. Brooks, especially then, was WAY out of line with those comments. That\'s sickening - really I\'m getting more and more pissed having to reread that poo.

One thing is clear though - Billy, Saintfan, and Danno are wrong. The QB IS SOLELY responsible for wins and losses. Don\'t believe me? \"I did what no other quarterback has done in Saints history, which is win a playoff game.\" I guess AB thinks the QB is responsible for wins and losses - I guess that makes him pretty average over the last three years... definitely not top 5.

JKool · 05-14-2004, 01:22 AM

WhoDat, this is your one style of argument I can\'t understand.

We know that you don\'t believe that the QB is solely responsible for wins and losses - otherwise, we could just have QB contests instead of games. But, you quote Brooks and seem to think that because he says it, it is true - please tell me you\'re joking? Furthermore, Brooks saying this or that dumb thing has no bearing on how good a QB he is, unless he says it to the guy who is protecting him or he is throwing the ball too.

Ok, I know you\'re kidding, but sheesh.

Danno · 05-14-2004, 08:40 AM

I\'m guessing that public speaking has never been one of Brooks\' strong points.
He\'s definitely got some issues. He has lots of talent but seems to have a Napolean complex doesn\'t he. Remember his \"I\'m not a running QB\" comments? He implied he didn\'t want to be labeled as the stereotypical black QB that simply takes off running when his 1st WR is covered.

I wouldn\'t put much stock into any of his public comments.

Aaron Brooks is Charles Barkley, without the charisma.

WhoDat · 05-14-2004, 10:08 AM

Yes Jkool, that was sarcasm. But it is funny to me that people on this board defend Brooks commonly making the argument that the TEAM let HIM down, yet Brooks claims that HE is the reason the Saints won a playoff game. Their own golden boy is contradicting their statements. Those were pretty dumb and selfish statements - and I often hear about how Brooks isn\'t dumb and isn\'t selfish on this board. Seems maybe it is those people who don\'t know the real Brooks.

05-13-2004, 09:50 AM	#11
coastalkid 100th Post Join Date: May 2003 Location: Spain Posts: 287	O'Sullivan, Our Hope for a Super Future I find it hard to place ALL of the blam for any of our losses lastyear on Brooks alone. Yes he did have some fumble issues last year but does anyone remember the ONE big fumble by Duece? No one got down on him, and shouldn\'t have either, but Brooks did improve in most statistical category. Holding on to the ball can be corrected. People such as brooksmustgo are quick to point out all of the talented Saints back ups going to the superbowl with another team makes me wonder what they would be saying if we actually did what you say and allowed Brooks to go to the Raiders for Woodson or for whatever we get and then the Raiders go to the superbowl with him??? What would you be saying then? It\'s not the fault of just one guy that is keeping us from the big one it is the chemistry of the team. There has not been a year in recent memory that the Saints had a real \"team\" concept. There seems to be some controversy every year. We need this team to come together. When a group of 11 guys play together on both sides of the ball they are very hard to beat. We have alot of good quality talent and experienced players and also young guys but until they mesh into a well oiled machine we will always fall short. It\'s not Brooks it\'s the chemistry.

05-13-2004, 11:00 AM	#12
saintz08 1000 Posts + Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 3,020	O'Sullivan, Our Hope for a Super Future It\'s not Brooks it\'s the chemistry. Coastalkid Could this be Leadership ?? When a group of 11 guys play together on both sides of the ball they are very hard to beat. A leader on defense and a leader on offense .....
saintz08 1000 Posts + Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 3,020

05-13-2004, 12:41 PM	#13
BrooksMustGo 1000 Posts + Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 1,762	O'Sullivan, Our Hope for a Super Future People such as brooksmustgo are quick to point out all of the talented Saints back ups going to the superbowl with another team makes me wonder what they would be saying if we actually did what you say and allowed Brooks to go to the Raiders for Woodson or for whatever we get and then the Raiders go to the superbowl with him??? OK, arguendo let\'s say that we unload Brooks on the Raiders and they go to the superbowl. It would be exactly like Tampa fans griping about letting Dilfer go on to take the Ravens to the superbowl. We all know that the Ravens D took them to the big game. Brooks taking someone to the superbowl is just as likely. If the Raiders got to the superbowl with Brooks, it would be in spite of him. But he is the big armed QB that Davis really likes and he has the big mouth and attitude common to the Raiders. He\'d be a great fit there. I find this unlikely, but I do think that Norv Turner might be able to get better performances out of Brooks. The major obstacle to Aaron Brooks improvement is Aaron Brooks. They kid is convinced he\'s the best to ever play the game. That sort of attitude precludes honest self appraisal and improvement. But with the Raiders not having a really running game, I don\'t see them going all the way. The Raider receivers are going to keep Brooks from being successful. He absolutely requires fast guys who get separation. He doesn\'t throw timing or crossing routes very well. Brooks shows no signs of staying in his protection and when he does move in the pocket, goes backwards. Brooks is also about to get really expensive. If I\'m going to spend the same kind of money, I\'d rather have Woodson, because he can do the job you pay him for. As for JT, we have to make a decision on him right now. About a dozen teams are going to be willing to give up a 4th rounder to pick him up as a restricted free agent. An honestly, even if he\'s just moving up to 2nd on the depth chart, it\'s a good move for JT. But if we unload Brooks for value, we can potentially get an elite CB or high draft picks or both in the deal. Then we can simply have open competition for the starting spot in camp between 2 guys who have made a reputation for good decision making, good arms, and great leadership skills. Even if JT lost the starting job to Bouman, I think he could live with that. Bouman\'s like 32 or something, so JT would then become the heir apparant. But to even think for a second that JT will be willing to stay here and be 3rd on the depth chart when he could have a chance to compete for the starting job is a fantasy. Either we do something constructive with JT or we lose him this coming offseason. Brooks is a dead end and has made that abundantly clear in his entire time here. It\'s time to act on the most promising backup in the league right now.
	http://www.blackandgold.net/site/signature/buddysig.jpg

05-13-2004, 01:20 PM	#14
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616	O'Sullivan, Our Hope for a Super Future BMG -- I actually enjoy reading any posts that have legtimate critcisms. Whether that be about Brooks, Haslett, or whoever. But, IMO, a lot of your remarks are just stuff you dream up in your head and you have no proof, and furthermore, you make those remarks and don\'t have anything to support them with. Take this remark on Brooks for example: But he is the big armed QB that Davis really likes and he has the big mouth and attitude common to the Raiders. He\'d be a great fit there. Big mouth? You know, Brooks has been highly criticised for not being more vocal. Everyone knows Brooks is not a loud mouth QB. Maybe Brooks is not \"media savvy\" but he\'s definately not a \"loud mouth\" QB. Then there\'s this remark: They kid is convinced he\'s the best to ever play the game. You make this statement, which I feel is another one of those thing you just dreamed up, but you make this statement and don\'t back it up in any kind of way? Do you have any evidence to support this with?? You don\'t have to proof it like you\'re in a court of law, but it would be helpful if you told us why you think this and make an attempt at making a convicing arguement. Which I think is very unlikely you\'ll be able to do. Now that we have that out of the way, I\'d like to show where I think you are wrong. He absolutely requires fast guys who get separation. You might have had a more convincing arguement if you talk about Brooks not being a great \"touch\" passer, but Brooks\' strong arm and passing ability make him one of the better quarterbacks at making throws into tight coverage. We all see Brooks throw those \"darts.\" That\'s far from being one of his problems. As for JT, we have to make a decision on him right now. Lord, Lord!! You sure have convinced yourself that a guy who has never played a down in the NFL is going to be something special. Luckily, we have some guys running this team that have the knowledge to know you don\'t go getting rid of a proven starting NFL QB and put the future of your team in the hands of a QB that has never thrown a pass in the NFL. I\'ll say this even if O\'Sullivan came in and took us to the superbowl, it would be the biggest gamble that a GM and coach has ever made in the history of the NFL. And, it would be a foolish decision.
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616

05-13-2004, 02:09 PM	#15
coastalkid 100th Post Join Date: May 2003 Location: Spain Posts: 287	O'Sullivan, Our Hope for a Super Future Not sure if you were defending me, BC or not, but BMG is just opinionated. I don\'t mind him sharing his opinion. I did take insult to being called arguendo though but won\'t allow it to bother me. His opinions are welcomed just as mine and everyone elses. The difference between a opinion of value and one without values is justification. He has none as you pointedout. Thanks for your reply though. How anyone can make a statement as fact based upon what they think is not a fact it is a opinion. BMG sounds like one of those who always favors the back up guy and not the starter. I do agree with the leadership verses chemistry part though. We do need more leadership.

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

05-13-2004, 04:05 PM	#16
BrooksMustGo 1000 Posts + Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 1,762	O'Sullivan, Our Hope for a Super Future Coastal, \"Arguendo\" = For the sake of argument. It\'s just a shorthand expression I picked up along the way to make sentences shorter. I apologize for giving offense though. I want everyone to be able to have their say here and I don\'t expect anyone to totally buy in to my admittedly biased take on Brooks. Billy is probably my favorite poster here because he generally represents the polar opposite of whatever view I tend to be advocating. I think it\'s OK to say that everyone on this board is opinionated. Folks that aren\'t don\'t spend a lot of time thinking about the Saints in May. So I embrace my opinionated-ness. As for substantiating my claims William: \"Al\'s a big-arm guy,\" Baltimore player personnel director Ozzie Newsome says. \"No way he lets a gunner like Roethlisberger get by him.\" http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/200...immerman.draft Even though he was wrong on the specific draft pick, I\'m thinking that Ozzie Newsome knows a fair bit about what Al Davis does and doesn\'t like in his QB\'s. As for Brooks, we\'re all aware of his statements like, \" I pretty much owned them with my eyes the whole night.\" But I\'ll point back to his 1st contract holdout with us. (Remember he held out on the Packers too, as a 4th rounder, unbelievable. http://www.jsonline.com/packer/news/jul99/pack72799.asp) http://cbs.sportsline.com/b/page/pre...573968,00.html \"The quarterback should be the first priority,\" Brooks said as he sat leaning back on a chair inside Alltel Stadium. \"It\'s disrespectful to me not to have a new deal done. They look at me like I\'m a -- third-string quarterback. I\'m worth millions of dollars to this football team in revenue. I did what no other quarterback has done in Saints history, which is win a playoff game. \"The more I talk about it, the more frustrated I get. I\'m a top-five quarterback in this league and I should be treated like one. I\'m not going to be in New Orleans if I\'m treated like this. They have their opportunity to do it now. If they don\'t, it\'s their fault.\" He has a cockiness about him that helps him place himself on a level that he has not yet reached. \"They all feel my pain,\" he said. Believe this: They can hear it, too I would agree that Brooks provides no leadership on the field, but get between him and his top 5 money and he makes an enormous amount of noise. This sort of thing I what I mean when I refer to big ego and big mouth. As for the passing stuff. I have to admit, my good friend 08 has been a tremendous help in recognizing that Brooks doesn\'t throw timing patterns. He is a decent sandlot QB, but it isn\'t a sandlot league. It isn\'t like he can go into the huddle and say, \"OK, Joe, Donte, Jerome, Boo, go long and whoever gets open I\'ll throw to.\" And since you mention it, he can\'t throw a touch pass to save his life. I swear, has no one on the Saints staff ever heard of a bucket drill? [Edited on 13/5/2004 by BrooksMustGo] [Edited on 13/5/2004 by BrooksMustGo] [Edited on 13/5/2004 by BrooksMustGo]
	http://www.blackandgold.net/site/signature/buddysig.jpg

05-13-2004, 06:00 PM	#17
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631	O'Sullivan, Our Hope for a Super Future \"The quarterback should be the first priority,\" Brooks said as he sat leaning back on a chair inside Alltel Stadium. \"It\'s disrespectful to me not to have a new deal done. They look at me like I\'m a -- third-string quarterback. I\'m worth millions of dollars to this football team in revenue. I did what no other quarterback has done in Saints history, which is win a playoff game. \" \"The more I talk about it, the more frustrated I get. I\'m a top-five quarterback in this league and I should be treated like one. I\'m not going to be in New Orleans if I\'m treated like this. They have their opportunity to do it now. If they don\'t, it\'s their fault.\" You know if Peyton Manning said that I would think it was trashy and that guy is deserving. Brooks, especially then, was WAY out of line with those comments. That\'s sickening - really I\'m getting more and more pissed having to reread that poo. One thing is clear though - Billy, Saintfan, and Danno are wrong. The QB IS SOLELY responsible for wins and losses. Don\'t believe me? \"I did what no other quarterback has done in Saints history, which is win a playoff game.\" I guess AB thinks the QB is responsible for wins and losses - I guess that makes him pretty average over the last three years... definitely not top 5.
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.\"

05-14-2004, 01:22 AM	#18
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	O'Sullivan, Our Hope for a Super Future WhoDat, this is your one style of argument I can\'t understand. We know that you don\'t believe that the QB is solely responsible for wins and losses - otherwise, we could just have QB contests instead of games. But, you quote Brooks and seem to think that because he says it, it is true - please tell me you\'re joking? Furthermore, Brooks saying this or that dumb thing has no bearing on how good a QB he is, unless he says it to the guy who is protecting him or he is throwing the ball too. Ok, I know you\'re kidding, but sheesh.
	"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks

05-14-2004, 08:40 AM	#19
Danno Truth Addict Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Spanish Fort, AL (via NO and B/R) Posts: 24,720	O'Sullivan, Our Hope for a Super Future I\'m guessing that public speaking has never been one of Brooks\' strong points. He\'s definitely got some issues. He has lots of talent but seems to have a Napolean complex doesn\'t he. Remember his \"I\'m not a running QB\" comments? He implied he didn\'t want to be labeled as the stereotypical black QB that simply takes off running when his 1st WR is covered. I wouldn\'t put much stock into any of his public comments. Aaron Brooks is Charles Barkley, without the charisma.

05-14-2004, 10:08 AM	#20
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631	O'Sullivan, Our Hope for a Super Future Yes Jkool, that was sarcasm. But it is funny to me that people on this board defend Brooks commonly making the argument that the TEAM let HIM down, yet Brooks claims that HE is the reason the Saints won a playoff game. Their own golden boy is contradicting their statements. Those were pretty dumb and selfish statements - and I often hear about how Brooks isn\'t dumb and isn\'t selfish on this board. Seems maybe it is those people who don\'t know the real Brooks.
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631