whowatches

Better question: what happens to the poor goat if he loses?

WhoDat

1. Never did I say AB couldn\'t be an NFL QB or a Starter with the exception of when he was hurt. In that case, yes, I did say that he shouldn\'t be our starter. I have argued that the Saints needed an open and fair QB competition. Think about this - Delhomme\'s numbers last year weren\'t all that far off from Brooks\' numbers in 2001. Imagine what will happen to Delhomme if he is given the same free pass, attention, training, QB coaches, access to former greats, and all of the other things AB has received from the Saints. C\'mon Saintfan - even you have said Delhomme should have gotten a fair shake when Haslett came in. I\'m not suggesting that Delhomme was definitively better that Brooks or Blake in 2000, but he certainly wasn\'t given much of a chance to show whether or not he was. Once Brooks took over, he was the guy... period. I think any position should be open and up for grabs by the best player available. I\'m not suggesting that when a guy\'s in a slump or has a bad game that he be yanked, but there needs to be competition for positions. That didn\'t happen at the QB position after Brooks took over.

2. Brooks WAS NOT deserving of his TOP FIVE QB in the league salary when he got it. He is YET to finish in the top five EVER in his career (composite). Salaries have gone up and he is probably now a lot clser to deserving of that money. If Delhomme is getting $38 now, Brooks is definitely deserving of $36 - however that wasn\'t always the case.

3. I\'mnot suggesting that I\'ve supported AB, but you guys continue to suggest that I simply have some hateful grudge against him. I DEFENDED the guy last season. I mean, I said he can and should be a Pro Bowler this year. I said I think he will have a great year. And with all this, I obviously still hate the guy. OK - you love Jim Haslett and think he is THE reason that the Saints have won ANY games in the last 4 years. Sound ridiculuos? Well I\'m just polarizing some old comments you made about the guy to the same extreme to which you polarize my commetns about Brooks.

C\'mon Saintfan, I love ya, but you\'ve done everything to prove Jim Haslett is the best coach in football.

\"Excuses, excuses, excuses. That’s all anyone ever makes for the New Orleans Saints’ 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.\"

saintz08

When does Brooks holdout again and want to renegotiate his renegotiated contract ??

saintfan

Yes, you have argued that. You\'ve also argued a thousand other things...and 996 of \'em were from an anti-Brooks angle. Deny that if you will, but it\'s the truth and you know it is. The thing is that there is no evidence that there wasn\'t a \"fair\" QB competition. Haz wasn\'t the first guy to overlook Jake. Bill Parcells did...TWICE. Mike Ditka cut him. Jake couldn\'t crack the starting lineup in NFLE. Jake\'s 38 Million dollar deal is backloaded...likely because the Panthers aren\'t sure either. I don\'t say these things in an attempt to drag Jake down. I say these things because with you EVERYTHING is an indictment against Haz. And before you get started, let me be clear. I\'m NOT saying Haz is the greatest coach of all time or even near it, but I WILL say his numbers, when set side by side with Bellichik or Parcells or some of the others widely considered to be \"quality\" coaches, Jim\'s numbers DO NOT suffer.

The players that speak poorly of Haz are the players who left here because of personal issues or contract issues or simply because they\'re jerks. Joe Horn was pissed, sure he was, but lets consider why before we start blaming the coach for the sake of having someone to blame.

You think Brooks is worth his Contract now, but he wasn\'t worth it then? Maybe we should have waited so he would have cost us more? Do you realize the biggest issue you have with Brooks is his contract? Do you realize that wasn\'t always the case? Can you see and admit that Brooks is a fairly solid QB and his contract is nearly the only thing left you have to complain about? C\'mon man.

C'mon Man...

GumboBC

WhoDat --

Look, saintfan is right. You do have valid arguements a lot of times. But, you can\'t simply point to the valid agruements you have made and say: \"See, I\'m fair\".

You know I have admited I\'m unfair when it comes to talking about Jake. And I admit I go over the top in defending Brooks. But, I will also level with you about Brooks so long as I don\'t have to deal with the BS....

You on the other hand, portray yourself as being the most fair and balanced guy on here and refuse to admit you are biased when it comes to certain things.

To point out what saintfan has already pointed out to you. You change your arguement against Brooks as fast as he proves you wrong. First it was:

1. Completion Percentage: This clearly showed you that he was not one of the best QB\'s in the league. But, Elway never cracked the 60% completion mark until his 11th year. We understand it would be better if Brooks completed a higher % of his passes. But, you are just using completion percentage for.......well........because it was handy and you wanted to convice us that Brooks was no good. I call that REACHING and that\'s being kind.

2. Not right for the West Coast Offense: I don\'t know how many times we had to hear this from you and a bunch of others. You were completely convinced of this and tried to convince us of it for a LONG time. We have never run a West Coast Offense and McCarthy said we had NEVER run a West Coast Offense. McCarthy\'s offense sends the receievers on much deeper routes than a West Coast Offense and it takes longer for the patterns to develop. Which might explain why Brooks isn\'t making those quick short throws like you tried to convice us he needs to be doing. You were incorrect, WhoDat.

3. Brooks\' Contract: Doesn\'t deserve it. Hasn\'t produced to his top 5 salary. But, players are paid on potential all the time. I can name 100-guys in the NFL that fits your criteria of undeserving. But, Brooks is unique in your mind. I call that BIASED.

You call it what you want, WhoDat. Maybe you\'re just trying to point out to us ALL the flaws Brooks has. I don\'t know? Just seems you have always been very biased to me.

Now, you have been doing better as of late. We\'re not so different, WhoDat......LMAO

[Edited on 25/6/2004 by GumboBC]

WhoDat

First of all, I never said that my opinion of Brooks hasn\'t changed? In fact, many times I\'ve said I liked the guy a lot in 2000 and 2001. However, your facts aren\'t quite clear. I said that Brooks was not really fit for our offense even in 2001 when I saw him becoming a very good QB. Even then, when I supported the guy, I said he wasn\'t efficient and effective and not fit for the West Coast. You know what? HE\'S NOT. Why do you think the offense changed?!?! Two reason. 1. AARON BROOKS. 2. Deuce McAllister.

You guys act like it is a coincidence. We DID run the west coast. That has changed b/c Brooks COULD NOT make the types of throws, reads, etc. he needed to be successful in the system - so Papa Haslett changed the system.

Next, I was outraged with Brooks\' comments and actions regarding his contract when it happened. That\'s nothing new. I\'ve been upset for years over that. He was undeserving if you ask me.

It\'s amazing that you guys continue to attack after I make comments like:

\" I DEFENDED the guy last season. I mean, I said he can and should be a Pro Bowler this year. I said I think he will have a great year. \"

I mean, I have an anti-Brooks anti-Haslett agenda? OK. Fine. You guys have a pro-Brooks pro-Haslett agenda where you support the two no matter how poorly they perform and regardless of how stupid their decisions are. Every angle you two take is one that seeks to cast the two in a better light and make them into saviors that they clearly are not. Fair?

\"Excuses, excuses, excuses. That’s all anyone ever makes for the New Orleans Saints’ 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.\"

GumboBC

See, there you go again. First, McCarthy said we have NEVER run the west coast offense. Now, you can call McCarthy a liar, but I\'ve watched the offense under McCarthy from day 1 and it\'s always been the same. As a matter of fact, they went out and got guys who fit the system McCarthy wants to run which simulates the Rams offense more than the 49\'ers offense.

Have you ever looked at Green Bays offense with Favre. Looks a helluva lot different than any west coast offense I\'ve ever see. West Coast in name only, brother.

Now you want me to believe that McCarthy has switched to an offense that he has no experience running and the only offense he has ever known. That\'s some kinda statement, WhoDat. But, it does help you when you don\'t want to admit you were mistaken.

[Edited on 25/6/2004 by GumboBC]

WhoDat

Billy, if you cannot see the differences between the offense when Blake was QB and Williams was RB versus the offense in say 2002 then you\'ve got other problems. Take the goggles off my friend. Or put the Tang down.

GumboBC

I might have other problems, WhoDat. But, I DO know what a west coast offense is and I do recognize when we don\'t run one.

Will you kindly explain to me HOW our offense is different?

Do the receivers run different routes?
Do the tightends run different routes?
Do the offensive linemen block differently?
Does the runningback play differently?

What\'s changed, WhoDat? What\'s changed is the players, not the scheme.

The only real thing that\'s changed is we got rid of Ricky Williams and got Deuce who better fits the system and got receivers that can strecth the field like McCarty and Haslett wanted to begin with. Can ya hear me? How \'bout now??? :P

WhoDat

Hehehe - Billy Strike Again!!!

The Saints do not and have never run the West Coast.

Oops.

From CNNSI:
First, new coach Jim Haslett hired Packers quarterbacks coach Mike McCarthy to revamp the offense. McCarthy is only 36, but he\'s well-schooled in a run-oriented version of the West Coast offense (think Broncos, Chiefs and Titans).

From NFL.com about Deuce in 2001
The trade immediately made McAllister, the club\'s No. 1 pick in 2001, the focal point of the Saints\' offense. It also ushered in a new era for the New Orleans attack. A ball-control unit once built around Williams\' power now features the speed and big-play potential of McAllister, who will be used as both a runner and a receiver.

It was the 232-pound McAllister\'s ability to turn any touch into a touchdown that sold the Saints on him and made Williams expendable. In the Saints\' version of the West Coast offense, McAllister is an every-down weapon. His polished pass-catching skills make him like an extra wide receiver and the coaching staff aims to exploit the linebackers and safeties who end up chasing McAllister in coverage.
http://www.nfl.com/insider/story/5701609


Or

FROM MCCARTHY\'S BIO ON THE SAINTS WEB SITE RIGHT NOW!!
Though the Saints\' history was once filled with teams dominated by their defenses, McCarthy has led an offensive revival in New Orleans. He has done so by relying on an uncompromising attention to detail, skilled planning and a dedication to the principles of the West Coast offensive system.
http://neworleanssaints.com/coachbio.cfm?coachid=31

\"Excuses, excuses, excuses. That’s all anyone ever makes for the New Orleans Saints’ 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.\"