another i cant hepp it thread

saintswhodi · 02-18-2005, 11:40 AM

Amen FF and Kelley. The problem you are gonna encounter Kelley is, let\'s use Scotty as an example since he spoke out, because McMahon does not have AB\'s \"stats\" McMahon is not gonna be seen as a viable alternative. Forget the fact that he is athletic, young, and has upside. You don\'t see AB\'s \"stats.\" Forget the fact that he doesn\'t start cause the team invested a #3 pick in Harrington. I see fully your point about getting rid of AB\'s salary, bringing a guy like him in at 2 mil, and showing up other areas of the team. How that is a losing proposition I don\'t understand.

In what language can I tell you that I understand that AB hurts our team with his play sometimes (or even often)?

Um Scotty, then explain to me why you don\'t wanna get rid of Brooks if you understand this as you say? You obviously DON\'T understand this. Without his mistakes, we make the playoffs, plain and simple. With his mistakes, we don\'t. So if you understand this, why wouldn\'t you wanna get rid of him?

So then how is this

Lastly, I\'ll take it that the bashers agree with my list of things we have tried to fix, but haven\'t, and stop using the \"the only constant has been AB\" BS. The true only constant is that out team has not been good all around for quite a while

BS if you say you understand this

In what language can I tell you that I understand that AB hurts our team with his play sometimes (or even often)?

If something is HURTING the team as you say you understand, wouldn\'t you wanna get rid of it? If you had lung cancer, and they removed your spleen, would you be satisfied with that even though the lung cancer is HURTING you? Then they removed a kidney but you still had lung cancer. SO basically what you are saying is you understand something is hurting the team, but youare unwilling to change it. Okay.

SaintFanInATLHELL · 02-18-2005, 12:20 PM

In what language can I tell you that I understand that AB hurts our team with his play sometimes (or even often)?

Um Scotty, then explain to me why you don\'t wanna get rid of Brooks if you understand this as you say? You obviously DON\'T understand this. Without his mistakes, we make the playoffs, plain and simple. With his mistakes, we don\'t. So if you understand this, why wouldn\'t you wanna get rid of him?

FINALLY!!!

Whodi finally had the guts to say what Brooks bashers have been trying to say to awhile.

Now prove it. I\'m going to preempt you on your 1st three:

1) The backwards pass. First off the Saints didn\'t lose the ball on the play. Secondly they lost the game 43-17 to the Chargers.

2) The underhanded pass. Denver was up 20-3 at the time.

3) The Arizona fumble. It was the opening series of the game. Also it was 4th and goal.

Go take a look at the recaps:

http://www.nfl.com/teams/schedule/NO

Now they were all screwups. But I assert that none of these screwups cost the Saints the game.

So the gauntlet has been thown down. Specifically what plays that Brooks screwed up on that cost the Saints a playoff spot?

SFIAH

Saint_LB · 02-18-2005, 12:26 PM

So the gauntlet has been thown down. Specifically what plays that Brooks screwed up on that cost the Saints a playoff spot?

Well, for starters, I would go back and review almost all of the plays that occurred in the first quarter of every game this year. I know that this is probably not specific enough, but, I think you understand what I am implying.

saintswhodi · 02-18-2005, 12:36 PM

So what you are saying is making a 20-3 game 27-3 helps the team? It\'s okay cause the AB led offense AGAIN could not score in the first, so we were down, and then he adds to it? Okay, I guess that\'s okay.

I also recall the Tampa game last year where AB fumbled FOUR TIMES, two untouched and cost us that game. I also recall had Aeneas Williams not tipped a ball that hit him in the hands late in the Rams game and was caught by Joe Horn , we would have lost that one too. AB threw a perfect strike to Aeneas. This year. What about the Seattle game? Down just 14-7 late, guess who throws an INT and gives Seattle the ball in their own red zone? One guess. We win that game, we are in the playoffs.

1) The backwards pass. First off the Saints didn\'t lose the ball on the play. Secondly they lost the game 43-17 to the Chargers.

2) The underhanded pass. Denver was up 20-3 at the time.

3) The Arizona fumble. It was the opening series of the game. Also it was 4th and goal

Stupid plays, no matter the quarter or the score. Plays a 4 1/2 year starter shouldn\'t make. Are you also gonna try to spin me how leading the league in red zone turnovers somehow helps the team? You do know, and I hate to repeat myself, an offense DOES NOT SCORE on a turnover in the red zone right? No points. Nothing for effort. And he LED THE LEAGUE. Any idea how many offensive players there are in the league? Ballpark figure? It\'s quite an impressive feat let me tell you. So what you want me to understand is, cause AB does stupid things after he couldn\'t lead the offense to a score it is acceptable? Okay. Thanks SFIAH. Whatsoever was I thinking?

LKelley67 · 02-18-2005, 12:40 PM

on your two points gumbo i would contend that drastic defensive turnaround is possible. carolina went from 31st in the league in 2001 to 2nd in 2002 while the offense remained steadily poor. the ravens improved in offense and defense from \'98 to \'99- from 26th to 14th and 23rd to 2nd. Big improvement can happen but it is predicated on big change tho.
atlanta had vick out in \'03 but arthur blank could still see they were worse than just that. overhaul= offense 30th to 18th, defense 32nd LAST to 14th and NFC Championship game. Same thing Schottenheimer in SD, look at the trend since he has been there- Defense: 30 to 27 to 18, Offense 16 to 14 to 11. Haslett has been .500 in wins/losses since here but look at the trends in this case- Offense: 10 to 8 to 18 to 10 to 16, Defense: 11 to 19 to 28 to 18 to 32. In 5 years to go from top 11 offense and defense to 16th average O and the absolute worst D DOES warrant overhaul. i hope only the best for ab and the whole team. i just see too much of the same thing, same trend coming with status quo.
on the second point i will qualify by saying i do not consider myself a brooks basher. he has some talent, the inconsistent variety of a jake plummer. but \"we won\'t have to rely on Brooks to win every game\"is over the top. i think even you can say his performance alone lost as many games as he won last year, muchless 2003.

EH?

[Edited on 19/2/2005 by LKelley67]

SaintFanInATLHELL · 02-18-2005, 02:07 PM

So what you are saying is making a 20-3 game 27-3 helps the team?

No. I\'m saying that making a 20-3 game 27-3 didn\'t cost the team the game.

You said that Brooks mistakes kept the team out of the playoffs. That means that specific Brooks mistakes, solely by his choice, was the only thing that kept the team from winning the games necessary to get into the playoffs.

I just want a list of those plays.

I\'ll give you an example. In the New England Miami game this year, the last interception that Brady threw cost the team the game. That ill advised throw was intercepted in the Miami red zone when the Patriots were leading the game. If brady had eaten the ball, the Pats would have won the game.

I want those plays from Brooks. The plays that cost the team the game, and therefore the playoffs.

It\'s okay cause the AB led offense AGAIN could not score in the first, so we were down, and then he adds to it? Okay, I guess that\'s okay.

No. That not a specific play that lead to the team losing the game.

Here\'s a hypotethical one. In the Carolina game in the 4th quarter Conwell caught a ball and rolled out of bounds, stopping the clock. Because of the time that was still left Carolina had a chance to kick the game into overtime, and could have won the game in overtime. If Conwell stays in bounds, Carolina loses the game because they run out of time.

I want those type plays from Brooks. Where the outcome of the game is directly impacted by a specific play from that specfic player.

Once you start generalizing, you lose the argument. \"If he had only played better then maybe possibly we could have come back from a 40 point deficit to win the game\" doesn\'t wash.

I\'ll give you a play that Brooks made in the opposite direction. From the Tampa Game:

Brooks, who scrambled for 13 yards on fourth-and-12 from the Tampa Bay 43 to keep the winning drive alive

If he doesn\'t make that play, the game is over.

I\'m asking you for the opposite play where the team had the game won, and because of a Brooks screwup, the team lost the game.

I also recall the Tampa game last year where AB fumbled FOUR TIMES, two untouched and cost us that game.

2003. Doesn\'t count for this discussion.

I also recall had Aeneas Williams not tipped a ball that hit him in the hands late in the Rams game and was caught by Joe Horn , we would have lost that one too. AB threw a perfect strike to Aeneas.

Didn\'t happen. So it\'s not relavent. The Saints won that game.

This year. What about the Seattle game? Down just 14-7 late, guess who throws an INT and gives Seattle the ball in their own red zone? One guess. We win that game, we are in the playoffs.

OK. That\'s one. BTW that play was in the third quarter.

1) The backwards pass. First off the Saints didn\'t lose the ball on the play. Secondly they lost the game 43-17 to the Chargers.

2) The underhanded pass. Denver was up 20-3 at the time.

3) The Arizona fumble. It was the opening series of the game. Also it was 4th and goal

Stupid plays, no matter the quarter or the score. Plays a 4 1/2 year starter shouldn\'t make. Are you also gonna try to spin me how leading the league in red zone turnovers somehow helps the team?[/quote:390582b876]
Can you post a link to that stat? I can\'t find a site that separates red-zone turnovers from everything else.

You do know, and I hate to repeat myself, an offense DOES NOT SCORE on a turnover in the red zone right? No points. Nothing for effort. And he LED THE LEAGUE. Any idea how many offensive players there are in the league? Ballpark figure? It\'s quite an impressive feat let me tell you. So what you want me to understand is, cause AB does stupid things after he couldn\'t lead the offense to a score it is acceptable? Okay. Thanks SFIAH. Whatsoever was I thinking?

I\'ll be waiting for that link.

SFIAH

saintswhodi · 02-18-2005, 02:40 PM

OK. That\'s one. BTW that play was in the third quarter.

So the 3rd quarter isn\'t late in the game? I guess it\'s early. Grasp at straws much? How many games did we miss the playoffs by again?

Can you post a link to that stat? I can\'t find a site that separates red-zone turnovers from everything else.

It\'s sad when you can\'t refute Brooks and run out of arguments, you get the can you provide a link argument. But to satify your curiosity, I had to dig this out.

http://msn.foxsports.com/name/public/NFL/ClutchFactor

It will be a surprise if any of these QBs are playing in the fourth quarter this Sunday, let alone make enough of a difference to change a ranking. Yes, Manning has 31 touchdown passes, but his four interceptions inside the 20 are more than anybody in the NFL except for Aaron Brooks. And that\'s what drags his ranking down.

Happy now, or shuild I not trust a statictical site such as foxsports to get their info right? Anything else you wanna request? I have done both things you asked, shown Aaron losing a game directly, this year and last year, and provided you with a link to the information. Can we run him out of town now? But I guess we can say foxsports has an anti Brooks agenda, I mean I do watch it so maybe my ill feelings led them to write such erroneuos information by the hate I projected through my TV screen or over my internet connection when I am on their website.

[Edited on 18/2/2005 by saintswhodi]

ScottyRo · 02-18-2005, 03:30 PM

McMahon does not have AB\'s \"stats\" McMahon is not gonna be seen as a viable alternative. Forget the fact that he is athletic, young, and has upside. You don\'t see AB\'s \"stats.\" Forget the fact that he doesn\'t start cause the team invested a #3 pick in Harrington. I see fully your point about getting rid of AB\'s salary, bringing a guy like him in at 2 mil, and showing up other areas of the team. How that is a losing proposition I don\'t understand.

Did I say anything about McMahon\'s stats? No. I used somebody that might actually be available to talk about because I\'m sick of the bashers having AB to blame while suggesting this generic anybody could come in and do better. I didn\'t even compare the two QBs. You jumped on the complete wrong idea there. All I was pointing out that McMahon fits the description FF used...he wants a new QB that may or may not be an upgrade and doesn\'t care if bringing in this person costs us a few more games. You jumped on the stat comparison thing.

As far as salary goes. Yeah, I\'d much rather have a player at 2 mil than 6 mil if the play is going to be similar. I\'ve got no problem there.

Without his mistakes, we make the playoffs, plain and simple. With his mistakes, we don\'t.

Of course, I see that but it\'s similarly easy and true to say that about many positions/units. I contend that had the tackles played better, we\'d have made the playoffs. I contend that if CB play had been as good in the 1st half of the season as it was in the 2nd half, we\'d have made the playoffs. That\'s just two. Shall we talk about LB play early or being without Deuce for 3 games? The are plenty of individual areas that I think improvement in would have resulted in another win and a trip to the playoffs. AB IS one of those areas.

As I say time and time again, I\'ll talk about viable alternatives to replacing AB. However, I really feel at a disadvantage because the bashers have a specific player to look at and post stats while claiming a change would help without suggesting a viable person to look at for this. That\'s why I suggested McMahon. I don\'t know that he\'s not capable of beating out Ab and it looks like there\'s potential for him to become available given the Garcia situation.

Why don\'t you bashers come up with your best viable candidate and so we can have this kind of discussion without having to refer to some phantom QB to replace Brooks?

SaintFanInATLHELL · 02-18-2005, 03:30 PM

Happy now, or shuild I not trust a statictical site such as foxsports to get their info right?

Uh... No?!

It doesn\'t show the stat. It just shows that Brooks has the most. Peyton had 4 redzone turnovers. Did Brooks have 5? Did he have 14? How many?

All in all it\'s a stat that\'s in isolation.

I\'d like to have the raw data. And preferably the surrounding context too.

Thanks,

SFIAH

saintswhodi · 02-18-2005, 03:36 PM

Scotty, there was a thread that was started just for that purpose, to list viable candidates. If you can dig it up, have at it. I am not for it again. But there were 5-6 guys listed. And the main criteria for poo-poohing them over AB was AB\'s \"stats.\" Sorry I grouped you into that.

SFIAh, funny. Say it was 5. Who the hell cares? He still leads the league as reported by foxsports. If you don\'t wanna accept that, fine. But that isn\'t Joe Blow\'s website. It\'s foxsports, you know where they have editors and such. And fact checkers. So basically your impression is that foxsports, a national sports media giant, with the ability to watch and analyze every play of every game, would lie about a stat like that? Give me a break. I see you have no argument left so I will expect your next post to be calling for Ab\'s head. Thanks. :P

[Edited on 18/2/2005 by saintswhodi]

02-18-2005, 11:40 AM	#91
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	another i cant hepp it thread Amen FF and Kelley. The problem you are gonna encounter Kelley is, let\'s use Scotty as an example since he spoke out, because McMahon does not have AB\'s \"stats\" McMahon is not gonna be seen as a viable alternative. Forget the fact that he is athletic, young, and has upside. You don\'t see AB\'s \"stats.\" Forget the fact that he doesn\'t start cause the team invested a #3 pick in Harrington. I see fully your point about getting rid of AB\'s salary, bringing a guy like him in at 2 mil, and showing up other areas of the team. How that is a losing proposition I don\'t understand. In what language can I tell you that I understand that AB hurts our team with his play sometimes (or even often)? Um Scotty, then explain to me why you don\'t wanna get rid of Brooks if you understand this as you say? You obviously DON\'T understand this. Without his mistakes, we make the playoffs, plain and simple. With his mistakes, we don\'t. So if you understand this, why wouldn\'t you wanna get rid of him? So then how is this Lastly, I\'ll take it that the bashers agree with my list of things we have tried to fix, but haven\'t, and stop using the \"the only constant has been AB\" BS. The true only constant is that out team has not been good all around for quite a while BS if you say you understand this In what language can I tell you that I understand that AB hurts our team with his play sometimes (or even often)? If something is HURTING the team as you say you understand, wouldn\'t you wanna get rid of it? If you had lung cancer, and they removed your spleen, would you be satisfied with that even though the lung cancer is HURTING you? Then they removed a kidney but you still had lung cancer. SO basically what you are saying is you understand something is hurting the team, but youare unwilling to change it. Okay.

02-18-2005, 12:20 PM	#92
SaintFanInATLHELL The Professor Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Lithonia, GA Posts: 2,773	another i cant hepp it thread In what language can I tell you that I understand that AB hurts our team with his play sometimes (or even often)? Um Scotty, then explain to me why you don\'t wanna get rid of Brooks if you understand this as you say? You obviously DON\'T understand this. Without his mistakes, we make the playoffs, plain and simple. With his mistakes, we don\'t. So if you understand this, why wouldn\'t you wanna get rid of him? FINALLY!!! Whodi finally had the guts to say what Brooks bashers have been trying to say to awhile. Now prove it. I\'m going to preempt you on your 1st three: 1) The backwards pass. First off the Saints didn\'t lose the ball on the play. Secondly they lost the game 43-17 to the Chargers. 2) The underhanded pass. Denver was up 20-3 at the time. 3) The Arizona fumble. It was the opening series of the game. Also it was 4th and goal. Go take a look at the recaps: http://www.nfl.com/teams/schedule/NO Now they were all screwups. But I assert that none of these screwups cost the Saints the game. So the gauntlet has been thown down. Specifically what plays that Brooks screwed up on that cost the Saints a playoff spot? SFIAH
	Super Bowl Championships: New Orleans Saints:1, Carolina:0, Atlanta Chokers: STILL ZERO Only Atlanta choked in an unchokable situation... Life is definitely good.

02-18-2005, 12:26 PM	#93
Saint_LB Deuce Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 2,894	another i cant hepp it thread So the gauntlet has been thown down. Specifically what plays that Brooks screwed up on that cost the Saints a playoff spot? Well, for starters, I would go back and review almost all of the plays that occurred in the first quarter of every game this year. I know that this is probably not specific enough, but, I think you understand what I am implying.
Saint_LB Deuce Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 2,894

02-18-2005, 12:36 PM	#94
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	another i cant hepp it thread So what you are saying is making a 20-3 game 27-3 helps the team? It\'s okay cause the AB led offense AGAIN could not score in the first, so we were down, and then he adds to it? Okay, I guess that\'s okay. I also recall the Tampa game last year where AB fumbled FOUR TIMES, two untouched and cost us that game. I also recall had Aeneas Williams not tipped a ball that hit him in the hands late in the Rams game and was caught by Joe Horn , we would have lost that one too. AB threw a perfect strike to Aeneas. This year. What about the Seattle game? Down just 14-7 late, guess who throws an INT and gives Seattle the ball in their own red zone? One guess. We win that game, we are in the playoffs. 1) The backwards pass. First off the Saints didn\'t lose the ball on the play. Secondly they lost the game 43-17 to the Chargers. 2) The underhanded pass. Denver was up 20-3 at the time. 3) The Arizona fumble. It was the opening series of the game. Also it was 4th and goal Stupid plays, no matter the quarter or the score. Plays a 4 1/2 year starter shouldn\'t make. Are you also gonna try to spin me how leading the league in red zone turnovers somehow helps the team? You do know, and I hate to repeat myself, an offense DOES NOT SCORE on a turnover in the red zone right? No points. Nothing for effort. And he LED THE LEAGUE. Any idea how many offensive players there are in the league? Ballpark figure? It\'s quite an impressive feat let me tell you. So what you want me to understand is, cause AB does stupid things after he couldn\'t lead the offense to a score it is acceptable? Okay. Thanks SFIAH. Whatsoever was I thinking?

02-18-2005, 12:40 PM	#95
LKelley67 1000 Posts + Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: baton rouge Posts: 2,540	another i cant hepp it thread on your two points gumbo i would contend that drastic defensive turnaround is possible. carolina went from 31st in the league in 2001 to 2nd in 2002 while the offense remained steadily poor. the ravens improved in offense and defense from \'98 to \'99- from 26th to 14th and 23rd to 2nd. Big improvement can happen but it is predicated on big change tho. atlanta had vick out in \'03 but arthur blank could still see they were worse than just that. overhaul= offense 30th to 18th, defense 32nd LAST to 14th and NFC Championship game. Same thing Schottenheimer in SD, look at the trend since he has been there- Defense: 30 to 27 to 18, Offense 16 to 14 to 11. Haslett has been .500 in wins/losses since here but look at the trends in this case- Offense: 10 to 8 to 18 to 10 to 16, Defense: 11 to 19 to 28 to 18 to 32. In 5 years to go from top 11 offense and defense to 16th average O and the absolute worst D DOES warrant overhaul. i hope only the best for ab and the whole team. i just see too much of the same thing, same trend coming with status quo. on the second point i will qualify by saying i do not consider myself a brooks basher. he has some talent, the inconsistent variety of a jake plummer. but \"we won\'t have to rely on Brooks to win every game\"is over the top. i think even you can say his performance alone lost as many games as he won last year, muchless 2003. EH? [Edited on 19/2/2005 by LKelley67]

Latest Blogs
2023 New Orleans Saints: Training Camp Last Blog: 08-01-2023 By: MarchingOn Puck the Fro Browl! Last Blog: 02-05-2023 By: neugey CFP: "Just Keep Doing What You're Doing" Last Blog: 12-08-2022 By: neugey

02-18-2005, 02:07 PM	#96
SaintFanInATLHELL The Professor Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Lithonia, GA Posts: 2,773	another i cant hepp it thread So what you are saying is making a 20-3 game 27-3 helps the team? No. I\'m saying that making a 20-3 game 27-3 didn\'t cost the team the game. You said that Brooks mistakes kept the team out of the playoffs. That means that specific Brooks mistakes, solely by his choice, was the only thing that kept the team from winning the games necessary to get into the playoffs. I just want a list of those plays. I\'ll give you an example. In the New England Miami game this year, the last interception that Brady threw cost the team the game. That ill advised throw was intercepted in the Miami red zone when the Patriots were leading the game. If brady had eaten the ball, the Pats would have won the game. I want those plays from Brooks. The plays that cost the team the game, and therefore the playoffs. It\'s okay cause the AB led offense AGAIN could not score in the first, so we were down, and then he adds to it? Okay, I guess that\'s okay. No. That not a specific play that lead to the team losing the game. Here\'s a hypotethical one. In the Carolina game in the 4th quarter Conwell caught a ball and rolled out of bounds, stopping the clock. Because of the time that was still left Carolina had a chance to kick the game into overtime, and could have won the game in overtime. If Conwell stays in bounds, Carolina loses the game because they run out of time. I want those type plays from Brooks. Where the outcome of the game is directly impacted by a specific play from that specfic player. Once you start generalizing, you lose the argument. \"If he had only played better then maybe possibly we could have come back from a 40 point deficit to win the game\" doesn\'t wash. I\'ll give you a play that Brooks made in the opposite direction. From the Tampa Game: Brooks, who scrambled for 13 yards on fourth-and-12 from the Tampa Bay 43 to keep the winning drive alive If he doesn\'t make that play, the game is over. I\'m asking you for the opposite play where the team had the game won, and because of a Brooks screwup, the team lost the game. I also recall the Tampa game last year where AB fumbled FOUR TIMES, two untouched and cost us that game. 2003. Doesn\'t count for this discussion. I also recall had Aeneas Williams not tipped a ball that hit him in the hands late in the Rams game and was caught by Joe Horn , we would have lost that one too. AB threw a perfect strike to Aeneas. Didn\'t happen. So it\'s not relavent. The Saints won that game. This year. What about the Seattle game? Down just 14-7 late, guess who throws an INT and gives Seattle the ball in their own red zone? One guess. We win that game, we are in the playoffs. OK. That\'s one. BTW that play was in the third quarter. 1) The backwards pass. First off the Saints didn\'t lose the ball on the play. Secondly they lost the game 43-17 to the Chargers. 2) The underhanded pass. Denver was up 20-3 at the time. 3) The Arizona fumble. It was the opening series of the game. Also it was 4th and goal Stupid plays, no matter the quarter or the score. Plays a 4 1/2 year starter shouldn\'t make. Are you also gonna try to spin me how leading the league in red zone turnovers somehow helps the team?[/quote:390582b876] Can you post a link to that stat? I can\'t find a site that separates red-zone turnovers from everything else. You do know, and I hate to repeat myself, an offense DOES NOT SCORE on a turnover in the red zone right? No points. Nothing for effort. And he LED THE LEAGUE. Any idea how many offensive players there are in the league? Ballpark figure? It\'s quite an impressive feat let me tell you. So what you want me to understand is, cause AB does stupid things after he couldn\'t lead the offense to a score it is acceptable? Okay. Thanks SFIAH. Whatsoever was I thinking? I\'ll be waiting for that link. SFIAH
	Super Bowl Championships: New Orleans Saints:1, Carolina:0, Atlanta Chokers: STILL ZERO Only Atlanta choked in an unchokable situation... Life is definitely good.

02-18-2005, 02:40 PM	#97
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	another i cant hepp it thread OK. That\'s one. BTW that play was in the third quarter. So the 3rd quarter isn\'t late in the game? I guess it\'s early. Grasp at straws much? How many games did we miss the playoffs by again? Can you post a link to that stat? I can\'t find a site that separates red-zone turnovers from everything else. It\'s sad when you can\'t refute Brooks and run out of arguments, you get the can you provide a link argument. But to satify your curiosity, I had to dig this out. http://msn.foxsports.com/name/public/NFL/ClutchFactor It will be a surprise if any of these QBs are playing in the fourth quarter this Sunday, let alone make enough of a difference to change a ranking. Yes, Manning has 31 touchdown passes, but his four interceptions inside the 20 are more than anybody in the NFL except for Aaron Brooks. And that\'s what drags his ranking down. Happy now, or shuild I not trust a statictical site such as foxsports to get their info right? Anything else you wanna request? I have done both things you asked, shown Aaron losing a game directly, this year and last year, and provided you with a link to the information. Can we run him out of town now? But I guess we can say foxsports has an anti Brooks agenda, I mean I do watch it so maybe my ill feelings led them to write such erroneuos information by the hate I projected through my TV screen or over my internet connection when I am on their website. [Edited on 18/2/2005 by saintswhodi]

02-18-2005, 03:30 PM	#98
ScottyRo 1000 Posts + Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Williamsburg, VA (ugh, the food here) Posts: 1,704	another i cant hepp it thread McMahon does not have AB\'s \"stats\" McMahon is not gonna be seen as a viable alternative. Forget the fact that he is athletic, young, and has upside. You don\'t see AB\'s \"stats.\" Forget the fact that he doesn\'t start cause the team invested a #3 pick in Harrington. I see fully your point about getting rid of AB\'s salary, bringing a guy like him in at 2 mil, and showing up other areas of the team. How that is a losing proposition I don\'t understand. Did I say anything about McMahon\'s stats? No. I used somebody that might actually be available to talk about because I\'m sick of the bashers having AB to blame while suggesting this generic anybody could come in and do better. I didn\'t even compare the two QBs. You jumped on the complete wrong idea there. All I was pointing out that McMahon fits the description FF used...he wants a new QB that may or may not be an upgrade and doesn\'t care if bringing in this person costs us a few more games. You jumped on the stat comparison thing. As far as salary goes. Yeah, I\'d much rather have a player at 2 mil than 6 mil if the play is going to be similar. I\'ve got no problem there. Without his mistakes, we make the playoffs, plain and simple. With his mistakes, we don\'t. Of course, I see that but it\'s similarly easy and true to say that about many positions/units. I contend that had the tackles played better, we\'d have made the playoffs. I contend that if CB play had been as good in the 1st half of the season as it was in the 2nd half, we\'d have made the playoffs. That\'s just two. Shall we talk about LB play early or being without Deuce for 3 games? The are plenty of individual areas that I think improvement in would have resulted in another win and a trip to the playoffs. AB IS one of those areas. As I say time and time again, I\'ll talk about viable alternatives to replacing AB. However, I really feel at a disadvantage because the bashers have a specific player to look at and post stats while claiming a change would help without suggesting a viable person to look at for this. That\'s why I suggested McMahon. I don\'t know that he\'s not capable of beating out Ab and it looks like there\'s potential for him to become available given the Garcia situation. Why don\'t you bashers come up with your best viable candidate and so we can have this kind of discussion without having to refer to some phantom QB to replace Brooks?

02-18-2005, 03:30 PM	#99
SaintFanInATLHELL The Professor Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Lithonia, GA Posts: 2,773	another i cant hepp it thread Happy now, or shuild I not trust a statictical site such as foxsports to get their info right? Uh... No?! It doesn\'t show the stat. It just shows that Brooks has the most. Peyton had 4 redzone turnovers. Did Brooks have 5? Did he have 14? How many? All in all it\'s a stat that\'s in isolation. I\'d like to have the raw data. And preferably the surrounding context too. Thanks, SFIAH

02-18-2005, 03:36 PM	#100
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	another i cant hepp it thread Scotty, there was a thread that was started just for that purpose, to list viable candidates. If you can dig it up, have at it. I am not for it again. But there were 5-6 guys listed. And the main criteria for poo-poohing them over AB was AB\'s \"stats.\" Sorry I grouped you into that. SFIAh, funny. Say it was 5. Who the hell cares? He still leads the league as reported by foxsports. If you don\'t wanna accept that, fine. But that isn\'t Joe Blow\'s website. It\'s foxsports, you know where they have editors and such. And fact checkers. So basically your impression is that foxsports, a national sports media giant, with the ability to watch and analyze every play of every game, would lie about a stat like that? Give me a break. I see you have no argument left so I will expect your next post to be calling for Ab\'s head. Thanks. :P [Edited on 18/2/2005 by saintswhodi]