Why in the world am I doing this?!

BrooksMustGo · 01-30-2005, 03:33 PM

JKool, As always, it is refreshing to discuss things with you. I\'ve never been caviled before though?

3b - I think you should add that how bad the mistakes are matters. There are few starting NFL QBs who are merely managers of the game that people can get excited about. Thus, I think you could make this point more strongly, and I also think it could be a weakness of your argument (but we\'d have to investigate it more thoroughly).

I agree entirely on the timing of the mistakes. Our current QB tends to make them as such awful times that they are underscored in the minds of people watching. I would also agree that what I\'m arguing for is basically to have a game manager for the coming season. However, like you and everyone else, I\'d rather have an Elway than a Dilfer for the long term.

I also agree that more investigation would clear this up. As a fan, I tend to get really nervous when our current QB is inside the 20\'s--backed up or in the redzone. I expect bad things to happen. Between the 20\'s I\'m never worried. I\'m not sure if I\'ve been trained to this or just notice it more, but that\'s basically my take on the current QB.

3c - This is not only AB\'s fault. Coaching has not helped him here. While I agree that this may be symptomatic of his \"dumbness\", it may also be due to coddling and/or poor coaching. I feel it is difficult to say how much of this is really on AB himself.

Agreed. Halo has said on several occasions that he felt the organization has ruined the current QB during his development. I think it\'s certainly possible. The trouble is, I\'m not sure it\'s fixable. He seems to think he\'s elite and the coaching staff hasn\'t ever really held him accountable. So I\'m not sure that we\'re ever going to see marked improvement from him in NO. I wouldn\'t be surprised if he went somewhere else and did quite well though.

3f - There are two intangibles that Brooks does have (though, I agree that for the most you are right on this point): (1) he is actually pretty darn tough - he takes a lickin\' and keeps on tickin\', and (2) he is a threat to gamble. I honestly believe this is a coaching (game planning) error.

I agree that he is tough and seems to do a good job of staying in good condition. I also agree that he is better on bootlegs where he is dangerous to run.

However, I\'d qualify that a bit. I don\'t think he\'s nearly as dangerous as McNabb, Culpepper or Vick. This could be a game planning problem. Maybe McCarthy emphasized that he shouldn\'t run at all, but throw the ball away? Even the scramblers settle down into the pocket as their career goes on, so I\'m not sure we\'re going to see as much freelancing from him regardless?

The one key difference I\'ll note from the last couple of seasons is that he tends to go backwards. When he used to roll out, he stayed close enough to the LOS that he was a threat to run. Now with 10 step drops, he ends up so far back that he takes his running out of the equation--a good run will just get him back to the line. Maybe this can be fixed, I don\'t know, but I\'m relatively sure that he\'s not going to have as good a rushing performance as when he was younger.

4c - I take your point here, but I feel like people can\'t have it both ways. A really good leader, which Brooks is not, would do both. This point needs to be clarified, since it appears that many have contradicted themselves here - I feel like this may be two or three separate points. I hope you can see what I\'m getting at here, since a greater diagnosis might be possible.

Here\'s the BMG spin on the subject. I think the current QB is weak on people skills. I would compare it to this: imagine Cheers. Our current QB is more like Lilith, I\'d rather have a guy like Norm.

All I\'ve read suggests that our current QB is kind of a recluse, he comes in and does his job and then leaves. I\'d rather have a QB that the other guys respect and trust. I\'d rather have a guy kind of like Roethlisberger who comes in and shakes everyone\'s hand, values what they do and conveys in word and action that nothing good happens without their contribution.

This overlaps another area, but it seems like our current QB conveys that he\'s in it for himself and tolerates the guys around him.

It is still my view that while 1&2 (and I very much enjoyed 4e) are good points, they are only really going to be convincing when a good alternative to AB is presented.

I understand the risk aversion part. (Spend WAY too much time around lawyers). This is really where it gets sticky and where I can\'t really offer a lot of suggestions. Our current guy is, after all, the devil we know.

I think, for example, that Mike McMahon from Detroit could be very good if given the chance. I also think we could get him for less than 1/4 of what we\'re paying this season. So strictly from a cap standpoint, I think it\'s a good idea. I also figure from a cap standpoint that if we paid McMahon around 1/2 million a year we\'d be in far better financial shape to shore up the defense and LT and have a coachable QB.

However, here\'s a fun hypothetical for you. Let\'s say that McCarthy gets Nolan and the 49ers to drink the Cool-Aid and they are willing to part with the #1 overall for Brooks. Would you be willing to accept such a trade to get Aaron Rogers or Alex Smith? Or would you be willing to deal our current QB and try to pick up Rivers from the Chargers? I\'m curious as to who it would take to get the more risk averse fans to sign off on the trade?

And my last hypothetical for the risk averse. Deciding to keep the current guy brings up 2 questions for me.
1. Are we going to be able to draft or free agency the players we need to make a superbowl run with his number against the cap?
2. Are we going to be able to make this superbowl run while our WR corps is still playing at a high level? It seems to me that the decision not to deal the current QB brings up all kinds of problems with Horn. For example, if we decide not to pay Horn his 4.5 million this year and cut him where are we at then? Or if we can re-sign Joe to a cap friendly deal, how long is he going to play at such a high level?

I want a QB who wins games, not one of those \"manager\" types; I just don\'t think our running game (mostly due to the Oline) or defense is strong enough to have that kind of QB.

I agree, long term it\'s better to have Elway than Dilfer. I\'m wondering whether our current guy could be our Herschel Walker? I think that his trade value is such that he could buy us 2-3 players that could go a long way towards fixing the defense and OT problems we are facing.

saintswhodi · 01-30-2005, 04:15 PM

Kool and BMG, whatever side of the argument you are on, you have to love the banter that is taking place back and forth. Both responses are well-thought out and very poignant.

Kool, I understand very well risk aversion. No problem on the blow up by the way. The point is this, sometimes you take the risk to reap the rewards. Example, what if New England decided to stick with Bledsoe once healthy instead of 6th round pick Tom Brady? Steelers let Maddox start when healthy instead of Ben? What if San Fran never decided to give Young a chance after his terrible seasons in Tampa? They gambled the franchise he could pick up where Montana left off and it happened. I have seen many good examples where the player you have just can\'t get you over the hump, and it seems our current guy can\'t get us into the playoffs without a 7-4 head start posted by another qb. If we sit back and allow ourselves to be held hostage by the \"we may not get anything better\" argument, we may be looking at Horn retiring and having no receiver to pick up the slack and seeing that as ANOTHER need very soon WHILE we are trying to fix the D, which will take more than one off-season. I agree with BMG that the time to act is now, while AB has trade value and there are teams of need, and teams with new coaches. I think a shot at Aaron Rodgers or ALex Smith is worth it.

BMG\'s financial point is extremely valuable also. for what he is being paid, preparing to be paid, and seems like he is beginning to scoff at is FAR AND ABOVE what he gives on the field. Dealing him allows the freedom to bring in a decent alternative at least for a year and shore up some other positions of need. The point has been amde coaching may have hampered him, and I am not inclined to disagree. But if that is the case, AB is beyond the window of learning that has been established by coaches in the league. He is who he is and who he is gonna be. With is salary, that is absolutely not good enough, and with him feeling he is great, it is obviously not gonna get better. We KNOW if any competition is brought in, he will be in the paper the next day saying how unappreciated he is. This team doesn\'t need that any more. It\'s time to cut our losses and move on.

LongTimeFan · 01-30-2005, 06:03 PM

JKool..I couldn\'t have said it any better than you this in this post..
As I said before I don\'t think that AB is a top 5 QB and if there was a way to trade him in return the Saints gets back something that would be worth the trade, some one said here that they would just cut him for the hell of it ( I guess if it\'s not your money you can say such things), also some would trade Brroks for Carr, Why?, I like Carr I feel that one day he will be a good QB but he wouldn\'t be in the timetable in making the playoofs with the team that we have now, hell by the time Carr learned the game better and then have to come in and learn a new system Horn, Deuce might not be there, as I said before I strongly beleive that the Saints will get back into the playoffs within 2 years.
Bottom line: The only way that I would trade Brooks right now would be for a P. Manning or McNabb which as we all know won\'t happen, be careful what you wish for..
I agree though that Brooks makes mistakes, talks without thinking and says how great he is but he\'s the best we have right now, he\'s it, so when you say that you would cut him for the hell of it think about what your saying, we could end up with a Bledsoe or worst and then we would really have problems, I would like to see our line begin to improve next season and once we have a good offense and Brooks still doesn\'t bring us to the playoffs then it could be time to re-build our entire offense which would mean that the playoffs would be 4-5 years away if we were to be lucky.
I want the Saints to make the playoofs and do well in the next 2 years, some of you might be ready to start from scratch which I\'m not ready for that just yet.

LongTimeFan

saintswhodi · 01-30-2005, 06:17 PM

Long Time, I think it was Saints LB who said it best in another thread. Pretty much EVERY position on this team has been changed except QB the last 4 years, and WE STILL don\'t make the playoffs. It\'s time to stop dancing around that postion and make a change. To say we should get a McNabb or Peyton for AB, who is barely worth a Bledsoe or Collins is just ridiculous. You might as well say you don\'t wanna trade him. What if we could get a guy who could post similar numbers, yet cut the mistakes and not make stupid comments once a month in the paper? Why wouldn\'t that be a fair trade? That\'s like going to the Lexus dealership with a Pinto and demanding they accept it for LS 430. I mean if you say he CAN be traded, at least be realistic, or please just simply say you don\'t wanna trade him.

LongTimeFan · 01-30-2005, 07:03 PM

saintswhodi

\"What if we could get a guy who could post similar numbers, yet cut the mistakes and not make stupid comments once a month in the paper? \"

Who could we bring right now that is available, not under contract that would be better than what we have right now,
they have to be avaliable, a wish list doesn\'t count.

It may be tougher than you think to get rid of Brooks and get a better QB

Saint_LB · 01-30-2005, 07:28 PM

It may be tougher than you think to get rid of Brooks and get a better QB

It may be tough, but it could be done. The thing that is funny is that we have had guys in the last five years that could\'ve fit the bill on our roster, and we let them go. I know Jake and Bulger can play in the NFL, and I suspect that J.T. might have what it takes. But, we keep letting them go, and the fans keep piling into the Dome, and Benson stays happy and remains pat. IMHO, the whole thing unraveled on Benson and Haz the moment they inked AB to a contract that pays him way more than he gives back, and have made a decision that whether we like it or not he is going to remain the QB until his contract expires. Their kinda saying, \"We made a mistake, now you guys are going to have to live with it...sorry.\"

LongTimeFan · 01-30-2005, 07:38 PM

You know the bad thing about losing Jake is he really wanted to remain in N.O even if he had to be a backup but the didn\'t want to pay him for what he was worth,
Glad to see him do well as a starter except when he plays the Saints

JKool · 01-30-2005, 07:54 PM

Wow, lots of good stuff here.

First, let me thank FF for starting the most congenial thread on this subject in a long while.

Second, LTF, I\'m glad you felt the post conveyed a sentiment you have. I often wonder how many people agree with anything I say?

Third, here are some points:

(1) Being caviled ain\'t so bad, is it?

(2) I always prefer the posts that are about what we can do about our problems over the ones that are merely pointing out our problems. Look, I\'m mostly a pro-Brooks guy, but if a good deal should come up, I\'m not opposed to trading him. He is definitely one of the better QBs we\'ve ever had, and that may not be saying much, but he\'s still good enough to be a starter in the NFL, and he\'s not in the bottom third of QBs in terms of ability (talent and otherwise) IMO. That said, I fully agree that he has many drawbacks.

(3) I agree with Halo that the window for improving our QB has probably almost closed. I do feel with slightly better game planning and a coach who doesn\'t constrain Aaron so much, he could be better. Not because he\'s improved, but merely because he is better utilized.

(4) I\'m starting to think that one of Horn, Duece, or Brooks will have to go or we won\'t be able to afford the defensive players and Offensive Tackles we need. Either we\'ll need to find some diamonds in the rough (which we seem to suck at) or we\'ll have to cut our losses on one of our big contract players (maybe Tebucky on top of one of those other three). I\'d really like to see us pay through the nose for two of the many free agent Tackles and at least one Linebacker (and maybe even a Corner). If we do that, I\'m not opposed to using a higher pick (maybe even a first) on a QB. That said, see below.

(5) I don\'t think that Rodgers or Smith will develop fast enough for us to win within the window that Whodi has helpfully delimited. People are a bit too enamored with Rothlisberger\'s work this year. It is not like it is common for a rookie QB to step in and start playing at that level. QBs, much like WRs, usually take two to four years to develop. Horn will be gone by then. Thus, I feel like a rookie may not be our answer, if we want to win on the frame people seem to think we have. Brooks could get it done, IMO, if we improve the OLine, the Defense, and Duece has a good year WITH BETTER GAME PLANNING.

(6) IMO Brooks contract will be no bigger problem to our getting the extra talent we need on D and the OLine than Duece\'s or Horn\'s. I\'m starting to have the feeling that we may have blown this window. Unless our key guys (Horn, Duece, and Brooks) get on board and don\'t hold out for the $$$, we\'re going to be in trouble next year anyway.

(7) For all the times I hear about Brooks workin\' for the payoff, I\'ve recently seen some stuff that suggests Duece and Horn aren\'t that much different. I agree that those two appear to be more team oriented, but I\'m beginning to have some doubts.

(8) BMG, it seems we agree on most everything except our risk aversion. I will consider which QBs I think would be worth what, but it might be helpful to hear ideas from others on this. I especially agree with this, \"I\'d perfer an Elway to a Dilfer.\" I feel that Brooks is more of an Elway; though obviously he\'ll never be in that class, he has the tools to be dangerous that Dilfer does not. I will repeat that with our OLine and Defense the way we are \"a Dilfer\", IMO, would be screwed here in NO.

(9) Whodi, I agree that risks must be taken. We\'re just disagreeing on the amount and on what. For every risk that takes off there are others that crumble. For every Tom Brady there are many other 6th rounders who don\'t make a team. For every Patriots there is a Bengals. I really think that you and I agree on most of the \"facts\", we just don\'t agree on the conclusion. The two missing premises that we don\'t agree on are these: (1) AB can get it done if properly handled and surrounded by a solid running game and pass protection, and (2) if we dump AB the risk will payoff in the time frame you have in mind.

(10) Whodi, I like when I\'m poignant.

I also agree that it is nice to have a bit of give and take in an argument. Sometimes when backed into a corner people start believing bad arguments more, rather than just giving them up. Oh well.

(11) LTF, I\'d consider trading Brooks for many others than the top three or four QBs in the league. If we could get Brees, perhaps I\'d consider letting AB go for high draft picks (or an OT or LB). I\'d even consider giving Brooks up for a guy in the middle of the pack, if we could get a second rounder too. HOWEVER, I do not think we should trade him for a \"game manager\" QB UNLESS we seriously improve our OL (two new Ts and maybe a new G) and get a STUD back up for Duece. A \"game manager\" just won\'t be able to get it done with our ALMOST WORST OF ALL TIME defense and our shi-ty O Line.

(12)

inkele:

LongTimeFan · 01-30-2005, 08:02 PM

JKool

I thought of Brees and he would be worth a trade for Brooks but there is no way the Chargers will part with him, that\'s the word from a few guys on ESPN anyways..
To me there\'s just not anybody out there right not to even consider, word is Bledsoe will be a backup for the Bills, he could be a starter else where I suppose but he\'s at the very end of his career and might only be good in a backup role

JKool · 01-30-2005, 08:06 PM

BMG, sorry I didn\'t get to your questions to the risk averse among us. I\'ll have to ponder them further.

LB, don\'t take this the wrong way, but what did you see in J.T. (other than he wasn\'t Brooks) that I didn\'t. He looked ok to me in one quarter of preseason football against the other team\'s third stringers. Other than that he didn\'t look any better than Bouman. I think Bouman isn\'t even suited to be a second stringer. I\'ll happily eat my words if he pays off in GB, but I won\'t be holding my breath. Don\'t get me wrong, several others share your view on J.T., but every time I try to get an answer to the question that I just put to you, I never get an answer.

BMG, now that I think about it, I would be very warry of bringing in a QB to replace Brooks who hadn\'t taken a snap in a regular season NFL game. I\'m not saying I wouldn\'t, but I think that improving the O and the D is possible and within our cap range even with Brooks here one more season (we could draft and develop a QB if we keep Brooks at least one more year). I\'d much rather trade Duece for high picks and draft a RB than draft a QB. Here is my reasoning: given my stance on a \"game manager\" QB given the shakey prospects for our OLine and Defense and the usual development period for a QB, a RB would be a better choice. RBs can usually contribute right away, unlike QBs, and if we got another high pick, we may be able to trade up to get one of those stud RBs in this year\'s draft (who would be cheaper and less likely to hold out than Duece). What do you think about that? I\'m not saying I favor that plan just yet, since I just thought of it, but it doesn\'t seem all that unreasonable to me.

01-30-2005, 03:33 PM	#1
BrooksMustGo 1000 Posts + Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 1,762	Why in the world am I doing this?! JKool, As always, it is refreshing to discuss things with you. I\'ve never been caviled before though? 3b - I think you should add that how bad the mistakes are matters. There are few starting NFL QBs who are merely managers of the game that people can get excited about. Thus, I think you could make this point more strongly, and I also think it could be a weakness of your argument (but we\'d have to investigate it more thoroughly). I agree entirely on the timing of the mistakes. Our current QB tends to make them as such awful times that they are underscored in the minds of people watching. I would also agree that what I\'m arguing for is basically to have a game manager for the coming season. However, like you and everyone else, I\'d rather have an Elway than a Dilfer for the long term. I also agree that more investigation would clear this up. As a fan, I tend to get really nervous when our current QB is inside the 20\'s--backed up or in the redzone. I expect bad things to happen. Between the 20\'s I\'m never worried. I\'m not sure if I\'ve been trained to this or just notice it more, but that\'s basically my take on the current QB. 3c - This is not only AB\'s fault. Coaching has not helped him here. While I agree that this may be symptomatic of his \"dumbness\", it may also be due to coddling and/or poor coaching. I feel it is difficult to say how much of this is really on AB himself. Agreed. Halo has said on several occasions that he felt the organization has ruined the current QB during his development. I think it\'s certainly possible. The trouble is, I\'m not sure it\'s fixable. He seems to think he\'s elite and the coaching staff hasn\'t ever really held him accountable. So I\'m not sure that we\'re ever going to see marked improvement from him in NO. I wouldn\'t be surprised if he went somewhere else and did quite well though. 3f - There are two intangibles that Brooks does have (though, I agree that for the most you are right on this point): (1) he is actually pretty darn tough - he takes a lickin\' and keeps on tickin\', and (2) he is a threat to gamble. I honestly believe this is a coaching (game planning) error. I agree that he is tough and seems to do a good job of staying in good condition. I also agree that he is better on bootlegs where he is dangerous to run. However, I\'d qualify that a bit. I don\'t think he\'s nearly as dangerous as McNabb, Culpepper or Vick. This could be a game planning problem. Maybe McCarthy emphasized that he shouldn\'t run at all, but throw the ball away? Even the scramblers settle down into the pocket as their career goes on, so I\'m not sure we\'re going to see as much freelancing from him regardless? The one key difference I\'ll note from the last couple of seasons is that he tends to go backwards. When he used to roll out, he stayed close enough to the LOS that he was a threat to run. Now with 10 step drops, he ends up so far back that he takes his running out of the equation--a good run will just get him back to the line. Maybe this can be fixed, I don\'t know, but I\'m relatively sure that he\'s not going to have as good a rushing performance as when he was younger. 4c - I take your point here, but I feel like people can\'t have it both ways. A really good leader, which Brooks is not, would do both. This point needs to be clarified, since it appears that many have contradicted themselves here - I feel like this may be two or three separate points. I hope you can see what I\'m getting at here, since a greater diagnosis might be possible. Here\'s the BMG spin on the subject. I think the current QB is weak on people skills. I would compare it to this: imagine Cheers. Our current QB is more like Lilith, I\'d rather have a guy like Norm. All I\'ve read suggests that our current QB is kind of a recluse, he comes in and does his job and then leaves. I\'d rather have a QB that the other guys respect and trust. I\'d rather have a guy kind of like Roethlisberger who comes in and shakes everyone\'s hand, values what they do and conveys in word and action that nothing good happens without their contribution. This overlaps another area, but it seems like our current QB conveys that he\'s in it for himself and tolerates the guys around him. It is still my view that while 1&2 (and I very much enjoyed 4e) are good points, they are only really going to be convincing when a good alternative to AB is presented. I understand the risk aversion part. (Spend WAY too much time around lawyers). This is really where it gets sticky and where I can\'t really offer a lot of suggestions. Our current guy is, after all, the devil we know. I think, for example, that Mike McMahon from Detroit could be very good if given the chance. I also think we could get him for less than 1/4 of what we\'re paying this season. So strictly from a cap standpoint, I think it\'s a good idea. I also figure from a cap standpoint that if we paid McMahon around 1/2 million a year we\'d be in far better financial shape to shore up the defense and LT and have a coachable QB. However, here\'s a fun hypothetical for you. Let\'s say that McCarthy gets Nolan and the 49ers to drink the Cool-Aid and they are willing to part with the #1 overall for Brooks. Would you be willing to accept such a trade to get Aaron Rogers or Alex Smith? Or would you be willing to deal our current QB and try to pick up Rivers from the Chargers? I\'m curious as to who it would take to get the more risk averse fans to sign off on the trade? And my last hypothetical for the risk averse. Deciding to keep the current guy brings up 2 questions for me. 1. Are we going to be able to draft or free agency the players we need to make a superbowl run with his number against the cap? 2. Are we going to be able to make this superbowl run while our WR corps is still playing at a high level? It seems to me that the decision not to deal the current QB brings up all kinds of problems with Horn. For example, if we decide not to pay Horn his 4.5 million this year and cut him where are we at then? Or if we can re-sign Joe to a cap friendly deal, how long is he going to play at such a high level? I want a QB who wins games, not one of those \"manager\" types; I just don\'t think our running game (mostly due to the Oline) or defense is strong enough to have that kind of QB. I agree, long term it\'s better to have Elway than Dilfer. I\'m wondering whether our current guy could be our Herschel Walker? I think that his trade value is such that he could buy us 2-3 players that could go a long way towards fixing the defense and OT problems we are facing.
	http://www.blackandgold.net/site/signature/buddysig.jpg

01-30-2005, 04:15 PM	#2
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	Why in the world am I doing this?! Kool and BMG, whatever side of the argument you are on, you have to love the banter that is taking place back and forth. Both responses are well-thought out and very poignant. Kool, I understand very well risk aversion. No problem on the blow up by the way. The point is this, sometimes you take the risk to reap the rewards. Example, what if New England decided to stick with Bledsoe once healthy instead of 6th round pick Tom Brady? Steelers let Maddox start when healthy instead of Ben? What if San Fran never decided to give Young a chance after his terrible seasons in Tampa? They gambled the franchise he could pick up where Montana left off and it happened. I have seen many good examples where the player you have just can\'t get you over the hump, and it seems our current guy can\'t get us into the playoffs without a 7-4 head start posted by another qb. If we sit back and allow ourselves to be held hostage by the \"we may not get anything better\" argument, we may be looking at Horn retiring and having no receiver to pick up the slack and seeing that as ANOTHER need very soon WHILE we are trying to fix the D, which will take more than one off-season. I agree with BMG that the time to act is now, while AB has trade value and there are teams of need, and teams with new coaches. I think a shot at Aaron Rodgers or ALex Smith is worth it. BMG\'s financial point is extremely valuable also. for what he is being paid, preparing to be paid, and seems like he is beginning to scoff at is FAR AND ABOVE what he gives on the field. Dealing him allows the freedom to bring in a decent alternative at least for a year and shore up some other positions of need. The point has been amde coaching may have hampered him, and I am not inclined to disagree. But if that is the case, AB is beyond the window of learning that has been established by coaches in the league. He is who he is and who he is gonna be. With is salary, that is absolutely not good enough, and with him feeling he is great, it is obviously not gonna get better. We KNOW if any competition is brought in, he will be in the paper the next day saying how unappreciated he is. This team doesn\'t need that any more. It\'s time to cut our losses and move on.

01-30-2005, 06:03 PM	#3
LongTimeFan Moderator Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Louisiana Posts: 2,403	Why in the world am I doing this?! JKool..I couldn\'t have said it any better than you this in this post.. As I said before I don\'t think that AB is a top 5 QB and if there was a way to trade him in return the Saints gets back something that would be worth the trade, some one said here that they would just cut him for the hell of it ( I guess if it\'s not your money you can say such things), also some would trade Brroks for Carr, Why?, I like Carr I feel that one day he will be a good QB but he wouldn\'t be in the timetable in making the playoofs with the team that we have now, hell by the time Carr learned the game better and then have to come in and learn a new system Horn, Deuce might not be there, as I said before I strongly beleive that the Saints will get back into the playoffs within 2 years. Bottom line: The only way that I would trade Brooks right now would be for a P. Manning or McNabb which as we all know won\'t happen, be careful what you wish for.. I agree though that Brooks makes mistakes, talks without thinking and says how great he is but he\'s the best we have right now, he\'s it, so when you say that you would cut him for the hell of it think about what your saying, we could end up with a Bledsoe or worst and then we would really have problems, I would like to see our line begin to improve next season and once we have a good offense and Brooks still doesn\'t bring us to the playoffs then it could be time to re-build our entire offense which would mean that the playoffs would be 4-5 years away if we were to be lucky. I want the Saints to make the playoofs and do well in the next 2 years, some of you might be ready to start from scratch which I\'m not ready for that just yet. LongTimeFan
	Rest In Peace JoeSam, thanks for everything my friend.

01-30-2005, 06:17 PM	#4
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	Why in the world am I doing this?! Long Time, I think it was Saints LB who said it best in another thread. Pretty much EVERY position on this team has been changed except QB the last 4 years, and WE STILL don\'t make the playoffs. It\'s time to stop dancing around that postion and make a change. To say we should get a McNabb or Peyton for AB, who is barely worth a Bledsoe or Collins is just ridiculous. You might as well say you don\'t wanna trade him. What if we could get a guy who could post similar numbers, yet cut the mistakes and not make stupid comments once a month in the paper? Why wouldn\'t that be a fair trade? That\'s like going to the Lexus dealership with a Pinto and demanding they accept it for LS 430. I mean if you say he CAN be traded, at least be realistic, or please just simply say you don\'t wanna trade him.

01-30-2005, 07:03 PM	#5
LongTimeFan Moderator Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Louisiana Posts: 2,403	Why in the world am I doing this?! saintswhodi \"What if we could get a guy who could post similar numbers, yet cut the mistakes and not make stupid comments once a month in the paper? \" Who could we bring right now that is available, not under contract that would be better than what we have right now, they have to be avaliable, a wish list doesn\'t count. It may be tougher than you think to get rid of Brooks and get a better QB

01-30-2005, 07:28 PM	#6
Saint_LB Deuce Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 2,894	Why in the world am I doing this?! It may be tougher than you think to get rid of Brooks and get a better QB It may be tough, but it could be done. The thing that is funny is that we have had guys in the last five years that could\'ve fit the bill on our roster, and we let them go. I know Jake and Bulger can play in the NFL, and I suspect that J.T. might have what it takes. But, we keep letting them go, and the fans keep piling into the Dome, and Benson stays happy and remains pat. IMHO, the whole thing unraveled on Benson and Haz the moment they inked AB to a contract that pays him way more than he gives back, and have made a decision that whether we like it or not he is going to remain the QB until his contract expires. Their kinda saying, \"We made a mistake, now you guys are going to have to live with it...sorry.\"
Saint_LB Deuce Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 2,894	Whether you think you can or think you can't...you're right!

01-30-2005, 07:38 PM	#7
LongTimeFan Moderator Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Louisiana Posts: 2,403	Why in the world am I doing this?! You know the bad thing about losing Jake is he really wanted to remain in N.O even if he had to be a backup but the didn\'t want to pay him for what he was worth, Glad to see him do well as a starter except when he plays the Saints

01-30-2005, 07:54 PM	#8
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	Why in the world am I doing this?! Wow, lots of good stuff here. First, let me thank FF for starting the most congenial thread on this subject in a long while. Second, LTF, I\'m glad you felt the post conveyed a sentiment you have. I often wonder how many people agree with anything I say? Third, here are some points: (1) Being caviled ain\'t so bad, is it? (2) I always prefer the posts that are about what we can do about our problems over the ones that are merely pointing out our problems. Look, I\'m mostly a pro-Brooks guy, but if a good deal should come up, I\'m not opposed to trading him. He is definitely one of the better QBs we\'ve ever had, and that may not be saying much, but he\'s still good enough to be a starter in the NFL, and he\'s not in the bottom third of QBs in terms of ability (talent and otherwise) IMO. That said, I fully agree that he has many drawbacks. (3) I agree with Halo that the window for improving our QB has probably almost closed. I do feel with slightly better game planning and a coach who doesn\'t constrain Aaron so much, he could be better. Not because he\'s improved, but merely because he is better utilized. (4) I\'m starting to think that one of Horn, Duece, or Brooks will have to go or we won\'t be able to afford the defensive players and Offensive Tackles we need. Either we\'ll need to find some diamonds in the rough (which we seem to suck at) or we\'ll have to cut our losses on one of our big contract players (maybe Tebucky on top of one of those other three). I\'d really like to see us pay through the nose for two of the many free agent Tackles and at least one Linebacker (and maybe even a Corner). If we do that, I\'m not opposed to using a higher pick (maybe even a first) on a QB. That said, see below. (5) I don\'t think that Rodgers or Smith will develop fast enough for us to win within the window that Whodi has helpfully delimited. People are a bit too enamored with Rothlisberger\'s work this year. It is not like it is common for a rookie QB to step in and start playing at that level. QBs, much like WRs, usually take two to four years to develop. Horn will be gone by then. Thus, I feel like a rookie may not be our answer, if we want to win on the frame people seem to think we have. Brooks could get it done, IMO, if we improve the OLine, the Defense, and Duece has a good year WITH BETTER GAME PLANNING. (6) IMO Brooks contract will be no bigger problem to our getting the extra talent we need on D and the OLine than Duece\'s or Horn\'s. I\'m starting to have the feeling that we may have blown this window. Unless our key guys (Horn, Duece, and Brooks) get on board and don\'t hold out for the $$$, we\'re going to be in trouble next year anyway. (7) For all the times I hear about Brooks workin\' for the payoff, I\'ve recently seen some stuff that suggests Duece and Horn aren\'t that much different. I agree that those two appear to be more team oriented, but I\'m beginning to have some doubts. (8) BMG, it seems we agree on most everything except our risk aversion. I will consider which QBs I think would be worth what, but it might be helpful to hear ideas from others on this. I especially agree with this, \"I\'d perfer an Elway to a Dilfer.\" I feel that Brooks is more of an Elway; though obviously he\'ll never be in that class, he has the tools to be dangerous that Dilfer does not. I will repeat that with our OLine and Defense the way we are \"a Dilfer\", IMO, would be screwed here in NO. (9) Whodi, I agree that risks must be taken. We\'re just disagreeing on the amount and on what. For every risk that takes off there are others that crumble. For every Tom Brady there are many other 6th rounders who don\'t make a team. For every Patriots there is a Bengals. I really think that you and I agree on most of the \"facts\", we just don\'t agree on the conclusion. The two missing premises that we don\'t agree on are these: (1) AB can get it done if properly handled and surrounded by a solid running game and pass protection, and (2) if we dump AB the risk will payoff in the time frame you have in mind. (10) Whodi, I like when I\'m poignant. I also agree that it is nice to have a bit of give and take in an argument. Sometimes when backed into a corner people start believing bad arguments more, rather than just giving them up. Oh well. (11) LTF, I\'d consider trading Brooks for many others than the top three or four QBs in the league. If we could get Brees, perhaps I\'d consider letting AB go for high draft picks (or an OT or LB). I\'d even consider giving Brooks up for a guy in the middle of the pack, if we could get a second rounder too. HOWEVER, I do not think we should trade him for a \"game manager\" QB UNLESS we seriously improve our OL (two new Ts and maybe a new G) and get a STUD back up for Duece. A \"game manager\" just won\'t be able to get it done with our ALMOST WORST OF ALL TIME defense and our shi-ty O Line. (12) inkele:
	"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks

01-30-2005, 08:02 PM	#9
LongTimeFan Moderator Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Louisiana Posts: 2,403	Why in the world am I doing this?! JKool I thought of Brees and he would be worth a trade for Brooks but there is no way the Chargers will part with him, that\'s the word from a few guys on ESPN anyways.. To me there\'s just not anybody out there right not to even consider, word is Bledsoe will be a backup for the Bills, he could be a starter else where I suppose but he\'s at the very end of his career and might only be good in a backup role

01-30-2005, 08:06 PM	#10
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	Why in the world am I doing this?! BMG, sorry I didn\'t get to your questions to the risk averse among us. I\'ll have to ponder them further. LB, don\'t take this the wrong way, but what did you see in J.T. (other than he wasn\'t Brooks) that I didn\'t. He looked ok to me in one quarter of preseason football against the other team\'s third stringers. Other than that he didn\'t look any better than Bouman. I think Bouman isn\'t even suited to be a second stringer. I\'ll happily eat my words if he pays off in GB, but I won\'t be holding my breath. Don\'t get me wrong, several others share your view on J.T., but every time I try to get an answer to the question that I just put to you, I never get an answer. BMG, now that I think about it, I would be very warry of bringing in a QB to replace Brooks who hadn\'t taken a snap in a regular season NFL game. I\'m not saying I wouldn\'t, but I think that improving the O and the D is possible and within our cap range even with Brooks here one more season (we could draft and develop a QB if we keep Brooks at least one more year). I\'d much rather trade Duece for high picks and draft a RB than draft a QB. Here is my reasoning: given my stance on a \"game manager\" QB given the shakey prospects for our OLine and Defense and the usual development period for a QB, a RB would be a better choice. RBs can usually contribute right away, unlike QBs, and if we got another high pick, we may be able to trade up to get one of those stud RBs in this year\'s draft (who would be cheaper and less likely to hold out than Duece). What do you think about that? I\'m not saying I favor that plan just yet, since I just thought of it, but it doesn\'t seem all that unreasonable to me.
	"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks