another i cant hepp it thread

[mutineer10]

I think we all need to go back and read the 9-page \"Brooks\" thread again. I did, and it\'s the best (and most civil) of all the AB arguments. Beyond that, it encompasses most everything being said in any of the other AB threads.

Anyway, looks like us poor AB haters are starting to lose the siege. The pro bowl was less than a week ago, yet the season has already been over long enough for everyone to forget how lousy AB was this year. More folks are defending him again, and the pendulum swings...

But, AB is not in real life what he is in your Madden 2005 game (he\'s having a great year for me there ... ha!), and all of you who want to keep AB are unfortunately likely to get your wish.

I hope it makes you very happy...

:killtard:

[Saint_LB]

We traded for a QB from the Packers,

Who smiled as he threw to linebackers.

He thinks it\'s real funny,

That they pay him so much money,

Despite having so many detractors. :P

[SaintFanInATLHELL]

I think we all need to go back and read the 9-page \"Brooks\" thread again. I did, and it\'s the best (and most civil) of all the AB arguments. Beyond that, it encompasses most everything being said in any of the other AB threads.

Anyway, looks like us poor AB haters are starting to lose the siege. The pro bowl was less than a week ago, yet the season has already been over long enough for everyone to forget how lousy AB was this year. More folks are defending him again, and the pendulum swings...

A couple of points:

1. I really think there are three groups of folks in the AB debate:

A. AB fans. I think Billy is the only card carry memeber. Thinks like AB walks on water. Progenitor of this thread.

B. The moderates. That\'s me, JKool, Saintfan for the most part. I think we\'re the only realists. Thinks that AB is good, but not that good. Thinks AB has problems but not so many problems that he is THE PROBLEM! in which getting rid of him will fix all of the Saints woes. Tries to use stats and reason to show that while AB has some problems, that there are other more pressing problems that needs to be addressed first. Moderates do not think that anyone else in the league can come in and make this team so significantly better in its current configuration. Moderates think that Brooks production, despite his faults, warrants shoring up other areas of the team first. Moderates who wish Brooks wouldn\'t help in these debates and just keep his yap shut. This moderate group is often misclassified as group A above. But as I said, Billy is the only card carrying member of that group that I\'m aware of. I\'ve noticed that all of us in this group have started labeling ourselves moderates.

C. The AB haters. Brooks sucks. Brooks is THE PROBLEM! who is \"lousy\" and can\'t get anything done. Haters who thinks he is the one person in the organization personally responsible for the Saints not winning and not making the playoffs. They thinks that the guy is a CANCER that should be excised post haste.

LB, who BTW I\'m glad decided to stick around, has posted some of the mindset of group C. It a frustration about the fact that Brooks has stuck while the organization let other QBs, like Delhomme, Bulger, and O\'Sullivan get away.
Points to the potential casality of the fact that everything else in the organization has changed personnelwise in the last 4 years of the playoff shutout except for the QB position. So since we can\'t get into the playoffs, and that\'s the only position that hasn\'t changed, that that lack of change is the reason.

I\'m a moderate. Plain and simple. Brooks has problems, but Brooks isn\'t THE PROBLEM! that\'s dragging the team down. Yes I\'d like to see him get his total turnovers under 15, total fumbles under 10, and for him to keep his yap shut. Yes he makes the occasional stupid play. I\'d like him to scramble more because I think he needs to realize that sometimes it\'s more important just to move the chains and keep the ball then firing it downfield. Sometimes he does have too much of a radar lock on a single receiver.

And I do believe that we need to get another talented QB in here. But is has to be at a budget price.

But all of the moderates draw the line at summary dismissal. And the numbers are simple on that. There are only two QBs in the league who has put up 20+ TDs and 3500+ yards in each of the last 4 seasons. Peyton Manning is one. Guess who\'s the other?

The Saints win at a .714 winning percentage (20-8 the last 4 seasons) when the team holds the opposition to under 21 points. That\'s a middle of the road defense. It happened in each of the last 4 games. In 13 of the 16 wins the team has had in the last 2 years, the opposition has been held under 21 points. I don\'t have shootout stats handy (where both teams scored more than 21 points). But I\'m willing to bet that it doesn\'t exceed 13/16 or 20/28.

That doesn\'t absolve AB of blame. He still can\'t turn the ball over. But it points to the fact that our offense is good enough to complete if the defense keeps up.

And every playoff stat that you can find shows that you have to have defense, pretty much regardless of the offense, in order to compete in the playoffs.

As a card carrying moderate in this debate that\'s what you\'ll hear me continue to argue: beef up the defense. The offense right now requires a few tweaks. But they were 14th in the league in scoring offense last year, while the defense was 28th.

I\'d just like to point out that defense got better the last 4 games of the season. The team went 4-0. It\'s an indicator.

But, AB is not in real life what he is in your Madden 2005 game (he\'s having a great year for me there ... ha!), and all of you who want to keep AB are unfortunately likely to get your wish.

I hope it makes you very happy...

I won\'t be happy if the defense doesn\'t continue to improve. I won\'t be happy if Brooks doesn\'t get his total turnovers under 15, which is possible if he gets his INTs back to 2003 levels (8) and keeps the 2004 fumbles lost (2).

In the end no one but the Brooks haters will be happy, because he\'s eventually going too become to costly to keep. His salary takes a big jump this year to $5.5 mil along with a $250k workout bonus. Along with his prorated bonus money his cap number this year is $7.7 mil. It\'ll only cost the Saints a little under $6 mil in a cap hit to trade or release him. In short the Saints are no longer upside down financially on Brooks as it\'ll be cheaper to get rid of him than it would be to pay him. And that number will separate further each succeeding season.

You can find the article here: http://profootballtalk.com/12-01-04through12-15-04.htm

So the debate may be over soon. Soon we may be talking about how the new Saints QB compares to Brooks.

SFIAH

[SaintFanInATLHELL]

There\'s one big hole in the \"let\'s replace Brooks with someone who can \"manage\" the game\" theory.\"

1. QB\'s who manage the passing game only have success when a defense holds oppents to low scores.

Examples:
a.) Trent Dilfer in Baltimore.
b. ) Jake Delhomme in Carolina.
c. Ben Rolthisberger in Pittsburg.

Given the fact that our defense has given up the most points over the last few seasons, I see little effect another QB is gonna make. Unless we get someone like Mike Vick who can win games on his own.

So, before we get a QB who can \"manage\" the passing game, we better get a defense that can stop somebody.

2. If we get a defense who can stop somebody, maybe we won\'t have to rely on Brooks to win every game.

I agree with you Billy, but your stats are not correct.

That Saints finished 14th in scoring defense in 2003 and 28th in 2004.

Neither is last.

In 2003 the Saints defense held the opposition to under 21 points 11 times. The team went 8-3 in those games. The team as 0-5 in the remaining 5 games where the team gave up more than 20 points.

In 2004 the team was 5-1 when the opposition was held to under 21 points and 3-7 in the remaining 10 games when the opposition scored 21 or more.

The stats points to your observation, but in neither case was the team last in scoring defense.

SFIAH

[GumboBC]

SaintFanInATLHELL--

Make that 4 groups of folks in the AB debate.

#4: GumboBC. Knows all of Brooks strengths and weaknesses, and just likes to piss off the hard core Brooks bashers who make no logical posts.

Believe me, I\'ve exahausted every possible angle there is to reason with the Brooks\' bashers. But, in the end, we still have to read 1000 \"Brooks\' sucks and I don\'t care what anyone says\" posts.

Your posts are well thoughtout and logical. I appreciate the effort. But, you might as well be talking to a wall as far as some members are concerned. You probably already know that.

Anyway, I don\'t waste my time anymore. I just take an extreme stance on the other side of the fence. Somebody\'s gotta do it........

[Edited on 19/2/2005 by GumboBC]

[Saint_LB]

Anyway, I don\'t waste my time anymore.

What a joke!!

[GumboBC]

SaintFanInATLHELL--

You are correct about the points our defense gave up. And you\'re correct on our win/loss record when a the defense holds an opponent to a respecable score.

But, our defense still ranks near the bottom of the league in most catergories. Like run defense. And it allows the opposing team to run a bunch of time off the clock. I think that\'s gotta be taken into consideration also.

I really appreciate the fact that you bring facts into the debate and make very good observations.

[JKool]

Way to take up the sword Scotty and SFIAH. Well done gentlemen.

Scotty and SFIAH, nice work.

Nice work SFIAH. Well put.

JK, just curious. You ever consider trying out for the Saintsations? You\'d make a great cheerleader.

LB, if you look at some other posters work, you\'ll see that they do this more often than I.

I think for the number of times I\'ve defended this view at length and I felt all alone, I just wanted these guys to know that I agreed with them, even if I didn\'t have time to join in the fray that day.

I know you\'re just having fun, so this doesn\'t apply to you LB, but for those who don\'t see that, I\'d just like to say this: sometimes it is just nice to hear that someone read what you wrote and thought it wasn\'t stupid - especially in light of the fact that the people responding seem to be implying that what you said was stupid.

PS - I\'m not in good enough shape to be a Staintation.

[saintswhodi]

C. The AB haters. Brooks sucks. Brooks is THE PROBLEM! who is \"lousy\" and can\'t get anything done. Haters who thinks he is the one person in the organization personally responsible for the Saints not winning and not making the playoffs. They thinks that the guy is a CANCER that should be excised post haste.

I was gonna leave this debate alone but I can\'t let this lie rest. Get yourself out of the moderate category SFIAH cause it is CLEAR by this post you love Brooks as you try to paint yourself in the most glowing light, while downing others. I knew your true colors would come out. I have not heard one person say Brooks is THE PROBLEM. They have said he is A PROBLEM THAT HAS NOT BEEN ADDRESSED FOR YEARS. Your Brooks love obviously prevents you from seeing the difference. I can see Scotty as moderate, and JKool, but you most definitely are not. Kool or Scotty may use the term Brooks bashers, but not haters cause noone has said they hated him. I and others who want him gone have said NUMEROUS times we wish beyond wish he would do better. But he doesn\'t. And he hasn\'t. IT is so evident to me what side of the fence you swing from, stop fooling yourself. I would never expect to see a post like this from Scotty or Kool, but I knew from your posts your true colors would come out eventually. Why\'d it take so long? It\'s obvious you don\'t read what is posted and have a pre-formed opinion. Well, i\'m not gonna let you pass it of as fact. Get your head around this. WE DO NOT HATE BROOKS, at least I don\'t. We are simply tired of his cancerous nature and stupid mistakes hurting this team. See the difference? If he shuts his mouth next year and puts up his stats WITHOUT the stupid mistakes, don\'t you think we wouldn\'t have anything to say? Probably not cause then you can make up some other myth. Do you have a I\'m a Deuce moderate and everyone else hates him plan too? Be for real. At least know what you are talking about before you rant.

[saintswhodi]

Just to complete my thought, there is no such thing on this forum as a \"Brooks moderate.\" And here is why. The only time you see JKool and Scotty in a Brooks thread are if they are defending him. That\'s it. When someone starts a I wanna have Brooks\' baby thread, until someone comes in to counter the point, they don\'t show up. And you usually get an excellent post or a nice point to the ones defending Brooks and bubkus for those who knock him, even though they are using facts and good arguments as well. This is no knock to Kool and Scotty, but a knock to the whole Brooks moderate idea. There are 3 categories of Brooksians on here.

1. The I wish Brooks would marry me crowd, which consists of one as far as I know. When someone says they don\'t care if we win or lose with Brooks, they only care that he is here cause those who want him gone don\'t get their wish, it is better to not even listen to them. They are gone.

2. Brooks defenders. Some say they are moderate, wouldn\'t mind seeing someone better, but they only come out in defense of Brooks. Some blindly support him. Whatever the case may be, they defend Brooks FAR MORE than they ever speak out against him. They may concede a point here and there, but you better believe there is a yeah but waiting with it. That\'s not moderate at all. Moderates defend both sides evenly, there is none of that here. No knock on anyone, look back for yourself.

3. Those who are just fed up with Brooks. Enough is enough. OPENLY ADMIT there are other problems, but know also QB is A PROBLEM and are ready for that to change cause it has been a problem for more than one season. Labeled bashers although the points used against Brooks are facts. This group also seems to include the national media and fans from other NFL teams. They seem to be very large in number and extend beyond this forum. But calling them bashers allows for the argument to be used that they have a bias, which isn\'t true. Some people are fed up with the LB situation, why aren\'t they biased? Some are fed up with the tackle situation, why aren\'t they biased bashers? Only when it comes to Brooks do you get labeled a basher, and that shows 100% proof that there are no moderates here, or else we would have people being labeled Gandy bashers, and Hodge bashers, and Sullivan bashers, and Riley bashers. I have yet to hear any of that.

So it\'s all good. But let\'s call a spade a spade. No moderates here, the whole idea is ludicrous. Nothing wrong with being a Brooks defender, just like nothing wrong with being an I wanna see Brooks go bye bye person. It\'s all a matter of perception. Let\'s be real with each other and stop hiding behind labels.