And the Answer is :
 

BROOKS, GRANT HAVE MILE-HIGH FRACAS



A league source tells us that Saints quarterback Aaron Brooks and defensive end Charles Grant got into a rumble on the flight back from the team's 34-10 pasting at the hands of the Arizona Cardinals.



Though we don't know who started it or whether any damage was done to either player (or to the plane), the thinking in Saints land is that the scrum might push the team toward maximizing its potential in 2004.



Fortunately for the Saints, they'll go nearly three weeks without having to hop another flight. On Sunday, they face the Bucs at home. The following Sunday, they host the Vikings on ESPN. And their ability to sweep the coming home stand will go a long way toward proving whether the scuffle will make any difference for a team that went from promising to underachieving via a 3-hour stint in the desert on Sunday.

http://www.profootballtalk.com/rumormill.htm

Anyone wanna bet the arguement was not over the last chicken wing .... Saintfan ????


[Edited on 4/10/2004 by saintz08]

And the Answer is :
 

Not sure I completely understand what you mean here. If I had to guess I\'d say Brooks probably called some people out for their sorry play and Grant got tee\'d.

And the Answer is :
 

Thanks Saintfan .

The team is coming apart at the seams .

Maybe Grant said \" J.T. should start cause he could lead the offense better then you against a worthless defense like Arizona \" .... ;)

And the Answer is :
 

Could be. More likely tho that Brooks called out the defense for allowing the sorry Cards to run the ball at will. ;)

And the Answer is :
 

Like the high powered offense was scoring at will and kept the defense off of the field ??? Then again they might have had 7 more points had fumbalaya Brooks not been true to his name .... ;)

[Edited on 4/10/2004 by saintz08]

And the Answer is :
 

7 points wouldn\'t have dont much for the final score, but believe it or not I was as pizzed about that fumble as you. Either way, Brooks can\'t do much when he\'s (a) running for his life and (b) can\'t get the ball off casue of pre snap problems and (c) there\'s a holding call on every other offensive play and (d) his vaunted receivers keep dropping the stupid ball. ;)

And the Answer is :
 

Well **** I don\'t blame him your gonna let a 36 year old run for 100 some yards what a joke. My Chaney Highshool squad of 96 could stop Emmit from rushing 100 yards. The current squad of 2004 could too.

GEAUX SAINTS. WHO DAT GONNA BEAT DEM SAINTS WHO DAT WHO DAT. WHO DAT GONNA CHUCK THAT THAT ROCK STECKER STECKER. I gotta layoff the crack lmao

And the Answer is :
 

A. Make sure all passing plays have a hot route slant option on them . Getting the ball out quicker gets the defense on their heels .

B . Repeat the snap count twice in the huddle at the end of the play call , Call cadence louder at the line .

C. Make the read faster and lead the receivers with the ball .

D. Take some heat off the ball , hands sweat in the desert heat .




[Edited on 4/10/2004 by saintz08]

And the Answer is :
 

So, if I may. In other words you\'re saying Brooks, as you typically attempt to insinuate, is solely responsible for the failure of our offensive line to \"excel\" and our receiver\'s inablilty to catch catchable passes.

I guess you missed the Non Call then. You know, the one where there was holding in the end zone. You know...the one where our guy was holding the moment the ball was snapped (there are several other similar examples you must have missed). I\'m sure you\'ll fail to acknowledge that many catchable passes (some right on the numbers) were just thrown too \"hot\" to handle.


Uh huh. Your agenda is as clear as ever. LMAO

:poke:

And the Answer is :
 

08 you\'ve collided with the ABB standard for post game evaluation.

Under the Anything But Brooks standard. By that I mean, if there is a loss, under no circumstance can Brooks play any part of explainting what went wrong. :icon_eyesroll:

The inverse principle works during a win. If we win, ignore any other explanation because it\'s plain as day that Brooks single-handedly won the game by himself. :icon_bs:

:kerry: