Brooks
 

I\'m not gonna stoop to childish name-calling with any of you big, ugly boogerheads...

:P

[Edited on 29/11/2004 by mutineer10]

Brooks
 

The smiling thing...I think it adds insult to injury. I think it is one of those knee-jerk reactions that some people have. You know you are not suppose to be smiling, but you just can\'t help yourself...kinda psychological. I know this is the case for AB...I saw him against the Broncos coming off the field after a pick, and I swear it looked like he was stretching his face down in an attempt to keep the smile off his face. I don\'t think he wants to smile, I just think it is his way of dealing with adversity. I don\'t hold it against him, because I do think that he wishes it didn\'t happen...it is just one of those things. I do respect him more, now, for at least trying to control it.

Brooks
 

LB,

We agree! Thanks for the first hand account.

It is like people laughing at really horrifying and shocking things, then. For example, some people laugh when they see a car accident, not because it is funny, but because that is the way their body responds that particular horror. Or people who smile while they genuinely begin crying - its got something to do with emotion overload.

If you\'re right, it could be the case that Brooks is smiling exactly because he cares - as opposed to the opposite. His emotions have got the better of him in these cases (of course, there is something not altogether good about that either, but your point is that the smiling could be evidence for or against his caring).

Nice point.

Brooks
 

BMG,

I could see Tennessee being interested. Brooks\' big arm and athleticism may falsely remind them of a younger McNair.

I\'m still not sold on the idea we could get too much for him. I still suggest to teams with unproven or lesser QBs (and there are several), he is probably worth a second rounder and possibly a backup player - IF they have a QB coach or a HC who has some ability in nurturing QBs. Who is Tennesse\'s QB coach?

Where is Whodat?

mutineer,

:annoy:

or

:bananajoy:

Brooks
 

If we could get a 2nd for Brooks I\'d wet myself.

I do think we might be able to get a 3rd. A new coach may bring in his own vet familiar with his system while a newcomer or rookie learns.

I wouldn\'t mind a bit if a Kitna or Dilfer type came in to take over while a promising rookie learns the ropes.

Of course, Brees would be too sweet.

Brooks
 

What? You need more from me? Didn\'t I already say that AB is THE problem for the Saints? Get rid of him and this team goes 14-2... that\'s what I said, right? LOL :)

The argument for pro-Brooksians these days seems to be (a) he isn\'t the biggest problem, so why are we even talking about him, (b) if the defense didn\'t suck his bone-headed backwards passes wouldn\'t matter so much, and/or (c) there\'s no other good QBs out there so let\'s stick with him.

All of those statements may be true, but they sure don\'t paint a pretty picture of AB. Basically, you\'re all saying, yeah, AB sucks, but the defense and available backups suck more. So what, he still sucks and is therefore a problem worth addressing, no?


Funny to see Danno \"wetting\" himself over a 2nd rounder for AB. Weren\'t you a \"Brooks Lover\" Danno? Don\'t tell me now that you always disliked AB and Haslett. ;)

I think he is worth a first rounder. If Tewsucky Jones is, AB is. Some other moron HC will get caught up in his stats, will watch a highlight film and decide that he can work the \"lowlights\" out of AB. I bet we could get a 1 for him. Certainly a 2nd.

Brooks
 

WhoDat,

You\'ve returned just in time for me to agree with all that you\'ve said here. Except these two things: (1) I don\'t remember anyone saying that AB isn\'t a problem, and (2) you don\'t have to say he sucks to think that he is a problem.

What everyone said is that he is not the problem other people were making him out to be. I see no problem with holding that position, and you seem to agree.

As far as Brooks \"sucking\", I have nothing to say until \"sucking\" is operationalized in some way - agree or disagree we will be left with the problem of sorting out what \"sucks\" means.

Also, you are well aware of the fact that people change their mind. Sure, I\'m in favor of calling people on their self-contradictions, but I don\'t see what someone said months ago has much to do with anything, unless they\'re still saying it.

As far as getting a first round pick, I could see that. However, it is my experience that people overvalue their draft picks. Thus, I\'m skeptical that we\'ll get that high a price.

Also, I was just wondering where you were, but I do appreciate the additional arguments.

Brooks
 

I haven\'t either gator. I\'ll probably pay more attention around the Senior Bowl.
And you are 100% correct about Stuart \"gangsta\" Scott. The only one more annoying than him is Michael \"JJ\" Irvin, or Kenny Mayne, or Deion Sanders, or Rich Eisen.
I\'m in the wrong biz.

WhoDat... Just because you think Aaron Brooks is the only problem this team has don\'t try to paint me as a lifelong Brooks lover. ;)

You can go back and read my 10,000 posts and you\'ll see I usually give him props when he deserves them and hammer his eye-owning goofy smilin backwards throwin asss when he needs it. I just love pointing out hipocrisy in the AB debates. It makes my day.

I don\'t think with a defense on pace to be the worst in NFL history that anyone should be pointing the finger only at the QB.

Brooks
 

I think they like this Volleck kid..he played pretty well...when he had to start..one thing is for sure though..They better make sure they get a really good back up..cuz Mcnair has really been hurting the last two years...

Brooks
 

If it turns out the Titans might be interested in AB, how awesome would it be to get Keith Bulluck for him, huh?

A guy can dream, can\'t he?

Of course, we\'d still need a QB...

:bandhead:

Brooks
 

rumor is that mat lienert fomr USC may come out early.....unless of course the saints show intrest......and maybe aaron rogers out of CAL...

OR we could go after randall out of LSU, i hear he is sweet! :)

[Edited on 30/11/2004 by TheJudge]

Brooks
 

Actually I don\'t think that he sucks. I think that the situation that he\'s currently in sucks. But almost universally everyone here thinks we need to get rid of him instead of trying to correct the situation around him.

The Saints are as predictable as water flowing downhill. In the first quarter McCarthy tries to establish the run. It rarely works. The defense gives up between 10 and 14 points in the 1st quarter while the offense has 3 three and outs because of predictable play calling mixed in with the inevitable false starts and holding penalties. All of a sudden the team is down 14-0.

Then the offense opens up. AB starts slinging the ball all over the field. The team gets back into the game somewhat. But in the end the defense has already leaked the requisite 20 points to the opposition. 11 games, at least 20 points a game.

It\'s a sad predictable situation that opposing teams can count on.

Personally I think McCarthy and Haslett are insane: They keep doing the same thing but expecting a different result.

And AB gets the blame for all of this. Somehow everyone is convinced that if you get another QB in there, it\'ll all be different somehow. Everyone seems to be asking why AB cannot consistently convert a 3rd and 12. I\'m asking why is the team in a 3rd in 12 to begin with?

We\'re sitting here talking about AB. But why is no one asking about Stallworth essentially losing the game by not converting that last 3rd down before the 2 minute warning in the Falcons game? Or why the more prolific playmaker on Falcons is running around uncovered at the end of the game?

Plus going over the numbers again Brooks numbers seem to be cap friendly as compared to other QBs in the top 5-15 in the league.

Brooks isn\'t a top 5 QB. However in the right situation and the right guidance he certainly could be a capable top 10 QB coupled with a top 3 RB and a top 5 receiver for the conceivable future.

Snippage on the rest.

SFIAH

Brooks
 

Good point. How would he look with a solid O-line, DEPENDABLE TE\'s and more than one good WR? Is it just me or does it seem our opponents know exactly what play we\'re gonna run before we even snap the ball?

You\'re right, on a list of things wrong with this team, AB isn\'t exactly at the top of the list. But I think a change of identity would help. I think this team has an attitude/confidence problem. Put AB on a team thats both confident and cocky and he\'ll probably make us regret running him off. It would be par for the course. Sometimes I can\'t shake duck-hooking my Big Bertha, and even though I know the Driver isn\'t the problem, sometimes changing to my Titleist helps.

Brooks
 

Anybody think we can get this to 6 pages? LOL

BMG - I missed this last time. You just moved to the top of my list. LOL ;)

Hey Granola-boy, you suck! LOL :) Clear? LMAO

Could AB be coached better than he is being coached now? I\'m sure of it. Would it make a differnce? Nope. His scouting report was right on. Has no touch, isn\'t a student of the game, is too dumb. AB has made the same type of mistakes over and over and over again for 5 years as a starter. If was going to learn, he would have already. No, he lacks the smarts and intangibles. He will forever be Jeff Blake, Jeff George, etc.

Exactly.

Brooks
 

SFIAH, we\'re still on the same page. Keep up the good work.

WhoDat, you\'ve caused me to change my mind completely. If Brooks sucks means what you suggest, then he must be totally awesome! Man, I can\'t believe anyone would suggest trading a guy who is so good at everything!

Don\'t make me beat you with my eyes again... :hallucine:

[Edited on 1/12/2004 by JKool]

Brooks
 

What\'s truly amazing is that the post has run this long when so many of us seem to be (more or less) in agreement.

Most of us seem to think that, while he regularly embarrasses and confuses us, Brooks is a serviceable enough QB. We certainly don\'t have anyone better on the roster, and we\'re paying him too much to have much hope of getting a fair deal out of him (and we\'d still need a QB if we did). AB has shown much ineptitude sprinkled with flashes of greatness, and while that\'s not necessarily encouraging, it\'s better than alot of teams can boast. Look at Arizona, Chicago, or Dallas and ask yourself if they would be having this argument. He\'s not a stud, but he\'ll have to do for now.

And hey, who\'s to say that he wouldn\'t improve under adequate leadership, or behind a more solid OL, or with a bit more talent at TE and WR (not talking about you, Joe). I don\'t really know what would fix his attitude, other than maybe some improvements around him. It\'d probably help if the defense gave him a little more support, as anyone knows it\'s terribly difficult to play from behind all the time. A steady, disciplined QB coach might help as well.

Fix the defense, fix the OL, fix the WR & TE corps, fix the coaching staff, fix the front office, then let\'s see what AB can do.

But ... is he really worth all the trouble...?

Brooks
 

That\'s really the crux of the entire discussion on Brooks. The hard part is that we have to consider not just whether Brooks himself is worth the effort, but whether or not his cap number now becomes prohibitive. We\'re almost out of a discussion of AB on his relative merits, interesting huh? We aren\'t discussing any more that Brooks has trouble making all the throws, reading defenses, making good decisions and his leadership aptitudes. It\'s really come down to whether he\'s worth all that he\'s costing us. There also seems to be the recognition that Brooks is not the kind of player who can carry a team on his own, but needs a strong supporting cast around him. So the question becomes: Can we afford to pay AB like we are AND go out and sign the strong supporting cast he needs?

For example, can we re-sign Deuce for the long term deal, re-sign Horn, Pathon or a free agent WR, sign a free agent LB, sign a run stopping DT, sign a safety, sign between 1-3 players for the o-line AND let Brooks keep earning his big cap killing number? It really looks like the money is about to run out at this point. And given his comments over the past 2 years, I don\'t see AB agreeing to restructure to give us cap relief.

My gut feeling is that this is a stat padding year for him so that he can force us to release him.

Brooks
 

Yeah, I do that a lot. You heard it here first folks - JKool thinks AB sucks more than any other player on the team! LOL

BMG - I know that you recognize this argument - it\'s not new. Things have simply come full circle - AB was never worth what he was being paid. That the coaching staff failed to adequately address defensive needs does not mean AB is worth his salt.

I also find this, fix everything else and then see AB can do argument unconvincing. I mean, take Pittsburgh for example - would AB be delivering up there like Roethlisberger has? I don\'t think AB would be playing substantially better, and Roeth is a rookie. Or take Philly. Would AB be outperforming McNabb? Doubt it. Then look at other teams similarly situated. Indy is loaded with offensive talent and terrible on defense - AB and Peyton aren\'t even in the same ballpark. I guess closer comparisons might be Bulger in St Louis or Green in KC. So AB is the equivalent of Bulger or Trent Green? That\'s not exactly exciting.

There\'s no question that the O-line is hurting AB this year, but what about last year when it was one of the tops in the league? The year before that? Bottom line is that AB has had a Pro Bowl WR (hopefully) 4 of 5 years in NO. He\'s had a top 5 RB every year he\'s been here. He\'s twice had 2 1000 yard WRs in one season, and the team added talent at WR and TE over and over. He had two great T for 3 years. The o-line is off this year but has traditionally been at very least average. How much longer can you continue to make excuses for this guy? It\'s just like the people who want to blame the players, injuries, a bad training facility, heat, luck, and anything else they can think of for the Saints woes rather than blame Haslett. Look guys, the Saints aren\'t winners with AB. You can compare his boneheaded plays to Favre\'s all you want, but there\'s one key difference. Favre\'s team just keeps winning. They keep overachieving. Are the Saints problems all AB\'s fault? Of course not, but he\'s part of it, and if you want to clean house, clean it.

Brooks
 

First, everyone needs and \"eye owning\", so :bugeyes:

Second, this idea of cleaing house may sound all well and good, but I don\'t think that is what we need. We need a better defense and a better o-line.

BMG is right that Brooks\' value should be considered relative to his pay.

Brooks is a middle of the pack QB. If we can get someone better, or someone as good who is cheaper, or someone who is almost as good but not as annoying, then I say ok.

Other than Brees (and I\'m skeptical on this one), I haven\'t heard all that many suggestions that should even tempt a sane GM.

Thus, as of now, I\'m still in favor of keeping AB, even if he never gets any better (and he has in some areas - e.g. fewer fumbles).

PS - All those people who\'ve said that AB will find a NEW way to screw up no matter what problem he fixes, what is the new thing this year? He\'s fixed the fumbling problem, he\'s not exactly out of control in the interception category, etc. What is it that he\'s found?

Brooks
 

Oh yeah, before anyone gets all snippy. We need a new coaching staff and front office staff (almost to the last one).

Brooks
 

Uh, how about underhanded/backwards passes while under pressure? Does that count? LOL. Yeah - he\'s found new and exciting ways. Oh - and the fumbles are down but the INTs are up. TDs are down too I think. So is completion percentage.

As for cleaning house, that\'s exactly what we need - we just need it in the management/leadership category and not the player personnel area. We need better coaches and scouts. No question. That is the root of the problem. However, if there is one player who most embodies this coaching staff, who is it? One guy who is as inconsistent, shows flashes of brilliance followed by flashes of retardation, who never seems to \"get it\", who is a \"leader\" with no followers... who is that guy? It\'s AB. AB is the one player who most represents the Haslett regime and he should go with them IMO.

Now, I\'m not dumb enough to suggest that we simply get rid of him regardless and see what happens. There needs to be a plan. And it needs to fit with other plans like DT, MLB, o-line, WR, etc., but QB SHOULD be in there and an AB exit strategy needs to be formed when the new staff comes in. That\'s my opinion anyway.

Brooks
 

I didn\'t catch you napping, did I? ;)

On your other point, CB should also figure in our plans. What would you say is the relative position of a QB replacement in terms of these others? Here\'s my list:

1. DT
2. MLB
3. SLB
4. OT
5. CB
6. OT
7. SS
8. QB
9. OG
10. WR

The only way that QB moves up the chart IMO is if our current QB costs too much for us to fill the first 4 spots with top flight FAs.

Thus, my offseason plan looks like this:
Use FA to get slots 1-4 and possibly 5 and 6. Draft for 5-8. Pick up extra FAs as possible for 9 and 10. Of course, that is very rough, since it will change based on targets of opportunity and how high our draft position is.

Brooks
 

B-39, B-39....Next number, O-27....

Oops, sorry, that\'s not the lottery, that\'s bingo.

[Edited on 2/12/2004 by dberce1]

Brooks
 

J - it depends... what do you mean by costs too much? With our cap situation and the number of players we could cut to make room, I don\'t think signing anyone would be impossible for this team. That said, if you assume Howard will not return with a franchise tag, I believe AB becomes the highest paid Saint next season, pending a Deuce contract extension. Does that seem smart to you?

Brooks
 

Smart? I don\'t know.

However, I don\'t mind paying him if no one else is available to be a reasonable (outlined within this thread) replacement.

I guess, I just don\'t hate the guy as much as others do. When I look around the league, I see maybe 5 to 8 guys I would definitely take over him and another 2 to 6 that I would be indifferent toward. When I look at the QB situation on other teams, I start thinking we don\'t have it so bad.

His pay is only relevant to me if it prevents us from doing some of the other things we need to do - as noted in both your post and mine above. I suppose some people feel some sort of moral outrage with respect to his pay as compared to his performance; I don\'t - not yet anyway. Sure, he\'s overpaid, but if that isn\'t hurting our ability to get what we need, what is the problem?

Other than how people seem to talk about it, I don\'t think too many of us are in disagreement about Brooks. He\'s not great, he\'s got a handful of very serious drawbacks, but its not like he\'s not cut out to be an NFL starter - he\'ll just never be great. I can live with that. There are many not great QBs who\'ve taken their teams to the SB.

Thus, the only two arguments that I still consider relevant to my opinion on whether Brooks should go are these:
(1) He costs enough to prevent our having a good team next year and maybe the year after (since I am in favor of replacing him relatively soon), and
(2) We need a change of identity, and Brooks is the most obvioius way to change this identity.

While I\'m not convinced of either yet, I do think those sound reasonable - there are many arguments that have been offered (such as \"he smiles too much\") that I just don\'t think matter compared to our having a decent team.

Brooks
 

Let\'s look at this Kool.

Definites I would take over Brooks: Culpepper, McNabb, Favre, Manning, Brady, McNair, Leftwich, Carr, Vick, Brees, Pennington. That\'s 11.

Quarterbacks I would take looks at over Brooks: Eli(hometown boy), Roethlisberger, David Garrard, Mike McMahon, Bulger, Palmer, Hasselbeck. That\'s 7.

Quarterbacks I would take a chance on being better than Brooks: Rivers, Leinart, Rogers, and Losman. That\'s 4.

That\'s 21 current and potential starting NFL qbs that I feel would do a better job, may do a better job, or has the potential to do a better job. I am sure I missed more. Doesn\'t look as good to me. It\'s all just opinion though and what you like in a qb.

Brooks
 

Since all we\'re doing is giving opinions now, here\'s my list:

Take over Brooks today:
Culpepper, McNabb, Brady, P. Manning, Roethlisberger, Vick, and Carr.

Indifferent with respect to Brooks today:
Bulger, Leftwich, Plummer, Pennington, and Brees.

Guys worth considering but come with huge problems (like being freakin\' old or almost totally unproven):
Farve, McNair, Delhomme, Palmer, Hasselbeck, and Green.

It is my opinion that gambling on new \"talent\" is not the way to go (unless you\'re going to keep Brooks as a backup), but I would guess that you and I differ on that - especially in light of the fact that you value the draft much more highly than I do. The draft is all well and good, but the way to get solid players is FA IMHO.

At any rate, just as a matter of opinion, it seems to me that at most 18 guys are either better or near as good as the guy we\'ve got given the evidence we actually have (namely guys who\'ve played enough to form an opinion of their NFL caliber play).

I didn\'t consider this here, but if I was going to trade right now, I\'d consider the mobility, toughness, and age of the guy I selected very carefully, since he\'ll be running for his life before the end of the first 10 minutes of play. At first blush, it seems that Brooks has handled the pounding fairly well.

Brooks
 

You\'re right..He has handled the pounding very well..Especially when you consider he had surgery on his shoulder in the off season...

And He should be kept around..to continue to take the pounding..while the team is rebuilt...and, If he ends up getting hurt..you then let your back up go in...and they will sign someone from somewhere to back him up..they have to..

The more I sit on the situation..the more I am prone to look even beyond next year...To see the results of what is going to be taking place...I\'m not ready to call next year a bust by any means..but..If it takes two or three more years to get a guy in here who can win consitently..I have no problem letting Brooks stay till then

[Edited on 3/12/2004 by shadowdrinker_x]

Brooks
 

How many people would like to still have Delhomme and/or O\'Sullivan right now?

Imagine that QB battle! Brooks, Delhomme, Bouman, O\'Sullivan.

PS - Word out of GB is that Grady Jackson might be the Packers\' MVP on defense. Having him in completely changes the look of the D and has helped improve their run defense dramitically! LOL

Still glad we got rid of that cancer and spent those two first rounders on Johnathan \"Buffet Line\" Sullivan.

Brooks
 

Yeah, he comes into camp at 380 lbs, gets hurt (I wonder why) and misses the 1st 6 games.
He\'s played 5 games and is averaging a whopping 2 tackles per game.
Yea, I\'d love to have him back here. Man I wish we could get that kinda production. LOL.

He\'s an excellent part-time player, and a complete slacker.

Brooks
 

Letting Delhomme go was a mistake. However, at some point a coach needs to resolve the QB battle one way or the other. QB is one of those positions where competition can be a mixed blessing. WRs and OL need to work with the same guy most of the time - in order build timing and confidence. Switching back and forth can be a problem.

That said, I imagine that WhoDat believe that Delhomme would have won the battle and we\'d have Delhomme instead of Brooks. Right now, I\'m indifferent to that. Last year I may have said something different.

Danno, good assessment.

Brooks
 

If I take a ****, and it\'s nice and hard, it\'s an upgrade from diarrhea- but it\'s still ****

Brooks
 

Kinda like 2000, when we had Jeff Blake, Brooks, Delhomme and Bulger.
Why can\'t we have the same eye for DT\'s or LB\'s?

I will admit I\'d love to have JT and Jake right now to battle Brooks. I don\'t think Boumann and Klingsbury are gonna push him very hard.

But having JT would mean no McKenzie.

Brooks
 

I don\'t think our receivers complimented O\'Sullivan, his arm wasn\'t as strong as some others we\'ve had here.
I do have the occasional dream at night of Bulger dropping bombs to Horn and Stallworth, though.

Brooks
 

Just some creative editing I found funny BNB. :xxrotflmao:

Brooks
 

haslett just knew that brooks would be his savior and make him an in house name but it flopped on hi... the reason they did not play delhomme when brooks was hurt a couple years ago is because they didnt want there to be a QB controversy and so he let us drift out of the playoffs buy playing a hurt brooks.... haslett put all his egss in his basket with brooks, and his eggs are now scrambled...

Brooks
 

im not so sure of bulger personally. i dont think he is all thatv geart. maybe thats just me. i think hes a starter in this league but put him on this team imm not sure he does much better then brooks.
to judge im not sure about has with all his eggs in one basket. im not disagreeing im just not sure. but i would say it bothered me then and it bothers me now that we should have replaced brooks the last couple of games that season because he was hurt. and why he didnt i dont know. so maybe you are right. he put all his eggs in one basket

Brooks
 

Bulger is in a bad situation- his o-line gives him about as much protection as a condom from a truck stop quarter machine, and his coach forgot that he has a future hall of famer in the backfield.

[Edited on 4/12/2004 by BlackandBlue]

Brooks
 

well i think if u have watched jackson he seems a good replacement. and as far as his coach thats why he is so successful. as far as their o line is ours much better?

Brooks
 

6 Pages! Woo! Let\'s see if we can\'t keep this going until the end of the season.

Assume away... I doubt anyone would have beaten AB out this year, not with this coaching staff. Even with a new one AB SHOULD win - the guy\'s been a starter for almost 5 years now. But if we had Delhomme, O\'Sullivan, Bulger, Blake, etc. right now we\'d have options. Bouman and Klingsbury or whoever don\'t give us a lot of options.