Now THIS is an interesting mock
 

http://www.profootballdraft.com/editordraft01.php

Depending on what we do in free agency, and how much our coaches(Lord help us it's in their hands again) feel the defense has really improved over the last 4 games, this could be an interesting and OVERDUE pick for us. Ballsy to say the least. Maybe too high for us to be looking at that position though.

Now THIS is an interesting mock
 

If we could get an Off Lineman, a cornerback, and a linebacker through trading Howard and using cap space to sign free agents that pick is exactly what I suggested in another thread. Get a young promising QB to 1) put pressure on Brooks - look what drafting Rivers did to Brees, and 2) give us an option for the next year. If Brooks turns out not to be the guy we have Smith with a year of knowing the system -- and we can trade Brooks and his fat contract -- or if Brooks shapes up we could probably still get a number one for Smith

Now THIS is an interesting mock
 

I like it just to get rid of Leon, but that\'s just me. We could trade him right before we make that pick or right after to get more picks. He has had his chance, he isn\'t getting any better. I wish he was a Drew Brees. Every bit of competition he has had has been run out of town so the only way Smith truly gets a shot under Haslett is with Leon gone.

Now THIS is an interesting mock
 

Right...

In the first round we fail to take an OT or an LB... sure. The only way that happens is if we go APE SHIZNIT in FA, which we all know we won\'t.

With E. Brown, Crowder, and Burnett all still available, do you really think you\'d be happy with a prospect QB who won\'t play for two or three years - while we are plagued with offensive penalties and the 32nd ranked defense? Your desire to get rid of \"Leon\" is clouding your vision Whodi.

It is a ballsy call, but it isn\'t a smart one - not this year.

What this suggests to me though, is that we could trade down a spot or two and maybe pick up a couple of extra picks or a serviceable second CB.

Now THIS is an interesting mock
 

My post had us getting a linebacker, Smoot and an Offensive lineman in FA (or through a trade of Howard). If that was the case I still think that Smith would be an excellent pick.

Now THIS is an interesting mock
 

Thing is Kool, I don\'t think Smith is a project qb. I think he can come in and be better than the incumbent. I do think picking him in the first is a reach, but he has talent and we will see where he grades out after the combine. If you read my first post, it specifically said \"depending on what we do in free agency,\" meaning don\'t forego needs to get the guy, but if we have addressed LB and O-line in free agency, go for it.

Last line in the first post.

Now THIS is an interesting mock
 

Whodi, I wasn\'t insulting your intelligence. I think we agree that this pick is NOT going to happen - that is all I was expressing.

4ss, I understood your point - that is why I wrote this:

Also, we probably need two LBs, a DT, and two OL to be competitive at this point. We\'re also going to need a safety very soon.

Don\'t worry guys, I realize that it was a \"fantasy\" of sorts. I just wanted to be clear that I think that looking at a QB is nowhere near a priority for this team - even with a reasonable FA (which we haven\'t had in as long as I can remember, which we all know isn\'t that long).

Apologies for writing in such a manner as to make you think I wasn\'t paying attention to what you were saying.

I, for one, would be extremely unhappy if we took a QB in the first round, UNLESS A LOT of other things happen first.


[Edited on 11/1/2005 by JKool]

Now THIS is an interesting mock
 

I gotcha, I only think we need one lb though. And if we move Gandy to RT and get a decent LT, I think we could survive that for a year. DT is also a must. So I do agree with you. But we see how well this team has done getting DT\'s by any route(Sully, Jackson, Hand) so I don\'t have a lot of confidence there. One interesting name mentioned was Hovan from Minny. He is relatively Young and not far from being considered one of the league\'s best. Maybe we get him at a reasonable price, a star lb, sign and trade Howard for a good o-lineman liek Samuels from Wash or for Smoot, we could be in a position to take Smith. I would love it like a hog in slop.

Now THIS is an interesting mock
 

Ape what, JKool? Does the name Jonathon Sullivan ring a bell? :rollinglaugh:

Now THIS is an interesting mock
 

Yea lets draft a QB and start tha rebuilding process. GREAT IDEA!!! What retard came up with this mock!

Now THIS is an interesting mock
 

Ummm, If I can ask a question without starting a peeing contest here.

Why is it that: New QB = Rebuilding?

The Steelers are starting a rookie and seem to have a better than average change of going to the superbowl. The Patriots won the superbowl with a rookie. The Rams won a superbowl with a guy who had never started in the NFL before.

It seems like if we got good value for Leon in a trade we could address defensive needs and improve our OT\'s and move to more of a ball control offense so the QB position just isn\'t as important. I don\'t think anyone in favor of a Leon trade is suggesting that the rookie has to come in and run the same playbook as Peyton Manning.

But even beyond that, I\'m not sure that Leon is so indispensible that the entire organization folds without him. Likewise, I don\'t see Leon taking us to a superbowl next year, so I\'m not sure why keeping him at his high cap number is so critical?

At any rate, this \"rebuilding\" claim has come up several times and leaves me scratching my head. Just asking.

Now THIS is an interesting mock
 

You wonder about that too BMG? It seems to me, more are afraid of doing WORSE w/o Brooks than taking ANY chance at being better. Stick with the devil you know rather than take chanes with one you don\'t.

Now THIS is an interesting mock
 

Right, b/c we NEEDED another pure speed WR with no hands and who can\'t learn the system in the 2nd round last year. We NEEDED Deuce in 2001... right?

Now THIS is an interesting mock
 

...and we NEEDED a DE in last year\'s draft.

BPA, baby, you\'ll never go wrong with BPA. If it weren\'t for that philosophy, deuce would be playing elsewhere.

Now THIS is an interesting mock
 

I totally agree with the BPA approach to the draft. But if a team is going to take that approach, they MUST deal with need picks in free agency. Mismanagement of free agency is what puts so much pressure on our drafts and one of the glaring failures of this front office.

Now THIS is an interesting mock
 

Actually, drafting this qb from Utah isn\'t such a bad idea. Drafting him for the future is a damn good idea. if we take care of the O-line via FA. Saints already signed a WR whom I like... CUTTING PATHON ALERT!!!!!!!!

Now THIS is an interesting mock
 

I guess we must have killed that site, because I can\'t get to it anymore.

aaaaahhhh, the power of cheese.

Now THIS is an interesting mock
 

BMG, I tend to agree with you on this:

I\'m not sure what the rest of you guys are getting at here.

1. We have no need for a QB AT THIS POINT, and Smith will NOT be BPA at 16. He\'s probably a second rounder.

2. Everyone agrees that Sullivan was a bust. However, he was high on most boards. Also, if he had been good, we would not have been in such dire straights against the run this year and looking for a DT still. Thus, the pick itself was a bust, but the idea wasn\'t too shaby (even if I thought we need a CB more at that point).

3. If you look at who is available in FA, you\'ll see we can get two LBs, two OTs, and even an OG. What we cannot get is a QB, S, or WR. Thus, there is some scenario where we will be able to take a QB at 16, it is just INCREDIBLY UNLIKELY.

4. I agree that our FO is bonkers and has done very poorly over the last many years. However, I really don\'t see this group (1) needing to take a QB and/or (2) believing that we need to take a QB.

I\'m fairly certain that IF we address all of our other needs (2 LBs, 2 OTs, 1 OG, and 1 DT) in FA, they SHOULD take a CB NOT a QB with our 1st pick.

Also, I don\'t think that Gandy should be moved to RT. We should try and deal him - his contract is huge, and he is an LT. Someone will want him as a solid backup.

Euph, I agree. Pathon is done.

Now THIS is an interesting mock
 

Oh yeah.

As far as the \"devil you know\" stuff, I think that sums up my view on it pretty well. Brooks is a serviceable QB.

You are all talking about getting some guy (perhaps a rookie) to manage the ball if we beef up the line. Why are you so sure that Brooks couldn\'t do that? He\'s been asked to do a lot with no protection all year, he\'s managed the fumbles, he\'s made few turn overs - he\'s improving. If you pluged him into a management role, are you so sure he couldn\'t do it?

I guess, I just don\'t see the argument. We\'re 500 with Brooks. If we improve the D and the O line, we should be better than 500, no? 9-7 is a playoff record. This year, if our D had been ANY GOOD AT ALL in the first 8 games, we would have made the playoffs. I agree that Brooks is not a long term solution at our QB position, but he sure as heck is Mr. Right Now.

I agree that if we can get a blockbuster trade for him (at least a first and second round pick and maybe a backup QB or Safety), then I\'d say we should go ahead and let him go for a rookie. Otherwise, I am, as of right this moment, not convinced by any of the vim and vigor with which many of you seem to be using to suggest we do away with him.

Now THIS is an interesting mock
 

Yes, we are, and so I\'ll get accused of calling him perfect...again...but I get this point. We\'re .500 with Brooks and the worlds worst defese, yet still they DEMAND we cut or trade the QB.

Now THIS is an interesting mock
 

Kool, you were going along pretty well until this:

14 last year, 13 this year. Now if you wanna say he and the team have better learned how to jump on his fumbles, that is a true statement. He lost 11 last year and only two this year. So he did get better and those around him also about picking up the fumbles. Kinda like that Leon reference we all use. \"If my team had jumped on those fumbles.........\"

Ouch again. 16 INTs. That\'s a few? 19 TOs last year, 18 this year, again cause we jumped on the ball better. He has absolutely NOT gotten better at the turnovers. I can\'t even guess how many of those came in the red zone. I know one fumble against AZ and one INT against Dallas for sure. There was another game, I think it was the first Carolina game wher ehe threw an INT in to the endzone from the 5 or something. And it doesn\'t count the turnovers that give the opposing offense the ball in their red zone. Seattle game for sure. So yes I am pretty confident he could not handle a \"manage the game\" role. Especially for a qb who proclaims himself \"great.\' Can\'t be just a manage the game qb and be great. Not Leon\'s style.

Now THIS is an interesting mock
 

That was supposed to be \"fewer\", not few.

Here is the improvement: last year the line played much better. He fumbled a lot, and it was almost entirely his fault. This year, the brutal punishment and the having to play on the fly, I\'d say fewer of the TOs were his fault and his fault alone - this represents improvement.

This year\'s Brooks combined with last year\'s line = not too bad.

Otherwise, you caught me on that one. I didn\'t realize there were 16 INTs this year; I guess I wasn\'t paying attention to the ones that didn\'t happen in the ol\' red zone.

Either way, it doesn\'t negate the point about being 500. While I\'ll concede that it is rational to hold that Brooks may not be able to \"manage\" the game - it seems we may be at a stale mate on that one (as far as I\'m concerned), unless good reply is given to my argument here.

[Edited on 12/1/2005 by JKool]

Now THIS is an interesting mock
 

I\'m not sure about this, since I didn\'t get to see too many of the games, but fumbles where you lose the ball are different from the ones you don\'t (in a way that is different from merely being a turn over).

Fumbles where recovery of the ball are likely usually occur near the LOS; thus, when Brooks lost the ball and it was recovered by our guys it wasn\'t merely Brooks dancing around and getting in trouble, it was Brooks getting hit before he was ready and some lineman was watching closely enough to Brooks getting creamed to jump on the ball. Thus, the recovery rate indicates that it was more on the line than on Brooks this time around.

This is by no means an iron clad argument, but it is worth considering when considering whether or not improvement was made.

Now THIS is an interesting mock
 

Ball control is probably the answer for this team with a minimal change in personnel. The bottom line is that you can\'t put every game in Leon\'s hands and expect to be better than 8-8. With 2 new OT\'s and a slimmer Deuce, we could play ball control, keep our defense off the field and have a better chance of winning by purposely taking the ball out of Leon\'s hands.

Let Leon throw enough 8 yard hooks to keep defenses from putting 8-9 in the box and depend on our WR\'s to get yards after catch or to put us in more 3rd and 2 rather than 3rd and 13. At any rate, by taking the ball away from the QB we can eliminate more of the decisions he has to make and hopefully keep his faulty decsions from being more damaging than they really have to be.

With that sort of offense, I\'m not sure why we need to pay a QB 6 million a year though.

Now THIS is an interesting mock
 

Totally agree BMG.

My poiny exactly Gator. It\'s the mistakes coupled with the fact of WHEN they are made. In the red zone is not the time to turn it over. Being sacked in the opponents red zone is not the time to underhand a gift to a Denver LB. It\'s the timing of the mistakes that drive me more batty than the mistakes themselves, as frustrating as they are.

And this wins the door prize. It is 5 years of this silliness and people are still making excuses for the guy. When is enough enough. I am not gonna get trapped into excusing every make Leon makes cause I am afraid noone else out there we can get has his \"talent.\" Just doesn\'t make sense.

Kool, you present a good argument, but look at it this way. Did you see the throw to Gandy? That was a fumble, recovered by Deuce, 20 yards from the line of scrimmage. If it is 3rd and goal, as in the Arizona game, and you fumble the ball, as AB did, you end up with 4th and goal even if you recover and a field goal instead of a td. Or, give the defense a play off in having to stop you and shutting down the drive altogether. Even if the fumbles are recovered by the offense, they can kill a drive depending on down and distance. And gatorman expressed it great about the blocking:

Happens more than people wanna admit. Not every play, probably not half, but enough to where the line gets all the blame and AB zero.

Now THIS is an interesting mock
 

We averaged slightly better than 21 points a game this year. That\'s down from last year, but it should still be enough to win. Brooks threw the second most passes in the league, primarilly I\'d assume due to the fact that we played from behind ALL the time. Brooks may not be perfect, but he\'s surely an easy target. I COMPLETELY Disagree with the idea that we should bring in some bus driver. Bill Parcells tried that very thing in Dallas this year, and he took himself from the playoffs to the couch.

Now THIS is an interesting mock
 

In a perfect world, I would like to have better play from the QB position. However, to get better play at the position, we need a new player at the position. I have zero confidence that Leon\'s game is going to be any better next year than it was this year. I think we\'ll get better results trying to pee into the wind than for Leon to either be a professional or play more intelligently.

But since it looks like we\'re going to have somewhere around 10 years of Haslett, we\'re going to be stuck with Leon for the remainder of his career. (In fact, I expect Leon to holdout or raise a big stink in order to get some blockbuster 10 year deal this offseason.) So in the meantime, the best option we have is to take the ball out of Leon\'s hands.

It seems evident to me that we need better play from the OT positions. Gandy is too expensive and isn\'t fast enough to pick up the rush and I can\'t see Riley being inked again.

As for Deuce\'s playing weight--I hurt for the guy. Ever since he\'s been here, Haslett has had him on a dieting yo-yo. First he was too light, then he was too fat, then he was too light again, now he\'s too fat again. I\'d like to take that decision from Haslett totally. Have Deuce and the conditioning coach and training staff meet and work out a size that works for Deuce. Haslett gets to move the Xs and Os around, Deuce decides what he needs to do to play at his best.

That kind of hurts my feelings Gator. ;)

Now THIS is an interesting mock
 

Accurate to be sure, but how many posts have you seen defending the QB because Turley wiffed? None that I\'m aware of, which is why I and some others get accused of thinking Brooks is perfect merely because we defend the guy against this kinda stuff. Clearly he\'s not perfect, but my GOD man, I\'ve seen people blame this guy for everything under the sun while making excuses for everything wrong with this team...and those excuses are typically pointing the finger at the QB.

You may (or may not) remember me pointing out dropped passes TWO YEARS ago and, as Whodi puts it, getting railed for even suggesting it, but I think we all know it\'s an issue. If we\'re paying attention we do. Admitting our guys have a problem dropping passes doesn\'t mean we don\'t think Brooks throws bad balls at times, but it seems to get generalized that way.

I have sunday ticket. I watch a lot of games. I can\'t name a single QB that doesn\'t get his WR \"popped\". It\'s not just Brooks, but the theme of this statement is that you think it is. I didn\'t see our guys make a lot of great catches this year, but I sure did see \'em drop of lot of passes that me and you might have caught.

Of course he does. So should the rest of the team. When you post in here that Deuce isn\'t exactly Jim Brown you get beaten to death. When you post in here that the O-Line necessarilly sucked this year you get it thrown back at Brooks. When Brooks is a the helm of an offense that averaged over 20 points this year and nearly 30 last year I\'m the kinda guy that looks at that and says, ya know, maybe the offense isn\'t the real problem here. Maybe the QB, mistakes noted, isn\'t the real issue. I don\'t think he wastes any more timeouts than most any other player in the league. I don\'t think he\'s responsible for 4 delay of game penalties a game either...I really don\'t. You guys rail him for \"rolling into the pass rush\", but I\'d suggest that this year, more often than not, he didn\'t have much of a pocket to roll out of to start with.

NO ONE, not even me, is trying to say Brooks is a GOD or anything close, but he IS allowed to Audible, and he DOES do it successfully. He fails at it sometimes to. Perhaps someone can show me a QB that doesn\'t? He IS accused of things he is not at fault for, and yeah, he says some dumb things. He is a target for an 8-8 team, but I simply cannot agree that he\'s the reason it\'s 8-8...not when I watch the games on Sunday and see the crap that happens around him. He\'s not getting a pass, but I\'m not making assumptions about him that I have no way of knowing either.

Now THIS is an interesting mock
 

To all:

Interesting factoid posted by BMG a few months ago:

Thought we could clear that dropped ball thing up again and \"put it in perspective.\" And if you click it again, it has the end of the year stats. Yeah, dropped balls. Okay.

[Edited on 12/1/2005 by saintswhodi]

Now THIS is an interesting mock
 

Quick question for every one. I like to do this from time to time to \"put things in perspective.\"

Aside from the Offensive Tackles, what is the next largest problem spot on offense? If you\'re a GM or an OC and you\'re planning an offense, what do you look to fix after the tackles?

Me, looking at the Saints, it\'s a tough call between the TEs and the QB. Given the vastly greater importance of the QB position, I probably address that before I worry about the TEs.

Or, look at the TEAM overall. DT, LB (shocker to see those two... again), OT... when what? QB?


I still feel that AB is disliked in large part due to how closely he resembles the rest of the team. Inconsistent, undisciplined, not that bright, not a \"student of the game\", works hard when he feels like it, but he always manages to do just enough to make some people think he deserves another year. Sound familiar? Couple that with hold outs for top 5 money and proclamations of being a great QB on a team that\'s holding him back and it isn\'t hard for me to see why people want him gone. Zero character....


[Edited on 12/1/2005 by WhoDat]

Now THIS is an interesting mock
 

If it\'s strictly offense, after the tackles we all know what position I am fixing. Conwell was hurt last year and Boo was much better in the old offense. I think changing the offense had something to do with his play as well as the whoel team\'s actually. If we go back to the offense that had us ranked in the top half of the league consistently, then tackles then QB, strictly on offense though. Overall, I am going LB, T, DT, QB, CB. First 3 I think we can address in free agency. Really don\'t want a rookie tackle. Looks like Leon is our guy next year no matter what, so if the first 3 are addressed in free agency, get Smith, let him learn a year or beat AB outright, and get him in there next year if ready, year after if not. But then I wonder, do I want a qb learning from AB and these coaches? Catch 22.

Now THIS is an interesting mock
 

My question would be, how do we determin what is a \"Bad\" throw or maybe how do we determin what is a catchable pass? Tom Landry once said, \"If you can touch it, you can catch it.\" I don\'t know if I\'d go THAT far, but I\'d scare the hell outta that hole! LOL

Now THIS is an interesting mock
 

I posted this already but it got crickets.
WhoDat you\'re right. This team\'s offense was down this year to about mid-pack. Over the last few years it may have underachieved but still finished upper 1/3. But good grief, the defense flirted with finishing the worst in the history of the league, and has gotten worse over the last 3 years..

Why the offensive problems are dominating the discussions is both confusing, frustrating, and tiresome. Nine out of ten posts should be targeting the real problems with this team. And the most severe problems don\'t play offense or QB.

Maybe its the mentality that a team\'s success or failure is tied directly to the QB. I feel most of the posters here are smarter than that.

Now THIS is an interesting mock
 

Missing the point Danno. The discussion was placed as strictly on offense. EVERYONE knows the defensive problems, and we have beat that into the ground too. Here\'s a rundown: Fire Venturi, cut Sullivan, move up and draft Rolle, move up and draft Johnson, take Thomas Davis, take Channing Crowder, get Hartwell in free agency, get Seth Payne, get Fred Smoot sign and trade Howard. Noone is ignoring the defense, IN THIS DISCUSSION we are not talking about it. Ya dig?

Now THIS is an interesting mock
 

There is no way that this would happen. Rolle, Johnson, Crowder, and maybe even Davis all will be drafted in the 1st. round. This remind me of an offseason on Madden. I mean be totally honest, do you really think that a) Rolle or Jonhson will be there when we pick? No. b) the price to receive a pick that high will be too steep concidering all of the problem that we have on both side on the ball and even if we were to trade Brooks or Howard we would not get a pick that high without giving up many more picks and we have never made a big splash in the FA pool. So unless their stock drops at the combine in which they may choose not to participate we better start thinking realistically!

Now THIS is an interesting mock
 

RSanders, maybe you missed these 2 statements:

We are at 16. It appears Rolle or Johnson may not go top 10 based on team needs at the top. Rolle is more likely to fall than Johnson at any rate. Dallas is at 11, doesn;t want to take a corner(Parcells said so) so moving up to 11 is not that big a jump. It\'s possible. Also those were just rehashes of defensive convos that have gone on for Danno. I think he missed them somehow.

[Edited on 12/1/2005 by saintswhodi]

Now THIS is an interesting mock
 

Hey maybe we should draft a QB but do you really thonk a 1st rounder? Everybody for the most part agrees that Brooks doesn\'t have the leadership quality that is needed for the QB position but if that is the case why would you think that if we use a 1st round pick on a QB that he would fare any better if he has to learn under Brooks. I think that we should draft the best player for us that can come in a help instantly. Maybe a 2nd or 3rd rounder make sense. Who knows though maybe(Keyword:Maybe, don\'t jump down my throat.) Brooks has a Brees type year next year then if we draft a QB in the 1st round we could be facing the same situation because I think that SD has to keep him atleast one more year to see if it was a fluke or that he has finally come around otherwise they go with an unproven in in this league all team want to win now not 2 or 3 years from now.

Now THIS is an interesting mock
 

But moving up in the 1st round is very costly. I would love to see us get one of those guys, but I think and from past drafts moving up in the 1st round especially from the middle is expensive it would probaby cost us at least 2 more picks maybe one if it is an early rounder. I guess that we will have to see what happens with Brooks and Howard first. This is the only way I see us being able to get two 1st round picks.

[Edited on 12/1/2005 by Rsanders24]

Now THIS is an interesting mock
 

To address your first issue, my main problem with the Brooks may be like Brees thing is Brooks has ALWAYS had an offense, and still can\'t get it together. Even when the defense was decent, he couldn;t put it all together. Brees has had LT, and that\'s it. And Doug Flutie starting for him here and there. He knows his job is ALWAYs on the line. Brooks doesn\'t have these worries, so why should he get better? He knows he\'s the starter, that is fine with Haslett, and so he is safe. I don\'t see him working on getting better at all.

On your second issue, moving from 20 something to 10 or lower is a big move. 16 to 11, not so big. If Rolle is still there, it was just a thought. Dallas needs a pass rusher, and our D could use a playmaker. Not saying it would happen, but it\'s possible. And i don\'t mind drafting a qb in the first, if other needs are addressed in FA. I have little confidence though a qb could learn under Brooks or withthis staff so he must be given the opportunity to compete for the job right off cause after that, he will prob regress, unless he is a Peyton Manning type who just has it in him to wanna do better. Not talent wise, just personal fortitude wise. That sure ain\'t Leon.

Now THIS is an interesting mock
 

Hey Danno - we have been agreeing a lot lately. Scary. :)

My point before stands true. After the Tackles AB is THE BIGGEST PROBLEM with the OFFENSE. There are some who suggest that he\'s not a problem at all, or a very minor one. I\'m pretty confident that he is a SIGNIFICANT problem.

There\'s no question that the Saints success next season will depend greatly on what their defense does. It is absolutely the biggest problem, by far. But then, you\'re comparing half the team to one guy. That\'s like saying that the offense not scoring in the first quarter all year was a bigger problem than DT. Sure, but that\'s not a fair comparison.

Based on what I saw from the defense and what I know about the players on defense, this team is fairly talented. Like you said, DT, WLB, SLB... We could use upgrades at SS and CB, but a tougher front 7 helps the secondary. If we could get 3 guys at DT and LB who impact the defense as much as McKenzie seemed to I think the defense will be pretty good. Of course, a coaching change at DC would hepl a lot also, but I\'m talking strictly player personnel here.

On Offense, you look at the tackles, and then you have to look at the QB position. Again, the QB, IMO, is THE MOST IMPORTANT player on the field. I think a big part of the reason that the offense is inconsistent as a unit is b/c their \"leader\" is inconsistent. I\'m not saying Brooks is the REASON, but he does CONTRIBUTE.

Point is, if I had to choose ONE single position to upgrade on this team, to go out and get the best money could buy, QB would be pretty close to the top of my list. That means he may not be THE problem - something a number of people assume is being said any time Brooks is criticized - be he is a SIGNIFICANT problem, that I think needs to be dealt with.