Brooks turnovers. How does he stack up?

saintswhodi · 02-20-2005, 09:21 AM

Some. But not all.

The one point I\'ve been pounding is the fact that when Brooks and the offense gets some decent defensive support, the team wins.

I see it like a really good pitcher whose record is poor due to a lack of run support. \"The guy must be a bum because his record is 6-19.\" But if all 6 wins were when his team gave him 3 runs and the 19 losses are when the team only scored 1 run or less, does that make the guy a bad pitcher because \"he doesn\'t deliver wins?\"

In the last 4 seasons, the 16 ranked team in defensive scoring has given up between 20 to 21 point. The Saints over those 4 years are 20-8 when the team holds the opposition to under 21 points. They win 70 percent of their games when the defense is average.

SF, I wonder if you researched how much Brooks contributes to teams getting over 20 points on the Saints. Case in point, Seattle game. Score 14-7 in the 3rd. AB throws an INT giving the Seattle offense the ball in their own red zone and then they make it 21-7, yet the defense had held them to 14 the whole game until AB\'s mistake. And we had 7 points while our defense had caused THREE TURNOVERS IN THE FIRST HALF. How many games are there like that? Did you research that? I doubt it. Hit me with those numbers. 20-3 Broncos, Brooks\' great under-handed pass makes it 27-3. That\'s over 20 then right? Nice to erase Brooks\' culpability in creating these very numbers you say we need to avoid.

SaintFanInATLHELL · 02-20-2005, 01:02 PM

Some. But not all.

The one point I\'ve been pounding is the fact that when Brooks and the offense gets some decent defensive support, the team wins.

I see it like a really good pitcher whose record is poor due to a lack of run support. \"The guy must be a bum because his record is 6-19.\" But if all 6 wins were when his team gave him 3 runs and the 19 losses are when the team only scored 1 run or less, does that make the guy a bad pitcher because \"he doesn\'t deliver wins?\"

In the last 4 seasons, the 16 ranked team in defensive scoring has given up between 20 to 21 point. The Saints over those 4 years are 20-8 when the team holds the opposition to under 21 points. They win 70 percent of their games when the defense is average.

SF, I wonder if you researched how much Brooks contributes to teams getting over 20 points on the Saints. Case in point, Seattle game. Score 14-7 in the 3rd. AB throws an INT giving the Seattle offense the ball in their own red zone and then they make it 21-7, yet the defense had held them to 14 the whole game until AB\'s mistake. And we had 7 points while our defense had caused THREE TURNOVERS IN THE FIRST HALF. How many games are there like that? Did you research that? I doubt it. Hit me with those numbers. 20-3 Broncos, Brooks\' great under-handed pass makes it 27-3. That\'s over 20 then right? Nice to erase Brooks\' culpability in creating these very numbers you say we need to avoid.

I\'m not trying o erase Brooks\' culpability. I\'ve said all along that Brooks needs to get his total turnovers under 15, which is something that he has never done in his career (along with never reaching the 60% completion percentage).

Also I\'ve been very careful to point out that when the team holds the opposition to under 21 points, not just the defense.

Last year I was concerned about the fact the Brooks had gone from throwing an INT once every 2 games or so, to routinely throwing 2 INTs per game. He threw 11 INTs in the last 7 games of the season, with only no INTs against TB and the last Carolina game.

He bears some of the blame. 3 INTs in Denver didn\'t help. But Brooks wasn\'t the primary reason the team was down 20-3 when that bonehead play occured:

From the drive chart here:

http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/playby...0041121_DEN@NO

Deuce didn\'t get a positive yardage play until the score was 20-0.

The defense gave up a 51 yd TD run, a 33 yard penalty, and a 37 yd TD pass all in the 1st quarter.

Every Saints drive except for 1 up until the interception had a penalty.

But from what you write above it seems you want to pin the whole thing on Brooks because of 1 bad play that made it worse.

Let\'s throw that play out and talk about everything leading up to it.

Why was the team down 20-3? How much of that 1st quarter and a half was directly attributable to Brooks? How much to Deuce? How much to Michael Lewis? How much to the defense? How much to the coaching?

The whole team sucked that day.

Yet every time anything from that day is discussed, it\'s the Brooks underhanded interception to Al Wilson.

Whodi, let\'s change the discussion. We\'re clear about how each other feels. You feel that Brooks\' mistakes makes him too much of a liability to keep. I say that while Brooks makes mistakes, that fixing other areas of the team has a higher priority.

I don\'t think anything is going to change there.

So trun the discussion back to other QBs. I think almost everyone here is in agreement that getting in another veteran QB for competition and possibly a backup would be a good thing. Being pushed certainly helped Brees for example. And Bouman has been like the Vice President.

We\'ve seen all of the usual suspects: Warner, Fiedler, Bledsoe, Garcia. McMahon has also been thrown out there.

Considering last years performances from these guys and the Saints offensive situaltion, especially the offensive line, could any of them really be successful? Or what support would they need to be successful?

SFIAH

saintswhodi · 02-21-2005, 10:03 PM

I think McMahon could be successful and Garrard from Jacksonville could be brought in to challenge. I don\'t want Garcia, Bledsoe, or Fiedler. I could be persuaded into Warner, but ONLY if we ran a quick strike offense like the Rams did. MEaning he gets rid of the ball in two or three steps. But we don\'t run that kind of offense. I would trade AB and his lower contract to San D for Brees, and throw in Darren Howard or a pick. That would solve several problems as I see them at the same time. What say you?

subguy · 02-21-2005, 10:09 PM

Horn backs up his quirkiness.......he produces week in and week out. I hate his shenanigan\'s but he at least comes to play.

frankeefrank · 02-21-2005, 10:40 PM

Aaron Brooks 18 total turnovers
Tom Brady 3 rings

SaintFanInATLHELL · 02-22-2005, 09:20 AM

Aaron Brooks 18 total turnovers
Tom Brady 3 rings

2004 Regular Season Scoring Defense.

Pats 2nd at 16.2
Saints 28th at 25.3

2003 Regular Season Scoring Defense

Pats 1st at 14.9
Saints 16th at 20.4

2001 Regular Season Scoring Defense

Pats 6th at 17.0
Saints 28th @ 25.6

You can\'t effectively compare individual stats (total turnovers) to team stats (3 SB rings). There\'s a reason that the Pats have 3 SB rings and the Saints simply couldn\'t. You\'re looking at it above.

Quick name the last SB champion that finished the regular season outside of the top 10 in scoring defense? You already have 3 of the last 4. TB and Baltimore were both the #1 scoring defense the year that they won. The Rams were in the top ten in 1999.

In fact using http://www.pro-football-reference.com I went back and looked up the scoring defensing rank of the last 16 SB winners. Each and every one was in the top 10 and the vast majority were in the top 5.

As JKool has said all along, football is a team game. An outstanding defense can make a QB look like a genius (Trent Dilfer for example) while a bad defense can make an outstanding QB look like a he can\'t win (Peyton Manning for example).

I\'m not saying that Brooks is a SB caliber QB. But Brady\'s defense is a big part of why he\'s a SB winning QB.

SFIAH

SaintFanInATLHELL · 02-22-2005, 09:26 AM

I think the issues on the defensive size of the ball are important enough to put into my sig. Just testing it out.

SFIAH

saintswhodi · 02-22-2005, 09:46 AM

SFIAH, this is funny. I pointed out to you TWO cases where Brooks directly led to our defense giving up more than 20 points, and you jump back on our defense. I wonder if you could look up the QB rating of those last 16 Superbowl teams and see if their QB led the league in A) lost fumbles or B) red zone turnovers. I asked before for you to qualify the numbers you found and seem to post often about us winning when the defense holds a team under 20 by finding out how many MORE games than what I pointed out AB was DIRECTLY responsible for it going over 20. SO then you divert the convo, I answer that, and you jump off on the defense tangent at first opportunity. So I will reinstate my initial request and the second request since you like throwing defensive numbers at us.

A) Please tell me how many times AB led directly to the team giving up over 20 points in the record you pointed out(I already gave you two).

B) Find out how many times in the last 16 Superbowls you pointed out the QB led the league in lost fumbles, or red zone turnovers. I know we have had a better running game the past few years than some Superbowl teams(Pats definitely except this year and the Bucs ), so find those stats please. Since your aim seemed to be to divert me from asking these kinds of questions, I will ask them again.

[Edited on 22/2/2005 by saintswhodi]

GumboBC · 02-22-2005, 11:08 AM

Aaron Brooks total turnovers: 18- Record: 8-8
Tom Brady total turnovers: 19 - Super Bowl Champ

2004 Regular Season Scoring Defense.

Pats 2nd at 16.2
Saints 28th at 25.3

I\'ve always wanted to say this: Nuff Said!!

Saint_LB · 02-22-2005, 11:20 AM

Nuff Said!!

Not quite, IMO. The Pats had an avereage time of possession of 31.22 minutes/game while the Saints had 28.18. From these numbers couldn\'t you make a case for the defense by saying that if the offense were on the field longer the defense might be giving up less points. Just a thought. Of course, I know that the response will be that if the defense could get off the field, then maybe the offense could have the ball longer. Either could be the case, I suppose.

02-20-2005, 09:21 AM	#51
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	Brooks turnovers. How does he stack up? Some. But not all. The one point I\'ve been pounding is the fact that when Brooks and the offense gets some decent defensive support, the team wins. I see it like a really good pitcher whose record is poor due to a lack of run support. \"The guy must be a bum because his record is 6-19.\" But if all 6 wins were when his team gave him 3 runs and the 19 losses are when the team only scored 1 run or less, does that make the guy a bad pitcher because \"he doesn\'t deliver wins?\" In the last 4 seasons, the 16 ranked team in defensive scoring has given up between 20 to 21 point. The Saints over those 4 years are 20-8 when the team holds the opposition to under 21 points. They win 70 percent of their games when the defense is average. SF, I wonder if you researched how much Brooks contributes to teams getting over 20 points on the Saints. Case in point, Seattle game. Score 14-7 in the 3rd. AB throws an INT giving the Seattle offense the ball in their own red zone and then they make it 21-7, yet the defense had held them to 14 the whole game until AB\'s mistake. And we had 7 points while our defense had caused THREE TURNOVERS IN THE FIRST HALF. How many games are there like that? Did you research that? I doubt it. Hit me with those numbers. 20-3 Broncos, Brooks\' great under-handed pass makes it 27-3. That\'s over 20 then right? Nice to erase Brooks\' culpability in creating these very numbers you say we need to avoid.

02-20-2005, 01:02 PM	#52
SaintFanInATLHELL The Professor Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Lithonia, GA Posts: 2,773	Brooks turnovers. How does he stack up? Some. But not all. The one point I\'ve been pounding is the fact that when Brooks and the offense gets some decent defensive support, the team wins. I see it like a really good pitcher whose record is poor due to a lack of run support. \"The guy must be a bum because his record is 6-19.\" But if all 6 wins were when his team gave him 3 runs and the 19 losses are when the team only scored 1 run or less, does that make the guy a bad pitcher because \"he doesn\'t deliver wins?\" In the last 4 seasons, the 16 ranked team in defensive scoring has given up between 20 to 21 point. The Saints over those 4 years are 20-8 when the team holds the opposition to under 21 points. They win 70 percent of their games when the defense is average. SF, I wonder if you researched how much Brooks contributes to teams getting over 20 points on the Saints. Case in point, Seattle game. Score 14-7 in the 3rd. AB throws an INT giving the Seattle offense the ball in their own red zone and then they make it 21-7, yet the defense had held them to 14 the whole game until AB\'s mistake. And we had 7 points while our defense had caused THREE TURNOVERS IN THE FIRST HALF. How many games are there like that? Did you research that? I doubt it. Hit me with those numbers. 20-3 Broncos, Brooks\' great under-handed pass makes it 27-3. That\'s over 20 then right? Nice to erase Brooks\' culpability in creating these very numbers you say we need to avoid. I\'m not trying o erase Brooks\' culpability. I\'ve said all along that Brooks needs to get his total turnovers under 15, which is something that he has never done in his career (along with never reaching the 60% completion percentage). Also I\'ve been very careful to point out that when the team holds the opposition to under 21 points, not just the defense. Last year I was concerned about the fact the Brooks had gone from throwing an INT once every 2 games or so, to routinely throwing 2 INTs per game. He threw 11 INTs in the last 7 games of the season, with only no INTs against TB and the last Carolina game. He bears some of the blame. 3 INTs in Denver didn\'t help. But Brooks wasn\'t the primary reason the team was down 20-3 when that bonehead play occured: From the drive chart here: http://www.nfl.com/gamecenter/playby...0041121_DEN@NO Deuce didn\'t get a positive yardage play until the score was 20-0. The defense gave up a 51 yd TD run, a 33 yard penalty, and a 37 yd TD pass all in the 1st quarter. Every Saints drive except for 1 up until the interception had a penalty. But from what you write above it seems you want to pin the whole thing on Brooks because of 1 bad play that made it worse. Let\'s throw that play out and talk about everything leading up to it. Why was the team down 20-3? How much of that 1st quarter and a half was directly attributable to Brooks? How much to Deuce? How much to Michael Lewis? How much to the defense? How much to the coaching? The whole team sucked that day. Yet every time anything from that day is discussed, it\'s the Brooks underhanded interception to Al Wilson. Whodi, let\'s change the discussion. We\'re clear about how each other feels. You feel that Brooks\' mistakes makes him too much of a liability to keep. I say that while Brooks makes mistakes, that fixing other areas of the team has a higher priority. I don\'t think anything is going to change there. So trun the discussion back to other QBs. I think almost everyone here is in agreement that getting in another veteran QB for competition and possibly a backup would be a good thing. Being pushed certainly helped Brees for example. And Bouman has been like the Vice President. We\'ve seen all of the usual suspects: Warner, Fiedler, Bledsoe, Garcia. McMahon has also been thrown out there. Considering last years performances from these guys and the Saints offensive situaltion, especially the offensive line, could any of them really be successful? Or what support would they need to be successful? 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.

02-21-2005, 10:03 PM	#53
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	Brooks turnovers. How does he stack up? I think McMahon could be successful and Garrard from Jacksonville could be brought in to challenge. I don\'t want Garcia, Bledsoe, or Fiedler. I could be persuaded into Warner, but ONLY if we ran a quick strike offense like the Rams did. MEaning he gets rid of the ball in two or three steps. But we don\'t run that kind of offense. I would trade AB and his lower contract to San D for Brees, and throw in Darren Howard or a pick. That would solve several problems as I see them at the same time. What say you?

02-21-2005, 10:09 PM	#54
subguy 1000 Posts + Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: FL Posts: 2,095	Brooks turnovers. How does he stack up? Horn backs up his quirkiness.......he produces week in and week out. I hate his shenanigan\'s but he at least comes to play.

02-21-2005, 10:40 PM	#55
frankeefrank 500th Post Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 775	Brooks turnovers. How does he stack up? Aaron Brooks 18 total turnovers Tom Brady 3 rings
frankeefrank 500th Post Join Date: Jul 2003 Posts: 775

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

02-22-2005, 09:20 AM	#56
SaintFanInATLHELL The Professor Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Lithonia, GA Posts: 2,773	Brooks turnovers. How does he stack up? Aaron Brooks 18 total turnovers Tom Brady 3 rings 2004 Regular Season Scoring Defense. Pats 2nd at 16.2 Saints 28th at 25.3 2003 Regular Season Scoring Defense Pats 1st at 14.9 Saints 16th at 20.4 2001 Regular Season Scoring Defense Pats 6th at 17.0 Saints 28th @ 25.6 You can\'t effectively compare individual stats (total turnovers) to team stats (3 SB rings). There\'s a reason that the Pats have 3 SB rings and the Saints simply couldn\'t. You\'re looking at it above. Quick name the last SB champion that finished the regular season outside of the top 10 in scoring defense? You already have 3 of the last 4. TB and Baltimore were both the #1 scoring defense the year that they won. The Rams were in the top ten in 1999. In fact using http://www.pro-football-reference.com I went back and looked up the scoring defensing rank of the last 16 SB winners. Each and every one was in the top 10 and the vast majority were in the top 5. As JKool has said all along, football is a team game. An outstanding defense can make a QB look like a genius (Trent Dilfer for example) while a bad defense can make an outstanding QB look like a he can\'t win (Peyton Manning for example). I\'m not saying that Brooks is a SB caliber QB. But Brady\'s defense is a big part of why he\'s a SB winning QB. 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.

02-22-2005, 09:26 AM	#57
SaintFanInATLHELL The Professor Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Lithonia, GA Posts: 2,773	Brooks turnovers. How does he stack up? I think the issues on the defensive size of the ball are important enough to put into my sig. Just testing it out. SFIAH

02-22-2005, 09:46 AM	#58
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	Brooks turnovers. How does he stack up? SFIAH, this is funny. I pointed out to you TWO cases where Brooks directly led to our defense giving up more than 20 points, and you jump back on our defense. I wonder if you could look up the QB rating of those last 16 Superbowl teams and see if their QB led the league in A) lost fumbles or B) red zone turnovers. I asked before for you to qualify the numbers you found and seem to post often about us winning when the defense holds a team under 20 by finding out how many MORE games than what I pointed out AB was DIRECTLY responsible for it going over 20. SO then you divert the convo, I answer that, and you jump off on the defense tangent at first opportunity. So I will reinstate my initial request and the second request since you like throwing defensive numbers at us. A) Please tell me how many times AB led directly to the team giving up over 20 points in the record you pointed out(I already gave you two). B) Find out how many times in the last 16 Superbowls you pointed out the QB led the league in lost fumbles, or red zone turnovers. I know we have had a better running game the past few years than some Superbowl teams(Pats definitely except this year and the Bucs ), so find those stats please. Since your aim seemed to be to divert me from asking these kinds of questions, I will ask them again. [Edited on 22/2/2005 by saintswhodi]

02-22-2005, 11:08 AM	#59
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616	Brooks turnovers. How does he stack up? Aaron Brooks total turnovers: 18- Record: 8-8 Tom Brady total turnovers: 19 - Super Bowl Champ 2004 Regular Season Scoring Defense. Pats 2nd at 16.2 Saints 28th at 25.3 I\'ve always wanted to say this: Nuff Said!!
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616

02-22-2005, 11:20 AM	#60
Saint_LB Deuce Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 2,894	Brooks turnovers. How does he stack up? Nuff Said!! Not quite, IMO. The Pats had an avereage time of possession of 31.22 minutes/game while the Saints had 28.18. From these numbers couldn\'t you make a case for the defense by saying that if the offense were on the field longer the defense might be giving up less points. Just a thought. Of course, I know that the response will be that if the defense could get off the field, then maybe the offense could have the ball longer. Either could be the case, I suppose.
Saint_LB Deuce Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 2,894