|
To all Brooks' Bashers.
The Brooks' bashers always have to have something to hang their hat on every year.
And this year is no different. Here are some of the most used. 1. Aaron Brooks' backward pass: Yep, he did it. I saw him myself, so I know he did it. Was it foolish? You betcha. But I also saw Tom Brady make one of the most foolish plays I've ever seen too. As Brady was being tackled, he threw the ball underhanded, and almost behind his head , to a defensive linemen when there was absolutely no Patriot in sight who had a chance of catching the ball. I saw Favre make some of the most stupid throws too. 2. Brooks calling himself a great QB who has played on an average team. Did Brooks say it? Yep. But it's never put in context. The whole thing came up right before the Saints played Delhomme and the Panthers. Brooks was being compared to Delhomme, over and over and over. And Brooks was tired of all the comparisons. Brooks said Jake was a fine QB who had the luxary of playing on a great team that went to the super bowl. Then, not wisely, Brooks said he was a great QB who has played on some bad teams. Brooks wasn't putting down any indivdual player. He was talking about the overall performace of the team as the reason why the Saints haven't won as many games as the Panthers. Brooks saying he was great was not wise. But I'm sure its frustrating to be dogged by the media like Brooks has been and Brooks did go out and back it up when he beat the Panthers. Let's not fool ourselves here. MANY QBs have made stupid remarks to the media. Chad Pennington looked like a whiny little brat when he blamed the N.Y. media. And lets not forget the Kurt Warner situation a couple of years back. While I wished Brooks would not say some things in the media (because he can never win that battle) I do understand where he's coming from. Brooks has to live with the criticism (unfair) every waking hour. On the street, in the resturants, in the media, in the super dome. All things considered Brooks has really handled the situation pretty well. Probably better than I would have. Terry Bradshaw stayed away from Pittsburg for about 20-years because of the way the fans and media treated him. He was hurt by the criticism. Don't tell me it doesn't affect players. I know for a FACT that it does. And I know that receiving criticism can cause a player to say stupid things. And coaches too. There are some fans here who like to bring up these things over and over and over and over. That's fine. But, don't fool yourselves. Cause you sure ain't fooling me and a lot of other folks. Now get out there and do some Brooks' bashing. I have no doubt you will. |
To all Brooks' Bashers.
:xxrotflmao:
|
To all Brooks' Bashers.
Quote:
Sweet reply |
To all Brooks' Bashers.
Some people are OK with having a cancer on the team, some are not. Jim Hazlett, OK....Dusty Baker, not OK...goodbye Sammy, I hope you like Baltimore.
Dude, I think you need to give it a rest. Those fans who are not OK with it will never change their mind. |
To all Brooks' Bashers.
Billy, Billy, Billy. You still don\'t get it.
Let me make an easy argument: after the Tackle position, could you upgrade the team more significantly with a single move than you could by replacing AB? Look - I don\'t doubt that AB has talent. That\'s not the issue. To me, consistency and efficiency are the most important things a QB can have. Give me a poor athlete (a la Brady or Delhomme) who knows the game like a coach over an athlete who can\'t read a defense. It\'s just my opinion, but it\'s a formula that seems to have worked. You seem to deny the fact that AB is inconsistent. You point to a single comment, or a single play, and then say - so what? I saw this guy or that guy make one bad play too. That\'s not the point, and you know it. It\'s generally accepted that AB is completely inconsistent. The local and national media have been reporting that for years. Even \"rumors\" put in print from the Saints organization have suggested that AB needs to mature and play more consistently. You seem to yell and scream at guys like Horn or Stallworth b/c they drop passes - in other words, they make a play and then botch one. You know that hurts the team. Well no person\'s play single-handedly effects an entire team as much as the QB\'s, and AB is on then off. I don\'t think AB is as talented as you do, nor do I think he has much football smarts. However, the guy could be an average to good QB if he could just get his head straight and play more even keel. The most frustrating part about him is that he has flashes where he exceeds even your most optimistic expectations. Then he follows those up with plays that make you wonder if he should be selling hotdogs instead of acting like one. |
To all Brooks' Bashers.
Quote:
look-brooks is a talented athlete, but not a very good football player..unless he develops into a football player he is a weak spot on this team. gumbo-i just have to ask---if brooks were white would you be crying for his head? It seems like you were the first to play the race card with brooks-when most of the rest of us were looking at production. the more I read your posts the more I\'m inclined to wonder about where your coming from. |
To all Brooks' Bashers.
*saintswhodi starts slow clap for WhoDat*
Scotty, it was an honest representation of what I was doing soon as I saw the title of the thread. Classic. |
To all Brooks' Bashers.
Quote:
Changing the QB can be the most significant move. It could make the team significantly better or WORSE. It depends on if that is the problem. Take Philly for example. Terell Owens made the most significant difference of any offseason signing. I suppose they could have replaced McNabb and gotten the same result. You seem to deny the fact we have an inconsistent offensive line, inconsistent receivers, and, according to you, inconsistent play calling. You you seem to deny that the QB is affected the most by all of that. But, yet, you want to suggest that changing Brooks is the move to make. Hmmmmmmm..... Just doesn\'t add up to me, WhoDat. ;) [Edited on 31/1/2005 by GumboBC] |
To all Brooks' Bashers.
Quote:
I make this statement because I have seen his immature, ignorant, and obtuse arguments about the value of coaching, quarterbacking, and others that tend to go round and round with no conclusion or logic. The other possibilities are that he is severly brain injured or schizophrenic. I don\'t know which, but trying to submit any logical response to his posts are fruitless. :seeingstars: :smile_argue: |
To all Brooks' Bashers.
Quote:
|
To all Brooks' Bashers.
RDOX, we need one of those smilies that \'s holding a sign that says BINGO. But all I can give you is this: :clap:
|
To all Brooks' Bashers.
Quote:
He\'s a real prince. I think he\'d be more valuable as trade bait, but he\'s a prince among men. |
To all Brooks' Bashers.
Just to add Fuel to the Fire!!!!!!
our own b&g is reporting rumors of posible replacements for Brooks, If we can get relative value for him... Kurt Warner is being of intrest to the Saints, and The San Deigo situation has already drawn early intrest from the Saints.. While I would not really want Warner (I would opt for a Rookie first) I think Philip Rivers is really intriguing...... Just for the Record: I am with Whodat, Brooks lacks heart, leadership, football sense, and the whole Team concept... Excellent Strong Fast Athelete, with iddy biddy heart and brain....... Furthermore it has been mentioned before with great merit, that one of the three Brooks, Horn, or Mcalister my have to be on the last Train outa Nawlins, cause of such high cap numbers, who is harder to replace I ask you...... If you guys had to choose, who is out and who is in!!!!!!!! :shrug: [Edited on 31/1/2005 by WD52] |
To all Brooks' Bashers.
I wish Halo would produce a \"Brooks Only\" forum. That way everyone can beat this dead horse in that forum, and we can discuss other things here.
|
To all Brooks' Bashers.
What would you like to discuss dberce? I don\'t understand. If you don\'t wanna read an AB thread, don\'t read it. Do you feel it is detracting from a convo you are trying to have elsewhere? These convos are titled and you can guess fairly on the content. If some of us would like to discuss AB, I don\'t see why it would be an issue for someone who doesn\'t when they can just ignore that thread.
[Edited on 31/1/2005 by saintswhodi] |
To all Brooks' Bashers.
I was thinking on my drive home that Halo probably loves AB. He generates more posting and thus more visits/hits than any other topic. Look at it like this, over an hour ago I posted a thread about the defense. It had one other person post to it in that first hour. An AB thread a mile long contnues to get posted several times per hour.
The worst defense in Saints history and nobody wants to talk about it. :casstet: |
To all Brooks' Bashers.
Fans are passionate about the Saints. But seems most are even more passionate about their like or dislike of Brooks. That\'s hardly anything new about the QB position..
The QBs are the most talked about position in the game.. Look folks.... We hear all the time about the things Brooks has said. In fact, we hear them over and over.. I never hear anyone that cares, or that will take up the time, to put up the other side of the arguement. There was more to the story than Brooks just proclaiming he\'s great and his team is average. It was all about the Jake Delhomme comparisions. But, no one ever brings that up. I did, and? No one else talks about the bone-headed plays other QBs make. At least I haven\'t read \'em.. Do we only want to hear one side of the story? Well, that ain\'t me. I\'m going to tell it like I believe it to be. Dont\' like it? You don\'t have to like it. This name calling doesn\'t bother me. It\'s just silly. |
To all Brooks' Bashers.
Quote:
It seems to me that like selective hearing, you have selective reading. Since I have been on this board, I can recall at least 10-20 disparaging comments about Warner, Vick, Bulger, Delhomme, Culpepper, Leftwich, Garcia, Trent Green. Most were made in response to something that you posted. You then came back with an argument about how good these folks were. Secondly, with you there isn\'t \"One side of the story\" there\'s 8-10. If Whodi,Who Dat, Myself, Xan, Mutey, BMG, or someone who you like to prod says that Brooks is a man, your next post is that Brooks is a woman and has a 36D bust. Thirdly, the problem that I continue to have is that I truly don\'t know what you believe, because you constantly are contradicting yourself in trying to argue with other posters. Finally, your posts are exactly like the behavior of someone who is either severly brain damaged or schizophrenic. That\'s not trying to call you names, it\'s an observation of your posting behavior. It\'s not meant as a slight or a cut. It is an observation of someone who works with people with these types of problems. |
To all Brooks' Bashers.
RDOX
I don\'t have to explain myself to you. Quote:
If you were on most boards.... you would be banned or come close to it. Wheather you think it\'s an observation or not. In the future... I will not respond to you. And I\'d appreciate if you did the same. |
To all Brooks' Bashers.
Personally, I\'m just tired of ABs game. He was really bad in all of our last 4 games and he showed what we all knew: he is good enough to lead a team to victories that is holding the opposition to less than 20 points.
He never steps into the pressure. He\'s a flake. He throws into double coverage. How often does one of our guys catch the ball in daylight? Never. He just hasn\'t progressed in his pocket presence. Look at Brady and Manning...both slower than Ab yet more evasive in the pocket. I\'m not a basher, but this year he made up my mind for me. I\'ll take O\'Sullivan. I\'ll take whoever, but this guy just doesn\'t get it. Last year he killed the picks and fumbled, this year hew did the opposite. We just need a fiery guy with some integrity.....not a weirdo with a cannon arm. I understand he\'s in a tough spot. He has an uncanny ability to make his mistakes when they will ruin the game for us, where other guys can count a D to bail them out. But, I just don\'t think he\'s a leader. He\'s overconfident when he\'s bad and complacent when he\'s good. |
To all Brooks' Bashers.
Quote:
|
To all Brooks' Bashers.
You brought up some good points Gumbo
|
To all Brooks' Bashers.
Quote:
Given the rate at which 1st round QBs succeed, we are roughly 30% likely to get a bust (think Rick Mirer, Akili Smith, etc.). Furthermore, even if we get a guy who will be better than Brooks, my analysis in another thread (which I won\'t repeat here), demonstrates that statistically speaking our new guy will be worse than Brooks for the next two seasons. I understand the intangibles arguments and that people are tired of Brooks stuff, but, again statistically speaking, you guys are betting on a horse that is both unproven and overwhelming likely to not be good for a couple of years. I\'d like to see more consideration of proven QBs - like Brees - rather than this speculation (unfounded statistically) that a rookie could make it happen for us. There just isn\'t reason to believe that (unless a MUCH MORE detailed argument for particular rookies is given - which it hasn\'t). [Edited on 31/1/2005 by JKool] |
To all Brooks' Bashers.
PS - Scotty, I like the new avatar.
|
To all Brooks' Bashers.
Quote:
|
To all Brooks' Bashers.
Should I start the chant?
Bust... Bust... Bust... Do it, BMG, do it. (Double entendre intended.) |
To all Brooks' Bashers.
Quote:
Thanks JK. I know you weren\'t fishing for compliments, but I have to say you are making some highly intelligent points on this thread. No way I could tackle it that well. You\'re doing the \"Militant Moderates\" proud. (Sounds better than \"The Fencers\") |
To all Brooks' Bashers.
Scotty, I\'m not sure how we ended up on a team, but I\'ll take it. My sunshiner days have passed, but I did enjoy them. However, those moonshiner types scare me a bit - I think they party a lot... ;)
|
To all Brooks' Bashers.
Aaawww, you didn\'t like the Fencers? :P
|
To all Brooks' Bashers.
Quote:
|
To all Brooks' Bashers.
Isn\'t that song about a guy and a girl? :bugeyes:
|
To all Brooks' Bashers.
:shrug: Maybe, but it can apply in this case in a purely heterosexual way. :realmad:
:cool: |
To all Brooks' Bashers.
:nono: :no_no: :no: :arge: :puke:
|
To all Brooks' Bashers.
Quote:
Now, you believe that I discount entirely the play of anyone on the team but Brooks and focus solely on him. I deny this allegation. Likewise, you deny my allegation that you refuse to place any blame whatsoever on AB. So we\'re at an impass. What do we do? Here\'s one idea. Why don\'t we take a look at what the analysts, other fans, and even the organization are saying? Do you think that is fair? You see, I\'ve come to realize Billy that you are so entrenched in this argument that you may not be able to even look at it objectively anymore. Now, let me be clear on my opinion. Aaron Brooks is an average QB who is of a net zero gain to this team. On the up side, he puts up great stats, he is athletically gifted, he has good escapability, and when he\'s on he can really light it up. On the down side, he has an inflated salary, he is inconsistent, he is does not possess much leadership or many of the intangibles you look for in a QB. He doesn\'t have much touch and his football IQ has been questioned. Now, I believe that is a pretty fair analysis. All of those attributes, one way or the other, have been claimed by professional sports writers and analysts. But my guess is that you probably disagree with many of the cons that I listed. What does that tell you? If many fans all see the same thing, if a number of professional writers all say the same thing, if tv personalities, ex-player, current players (ex-teammates), analysts, and even members of the organization all say the same thing, do think maybe there\'s a chance that AB really is a problem? Or is this just some huge conspiracy where thousands of people all harbor a personal and unfounded hatred for AB? Or, are we all just missing something that apparently you and a markedly smaller minority of folks still seem to see? Any chance you\'ve entrenched yourself so much in this debate that you may skew things? Billy, understand that I\'m not attacking you. I\'m being quite serious. I have no doubt in the past that I did exactly what I\'m describing right now. I feel that I came out of it, to the point where I could understand why you pro-brooks folks thought he could make the Pro Bowl... I even agreed. I\'m not suggesting that the line doesn\'t effect his play. I\'m not suggesting the WRs, or TEs, or RBs, or coaches, or playcalling, or fans, etc. don\'t effect his play. But doesn\'t EVERY QB deal with those same elements? So then we\'re back to where we started, aren\'t we? Bottom line - I don\'t care what Philly did, or what works in Indy or Carolina or SD. I care what works or doesn\'t work in New Orleans. Now I\'ve been over this a number of times, and if you look at the offense, the number one need is Tackle. After that, you simply cannot identify another single position or player who could effect the team as much as Brooks does. Period. Could the Saints get worse with another QB? YES - but that\'s not the point. No one is suggesting AB is the worst QB in the league. At least, I\'m not. I am suggesting that the Saints COULD improve at the QB position and SHOULD seek to do so. Can you really argue with that? |
To all Brooks' Bashers.
... this is really good for the shoulders and the traps.... |
To all Brooks' Bashers.
WhoDat --
I\'ve thought long and hard about how to reply to your last post. I don\'t want to complicate my response, so, I\'m going to keep it simple. The question is should Brooks stay or go? The answer is............ well, there is no right or wrong answer. Some folks think he should go. Some folks think he should stay. There\'s evidence to support both sides. So, you\'re not wrong. And I\'m not wrong. We just have a difference of opinion. I hope I\'m clear on that and I hope you agree? My problem is with the folks who state in no uncertain terms that Brooks needs to go. And there\'s a bunch of \'em. It\'s fine to feel that way. But, it\'s not fine to tell me I\'m some kind of idiot for thinking otherwise. Am I WRONG for wanting Brooks to stay? Of course I\'m not WRONG. But, I\'m not RIGHT either. That\'s hard for some folks to understand. It\'s hard for them to understand that they aren\'t RIGHT about Brooks. And it makes them mad as hell that everyone doesn\'t agree with them. I understand that I\'m not RIGHT about wanting Brooks to stay. I\'m not blind, I see a lot of the negative things Brooks does. There is no winning the Brooks debate. So, some folks can believe they are RIGHT. But, I think most folks know what\'s really going on here. I feel no need to post all the negative crap about Brooks, even if I agree with some of it. There\'s just too much of it on here. Instead, I put up the pro-Brooks side of the arguement. The other side needs to be heard, IMO. It\'s not heard nearly enough on here. I believe some folks who want Brooks to stay are just tired of the subject and don\'t post. I believe some are kinda scared to cross all the Brooks\' bashers. Well, I\'m not scared. But, it is getting old... [Edited on 1/2/2005 by GumboBC] |
To all Brooks' Bashers.
While I disagree with the suggestion that there are throngs a AB supporters out there too frightened by the big bad bashers of blackandgold.net, I otherwise agree with most of what you said. I am a little confused though.
You stated that we all have our opinions and none of us is right or wrong. OK, so then why is this a problem? \"My problem is with the folks who state in no uncertain terms that Brooks needs to go. And there\'s a bunch of \'em. It\'s fine to feel that way. But, it\'s not fine to tell me I\'m some kind of idiot for thinking otherwise.\" You state in no uncertain terms that he is not the problem, so you not? You question others\' football knowledge and even personal ag--da for suggesting that AB is the problem. How is that different? I also believe, maybe foolishly, that AB could silence all of us \"bashers.\" Is he capable of a Pro Bowl year? I used to think so - I\'m not so sure though. I\'ll tell you one thing, he could shut me up by producing those types of numbers. But he doesn\'t have to be a pro bowler to make me happy. I\'d lay off of him if he could just play smart, efficient football. Hopefully, you are willing to at least concede that in the past, I have backed AB when he played well despite his team. Problem is, I\'ve never seen you get down on the guy - and that\'s what I think upsets a number of people here. I can\'t remember seeing you come on this board after a bad game and simply say, \"Man, AB stunk today. When is this guy going to CONSISTENTLY play like I know he can?\" Even when he stinks you rush to his rescue. Which prompts that same old question we kept coming back to with Haslett - what is it going to take? If Brooks gets benched, will you believe that he hurt the offense or wasn\'t the right option? If he gets cut or traded - what then? In total, a lot of this, IMO, goes back to the team in general. Aren\'t you tired of same old? I certainly am. More than anything else I\'m tired of seeing inconsistency and failure to live up to potential. I can\'t think of a single person of the team that fits that description more aptly than AB. And sure, b/c he\'s the QB he does get more attention that any other player - but don\'t you think it\'s justified? Doesn\'t he affect the team far more than a DT or G or even WR or LB? |
To all Brooks' Bashers.
WhoDat --
I\'ll concede. I used to think Brooks was a top 5 or 10 QB in the league. But, now, the potential doesn\'t seem to be matching the results. I can only go on potential for so long. I\'m not saying Brooks hasn\'t played well enough to be our QB. I don\'t go along with all this Brooks has played like a \"bum\" stuff. That\'s hardly been the case. I aslo stil believe Brooks can be one of the top 5 or 10 QBs in the NFL if Haslett will get some of these problems straighted out. But, at the same time, I\'m willing to concede that Brooks might never be in the elite catorgory. He might fail. I\'m also willing to concede Brooks has played badly in some games. But no matter how Brooks plays, folks run to this board after the game and lay it ALL on him. |
To all Brooks' Bashers.
I\'m glad you can see that. I understand why you get mad when people say, \"Brooks is a bum.\" He may be an idiot, but he\'s not a bum! LOL ;)
Seriously though, it\'s fair to say that Brooks has played like a bum, b/c he has. Likewise, it\'s fair to say he\'s played great, b/c he has. I don\'t think it is unfair to suggest there is some credibility to the generally accepted opinion of AB, b/c writers, analysts, coaches, players, and yes, even fans, have been observing the guy for five years now. Brooks has improved in a number of areas, but he\'s also fallen off in others. To say that AB is refined is a stretch. I\'m also not so sure you can say that the guy has really improved, despite more attention from the staff (coaches, classes, former greats, coddling, etc) than about any other player. Here\'s a comparison from his first year as a starter to this year. 2001 - 3,832 yards, 26 TDs, 22 INTs, 55.9% comp, 6.87 y/a, long of 63, 13 40+ comps, 76.4 QB rating 2004 - 3,810 yards, 21 TDs, 16 INTS, 57% comp, 7.03 Y/a, long of 57, 5 40+ comps, 79.5 QB rating That ain\'t much improvement - certainly not commisserate with what you expect from a guy going from first year starter to highly paid five year pro. At least, that\'s not what I expect. I expect more. The guy isn\'t bad, nor is he particularly good. I couldn\'t call him average, though that\'s close. I can only accurately classify him as inconsistent. Now people want to debate whether he is THE problem - it\'s hard to ever point to any ONE player and say, that guy is THE problem with the team. However, I believe that he is a significant problem for the team. Further, if you think way back to when he was signed, paid top-5 money to be the starter, and chosen over Blake, Bulger, Delhomme, et. al., the rationale was that he was already a playmaker and he had the POTENTIAL to be great. Well, he makes fewer plays on his own now and his potential hasn\'t been realized. You can speculate as to whose fault that is or why it hasn\'t happened, but the bottom line remains that the results expected were no acheived. Now, I see fans of this team justifying a failure to act (not specifically you Billy, and not only in regard to Brooks) on the grounds that a change might make things worse. How is that a good plan?! Well, this isn\'t really what we wanted, we haven\'t gotten what we expected, a number of different plans and options have been exercised to no avail... but making a change to try and get better also means we risk getting worse, and we just can\'t risk that. Better to suceed at being average than fail at being great. I can\'t tell you how much that attitude infuriates me, and IMO it only breads contempt, apathy, and it\'s the reason many teams stay mired in mediocrity. |
To all Brooks' Bashers.
Who,
Good post buddy. I\'m sure you already know what I have to say about the mediocrity thing, but here are some additional points made by several people here: (1) We have a limited time frame with the \"talent\" we currently have (this may only be the case if you consider Horn and Duece - b/c running back careers tend to be shorter than most positions - the bulk of our talent, since we have a lot of young guys espc. on D) (2) If we improve the OLine and the D, we should rise above mediocrity - we were mediocre with the worst D in the league and an OLine that one would be pressed to call ok. Thus, if we risk a new QB and there is a window you have two probable outcomes: (1) The new guy is a bust and we get worse. (2) The new guy is good, but even good new guys (like Boller or Leftwich for example) take about two years to get to close to where Brooks is now statistically. Either way, our window probably closes. If you think the window is not closing, the there appear to be two probable outcomes: (1) New guy is a bust. (2) New guy makes this team great, but not until after two years. If we stick with AB, there are two probable outcomes: (1) AB continues to be the same, and we do better - as our D and improved OL allow the team to win games we didn\'t last year. (2) AB gets worse (though, I\'d have to say that there is little evidence for that), and we end about the same as last year. Which of get new guy or stick with AB seems to depend on these factors: (1) Window, no window. (2) Probability new guy is a bust (3) Reasonableness of the belief that AB will get worse. I can see taking either a pro or a con side on (1) or (2), but I\'m not sure why someone would take the view pro (3)? I can\'t remember where I was going with this now, but since I wrote it, I\'m gonna see what kind of response it gets - maybe I\'ll remember what I was up to. One more thing: Compare ABs stats the year prior to this one to his stats his first year as a starter, (modulo fumbles) there is a more significant improvement. If you take the dive in the D and the utter explosion of stupidity on our OL to have effected him this year, then there is reason to believe he is improving (IMO). |
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:32 AM. |
Copyright 1997 - 2020 - BlackandGold.com