Props to JKool (Warning: AB Here - Enter at own Risk)

WhoDat · 02-20-2005, 08:35 PM

J - I may be misappropriating the props here, but I'm giving 'em to you. If you were quoting from others, I trust you will assign proper credit.

In a recent thread, I read some interesting ideas that J brought up concerning the infamous Aaron Brooks debate. I liked them and wanted to discuss them further with J and others.

Why the Brooks Debate Continues to Rage
J suggested that Brooks is such a hot topic b/c, for the most part, we agree on most everything else. I think that's a novel concept that I hadn't thought about, and it probably has merit. While I wouldn't simplify it entirely to that level (I think some posters often try to settle old scores via the same old debate, and the fact that we're in the middle of an offseason without FA or the draft filled with nearly none of the radical changes that Haslett alluded to also plays a part), but the idea is good. We all generally agree that defense should be a primary concern for the 3rd? 4th? straight season. As per usual, LBs and a productive run-stuffing DT top the list. S is a concern, as is depth at corner. Generally though, we all agree that something must be done. On offense, we all see a need for Tackles, though I dare not go farther. So the only thing left to debate is whether or not our loved/hated QB should remain.

(On a side note, this is the what? 4th? year that defense has been a primary concern. And what are those concerns? LB, DT, S... CB (pretty much the whole gammit on D). When will fans finally be fed up with Venturi, Haslett, and a FO that does nothing (at least nothing right) on defense every season???)

Opinions are like ... you know.
J went further as well. He said that we all know the same facts about AB, so disagreement is simply a matter of opinion that cannot be decided. Again, while I have some reservations (I think perception definitely comes into play - but I agree we all have access to the same information), I agree with the general concept.

My hope here is to keep this thing civil, so lets all at least try. Kool - if I remember correctly, you and others have said recently that you are fully aware that AB is not without fault and that other QBs should be brought into challenge him, but you've stopped short of wanting him cut b/c there's no other value at QB out there. While I will not (and probably could not even if I wanted to) argue with the concept that he shuold be kept until another (better) option presents itself, does it seem at all telling to you that the major defense for Brooks right now is no longer that people believe him to really be right, but simply that there are no other better options? In other words - is your argument - yeah, unless the guy proves himself in the meantime, the Saints should only keep him until they can reasonably find someone else?

This seems similar to an analogy I used in another thread. What are your thoughts?

Let me use an analogy, if I may, that we have used a lot in the past: a car. AB is like a porsche fuel injection system. Under perfect conditions the system has the ability to seriously boost horsepower, efficiency, and general performance from the car's engine. For such a potentially powerful piece of equipment, I can understand why the team would be willing to pay a premium. However, 4 years later, the damn fuel system hasn't paid off. Hoses are constantly rupturing and having to be replaced. The intakes get clogged and cause misfires. In general, the car runs real well every so often, but normally it is generally in need of repair and maintenance.

To use the same analogy, the LBs may be flat tires and the OT may be a cracked radiator. If you really want this stupid car to go anywhere, you're gonna need to address the tires first. After that, you could move, but the radiator is really going to need to be replaced, or at least sealed and refilled with antifreeze. This fuel injection system may be a large overhaul, and may limit the car less than two flat tires, but it's still a problem and it still needs attention.

That's how I feel about AB. He's a large investment that hasn't paid off. It goes back to the same issue on which we always seem to disagree - when is enough enough?

Would you tend to agree with that? What say you granola boy? :)

[Edited on 21/2/2005 by WhoDat]

Danno · 02-20-2005, 09:17 PM

I tend to stay away from the 7 zillion Brooks debates, but I also agree. JKool articulated his point very well, and deserves the props.

We all tend to agree on just about everything else wrong with this team, except Aaron Brooks. (cough**and a fat underachieving Deuce McAllister**cough)

TayTay · 02-20-2005, 09:37 PM

I\'d have to disagree. When I look at Brooks, I don\'t see the porsche. I see a 95 chevy with a killer stereo system and dual exaust. I see a regular car with a few amazing traits. I look at Brooks and immediatly notice the mobility and arm strength. But I look deaper and realize that the accuracy and intelligence are not there. Brooks is a plain car. If not for his stereo and dual exaust, Brooks would stay in the garage. Not be cruisin\' down the highway.

GumboBC · 02-20-2005, 09:50 PM

Yeah, props to JKool. Not just for this post, but for making great observations and being fair in all the debates.. I still dont\' agree with the chump all the time, though..

As far as how folks feel about Brooks?

Hmmm...

There seems to be a few different opinions on Brooks:

1. Brooks should go now and let\'s get someone else period.

2. Someone should be brought in as an insurance policy.

3. I think ABs play hasn\'t been perfect, but I\'m fine with him.

I think that about covers it?

I\'m not good with the folks in the #1 camp. Brooks has made some mistakes to be sure. But, many of Brooks mistakes are the direct result of some of the players around him. That\'s all I\'ve got to say about that.

I\'m fine with bringing in someone as an insurance policy. I\'ve got some doubts about Brooks and I always will until he puts it all together. But, for that to happen, other problems must be corrected that have little to do with Brooks.

As you might have guessed, I\'m in camp #3. I\'m fine with Brooks. I see no need to replace him. I see that as a low priority on this team. I feel that no matter what QB we get, that not much is going to change in terms of offensive production..

There ya have it..

Saint_LB · 02-20-2005, 10:14 PM

We all tend to agree on just about everything else wrong with this team, except Aaron Brooks. (cough**and a fat underachieving Deuce McAllister**cough)

How dare you make a comment like that about the best running back to ever put on the Saints\' uniform...It\'s not like I really feel this way, I just thought I would try something different and turn an AB thread into something different, and I could try out these new italic and bold functions that I found.

[/quote:8ff84ec60a]

JKool · 02-21-2005, 02:20 AM

Who, thanks for the props.

The stuff you\'re \"quoting\" from is actually part of a much larger position, but I think you did those parts some justice here. Thank you both for the props and the careful reconstruction (and generalizing) of my view.

First,

In other words - is your argument - yeah, unless the guy proves himself in the meantime, the Saints should only keep him until they can reasonably find someone else?

This sounds reasonably like my view.

Second, I agree that sometimes peoples\' motivations for posting, discussing, arguing, and being stubborn are not as pure as I\'d like to think. However, I imagine that is obvious to anyone who reads the posts here.

Third, one of the other parts of the bigger argument was an idea I had about blame distributions. This should help see why I\'m not a fan of the car analogy (though that analogy certainly has its merits and I\'ve found it helpful in the past).

The idea of blame distributions is roughly this, and I\'ll just quote myself if that is cool:

blame/praise comes in degrees and is often spread out accross several players at the same time. Thus, saying the OLine sucks is not a defense of Brooks, so much as it is pointing out that the blame for some plays/things is spread out over the QB-OLine group. It is sometimes hard to tease out on which part of that group most of the blame falls, other times it is easy (like some of the cases you pointed out - e.g. backward pass). This is true not just for the QB-OL pair but many other groupings and combinations - that is because it is a team game. For example a pass over the middle. Is that the MLBs fault, the SS fault the LBs as a group\'s fault, the LB-S grouping that is to blame? It is hard to say; sometimes it is obvious, the trailing LB in coverage is to blame, but if it is a zone, it is hard to say which guy should have been rotating, and so on.

The idea is, roughly, a lot of work much go into properly assigning blame/praise to players and groups - careful examinations of the stats and observations of the game itself (among other measures) must be used to distribute the blame/praise properly and to the correct degree.

Here is why this idea doesn\'t mesh with the car analogy: by setting up the car so it is the QB and the other parts (say the tires are the LBs) are other parts of the car, one assumes that they have some good insight into the right blame distribution. Notice that on your analogy, the QB is the whole car and the other players are parts of the car. It doesn\'t seem obvious to me that when the team isn\'t winning it is time for a new car (e.g. QB). Perhaps, if you treated every individual player as car... well, I\'m not sure, I\'d have to think how the analogy worked there. I hope that made sense; I did my best at 1:00 am. I\'d be happy to say more later.

Finally, I understand that people feel like after four years, AB should just be good, but when I look at how the team has changed every year - in personel, schemes, interpersonal conflicts, strengths, and so on, I don\'t see how we could expect this one guy to adapt to every possible tinker that has been made to the team. Most coaches build the team, the game plan, and even the practice schedules around their key players\' talents - here in NO we just keep changing regardless of the impact on our key players (look at the stupid move to 2TEs and how it affected Deuce for an example). AB was on a somewhat steady improvement in most (though certainly not all) areas of his game (at least as they are reported in the statistics) until this year.

At any rate, before anyone gets the idea that I\'m supporting AB, I just want it to be said that I see it as very hard to evaluate our QB given all the other problems. That is, how the blame distribution should finally fall is beyond my grasp yet, and I\'m not sure how I feel about merely stating how long he has had to develop as a big factor in determining the actual distribution. That time and lack of development (though not completely clear) is one part of finally determining the right distribution, but it is not enough on its own.

That is my granola lovin\' thoughts on the car analogy for the moment. I look forward to discussing it futher though. Cheers.

LKelley67 · 02-21-2005, 08:04 AM

i think it would be good if there could be as defined as possible list of opinions not so much about brooks but the quarterback position. similar to billy\'s summary but broken down a little more-

1. want brooks only, no change, no competition

2. want brooks as starter, bring in not a competitor but a better back up

3. keep brooks but bring in someone to compete for starting job, if not winning it, push ab, and be a better #2 guy

4. open to change but must be on par or better track record. looking for even exchange if replaced

5. desire a replacement, even if less proven but one deemed worth the risk. get a youngster to groom. use cap savings to address team needs

6. replace anyway possible including outright release

how\'s that? get it refined and we could poll to know the camps on this issue.

WhoDat · 02-21-2005, 11:46 AM

Notice that on your analogy, the QB is the whole car and the other players are parts of the car. It doesn\'t seem obvious to me that when the team isn\'t winning it is time for a new car ...

I\'ll chalk this one up to your post being made at 1:00 am.

Look again J... or see below.

\"Let me use an analogy, if I may, that we have used a lot in the past: a car. AB is like a porsche fuel injection system. Under perfect conditions the system has the ability to seriously boost horsepower, efficiency, and general performance from the car\'s engine.\"

In fact, in my analogy, I listed AB as a part or system within the car(TEAM), just as I listed the LBs and OTs as parts. Also, my system isn\'t one that seeks to fix blame. I am one that is, in case you haven\'t noticed, big on fixing the problem, not assigning blame - thus my desire to strike quickly when I believe I\'ve IDed the problem (Haslett, Brooks, Loomis, etc.). Certainly, one could make the argument that by a$$igning blame you\'re really trying only to identify the root or primary CAUSE of the problem. That\'s valid.

But my system makes it simple - or at least tries to. What\'s the biggest problem with our \"car\" (Team)? We\'ll, we\'ve got two flat tires (LBs). We\'re gonna need to fix that before this car can make any progress at all. Then move down the line and fix the next most pressing issue. If AB were to be a broken A/C system, for example, then you could show how most people fall in the AB debate. Some might say, \"I\'ve got two flat tires! A broken A/C isn\'t a problem at all, how can you be talking about A/C?! Look at the damn tires!\" Others on the opposite side of the spectrum might say, \"No s--t the tires, but no A/C makes me uncomfortable! We\'ve been trying to fix the tires for years and they keep popping. Just fix the A/C so at least I\'m comfortable.\" The middle ground (where I stand despite what some will tell you), might be \"Fix the tires first and buy a fan. Worry about making the car mobile, but figure out how and when you\'re going to fix the A/C eventually. Just b/c the tires are flat doesn\'t mean the A/C isn\'t a problem - it\'s simply a lesser problem at the moment.\"

Ya dig?

At any rate, before anyone gets the idea that I\'m supporting AB, I just want it to be said that I see it as very hard to evaluate our QB given all the other problems. That is, how the blame distribution should finally fall is beyond my grasp yet, and I\'m not sure how I feel about merely stating how long he has had to develop as a big factor in determining the actual distribution. That time and lack of development (though not completely clear) is one part of finally determining the right distribution, but it is not enough on its own.

In other words, you\'re going the granola route and copping out!

JKool · 02-21-2005, 05:53 PM

Granola... so yummy.

Ok, Who, my bad. I\'m down with the car analogy now.

You also anticipated one of my concerns - fixing a problem involves identifying the problem, which involves fixing a blame distribution.

I think we\'re on the same page.

4saintspirit · 02-22-2005, 09:26 AM

1. want brooks only, no change, no competition

2. want brooks as starter, bring in not a competitor but a better back up

3. keep brooks but bring in someone to compete for starting job, if not winning it, push ab, and be a better #2 guy

4. open to change but must be on par or better track record. looking for even exchange if replaced

5. desire a replacement, even if less proven but one deemed worth the risk. get a youngster to groom. use cap savings to address team needs

6. replace anyway possible including outright release

how\'s that? get it refined and we could poll to know the camps on this issue.

Have to say that presently I am in the #3 category for the following reasons -- 1) Have more pressing concerns than dumping Brooks 2) think he deserves another year to see what happens with a better defense (optimistically thinking we are going to have one of course) 3) Feel that we need a better backup that can push him to play with intensity all of the time and maybe step in if we need him to

02-20-2005, 08:35 PM	#1
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631	Props to JKool (Warning: AB Here - Enter at own Risk) J - I may be misappropriating the props here, but I'm giving 'em to you. If you were quoting from others, I trust you will assign proper credit. In a recent thread, I read some interesting ideas that J brought up concerning the infamous Aaron Brooks debate. I liked them and wanted to discuss them further with J and others. Why the Brooks Debate Continues to Rage J suggested that Brooks is such a hot topic b/c, for the most part, we agree on most everything else. I think that's a novel concept that I hadn't thought about, and it probably has merit. While I wouldn't simplify it entirely to that level (I think some posters often try to settle old scores via the same old debate, and the fact that we're in the middle of an offseason without FA or the draft filled with nearly none of the radical changes that Haslett alluded to also plays a part), but the idea is good. We all generally agree that defense should be a primary concern for the 3rd? 4th? straight season. As per usual, LBs and a productive run-stuffing DT top the list. S is a concern, as is depth at corner. Generally though, we all agree that something must be done. On offense, we all see a need for Tackles, though I dare not go farther. So the only thing left to debate is whether or not our loved/hated QB should remain. (On a side note, this is the what? 4th? year that defense has been a primary concern. And what are those concerns? LB, DT, S... CB (pretty much the whole gammit on D). When will fans finally be fed up with Venturi, Haslett, and a FO that does nothing (at least nothing right) on defense every season???) Opinions are like ... you know. J went further as well. He said that we all know the same facts about AB, so disagreement is simply a matter of opinion that cannot be decided. Again, while I have some reservations (I think perception definitely comes into play - but I agree we all have access to the same information), I agree with the general concept. My hope here is to keep this thing civil, so lets all at least try. Kool - if I remember correctly, you and others have said recently that you are fully aware that AB is not without fault and that other QBs should be brought into challenge him, but you've stopped short of wanting him cut b/c there's no other value at QB out there. While I will not (and probably could not even if I wanted to) argue with the concept that he shuold be kept until another (better) option presents itself, does it seem at all telling to you that the major defense for Brooks right now is no longer that people believe him to really be right, but simply that there are no other better options? In other words - is your argument - yeah, unless the guy proves himself in the meantime, the Saints should only keep him until they can reasonably find someone else? This seems similar to an analogy I used in another thread. What are your thoughts? Let me use an analogy, if I may, that we have used a lot in the past: a car. AB is like a porsche fuel injection system. Under perfect conditions the system has the ability to seriously boost horsepower, efficiency, and general performance from the car's engine. For such a potentially powerful piece of equipment, I can understand why the team would be willing to pay a premium. However, 4 years later, the damn fuel system hasn't paid off. Hoses are constantly rupturing and having to be replaced. The intakes get clogged and cause misfires. In general, the car runs real well every so often, but normally it is generally in need of repair and maintenance. To use the same analogy, the LBs may be flat tires and the OT may be a cracked radiator. If you really want this stupid car to go anywhere, you're gonna need to address the tires first. After that, you could move, but the radiator is really going to need to be replaced, or at least sealed and refilled with antifreeze. This fuel injection system may be a large overhaul, and may limit the car less than two flat tires, but it's still a problem and it still needs attention. That's how I feel about AB. He's a large investment that hasn't paid off. It goes back to the same issue on which we always seem to disagree - when is enough enough? Would you tend to agree with that? What say you granola boy? :) [Edited on 21/2/2005 by WhoDat]
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631

02-20-2005, 09:37 PM	#3
TayTay 100th Post Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 118	Props to JKool (Warning: AB Here - Enter at own Risk) I\'d have to disagree. When I look at Brooks, I don\'t see the porsche. I see a 95 chevy with a killer stereo system and dual exaust. I see a regular car with a few amazing traits. I look at Brooks and immediatly notice the mobility and arm strength. But I look deaper and realize that the accuracy and intelligence are not there. Brooks is a plain car. If not for his stereo and dual exaust, Brooks would stay in the garage. Not be cruisin\' down the highway.
TayTay 100th Post Join Date: Feb 2005 Posts: 118

02-20-2005, 09:50 PM	#4
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616	Props to JKool (Warning: AB Here - Enter at own Risk) Yeah, props to JKool. Not just for this post, but for making great observations and being fair in all the debates.. I still dont\' agree with the chump all the time, though.. As far as how folks feel about Brooks? Hmmm... There seems to be a few different opinions on Brooks: 1. Brooks should go now and let\'s get someone else period. 2. Someone should be brought in as an insurance policy. 3. I think ABs play hasn\'t been perfect, but I\'m fine with him. I think that about covers it? I\'m not good with the folks in the #1 camp. Brooks has made some mistakes to be sure. But, many of Brooks mistakes are the direct result of some of the players around him. That\'s all I\'ve got to say about that. I\'m fine with bringing in someone as an insurance policy. I\'ve got some doubts about Brooks and I always will until he puts it all together. But, for that to happen, other problems must be corrected that have little to do with Brooks. As you might have guessed, I\'m in camp #3. I\'m fine with Brooks. I see no need to replace him. I see that as a low priority on this team. I feel that no matter what QB we get, that not much is going to change in terms of offensive production.. There ya have it..
GumboBC Banned Join Date: May 2004 Posts: 2,616

02-20-2005, 10:14 PM	#5
Saint_LB Deuce Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 2,894	Props to JKool (Warning: AB Here - Enter at own Risk) We all tend to agree on just about everything else wrong with this team, except Aaron Brooks. (coughand a fat underachieving Deuce McAllistercough) How dare you make a comment like that about the best running back to ever put on the Saints\' uniform...It\'s not like I really feel this way, I just thought I would try something different and turn an AB thread into something different, and I could try out these new italic and bold functions that I found. [/quote:8ff84ec60a]
Saint_LB Deuce Join Date: Sep 2004 Posts: 2,894

02-21-2005, 02:20 AM	#6
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	Props to JKool (Warning: AB Here - Enter at own Risk) Who, thanks for the props. The stuff you\'re \"quoting\" from is actually part of a much larger position, but I think you did those parts some justice here. Thank you both for the props and the careful reconstruction (and generalizing) of my view. First, In other words - is your argument - yeah, unless the guy proves himself in the meantime, the Saints should only keep him until they can reasonably find someone else? This sounds reasonably like my view. Second, I agree that sometimes peoples\' motivations for posting, discussing, arguing, and being stubborn are not as pure as I\'d like to think. However, I imagine that is obvious to anyone who reads the posts here. Third, one of the other parts of the bigger argument was an idea I had about blame distributions. This should help see why I\'m not a fan of the car analogy (though that analogy certainly has its merits and I\'ve found it helpful in the past). The idea of blame distributions is roughly this, and I\'ll just quote myself if that is cool: blame/praise comes in degrees and is often spread out accross several players at the same time. Thus, saying the OLine sucks is not a defense of Brooks, so much as it is pointing out that the blame for some plays/things is spread out over the QB-OLine group. It is sometimes hard to tease out on which part of that group most of the blame falls, other times it is easy (like some of the cases you pointed out - e.g. backward pass). This is true not just for the QB-OL pair but many other groupings and combinations - that is because it is a team game. For example a pass over the middle. Is that the MLBs fault, the SS fault the LBs as a group\'s fault, the LB-S grouping that is to blame? It is hard to say; sometimes it is obvious, the trailing LB in coverage is to blame, but if it is a zone, it is hard to say which guy should have been rotating, and so on. The idea is, roughly, a lot of work much go into properly assigning blame/praise to players and groups - careful examinations of the stats and observations of the game itself (among other measures) must be used to distribute the blame/praise properly and to the correct degree. Here is why this idea doesn\'t mesh with the car analogy: by setting up the car so it is the QB and the other parts (say the tires are the LBs) are other parts of the car, one assumes that they have some good insight into the right blame distribution. Notice that on your analogy, the QB is the whole car and the other players are parts of the car. It doesn\'t seem obvious to me that when the team isn\'t winning it is time for a new car (e.g. QB). Perhaps, if you treated every individual player as car... well, I\'m not sure, I\'d have to think how the analogy worked there. I hope that made sense; I did my best at 1:00 am. I\'d be happy to say more later. Finally, I understand that people feel like after four years, AB should just be good, but when I look at how the team has changed every year - in personel, schemes, interpersonal conflicts, strengths, and so on, I don\'t see how we could expect this one guy to adapt to every possible tinker that has been made to the team. Most coaches build the team, the game plan, and even the practice schedules around their key players\' talents - here in NO we just keep changing regardless of the impact on our key players (look at the stupid move to 2TEs and how it affected Deuce for an example). AB was on a somewhat steady improvement in most (though certainly not all) areas of his game (at least as they are reported in the statistics) until this year. At any rate, before anyone gets the idea that I\'m supporting AB, I just want it to be said that I see it as very hard to evaluate our QB given all the other problems. That is, how the blame distribution should finally fall is beyond my grasp yet, and I\'m not sure how I feel about merely stating how long he has had to develop as a big factor in determining the actual distribution. That time and lack of development (though not completely clear) is one part of finally determining the right distribution, but it is not enough on its own. That is my granola lovin\' thoughts on the car analogy for the moment. I look forward to discussing it futher though. Cheers.
	"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks

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

02-20-2005, 09:17 PM	#2
Danno Truth Addict Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Spanish Fort, AL (via NO and B/R) Posts: 24,720	Props to JKool (Warning: AB Here - Enter at own Risk) I tend to stay away from the 7 zillion Brooks debates, but I also agree. JKool articulated his point very well, and deserves the props. We all tend to agree on just about everything else wrong with this team, except Aaron Brooks. (coughand a fat underachieving Deuce McAllistercough)

02-21-2005, 08:04 AM	#7
LKelley67 1000 Posts + Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: baton rouge Posts: 2,540	Props to JKool (Warning: AB Here - Enter at own Risk) i think it would be good if there could be as defined as possible list of opinions not so much about brooks but the quarterback position. similar to billy\'s summary but broken down a little more- 1. want brooks only, no change, no competition 2. want brooks as starter, bring in not a competitor but a better back up 3. keep brooks but bring in someone to compete for starting job, if not winning it, push ab, and be a better #2 guy 4. open to change but must be on par or better track record. looking for even exchange if replaced 5. desire a replacement, even if less proven but one deemed worth the risk. get a youngster to groom. use cap savings to address team needs 6. replace anyway possible including outright release how\'s that? get it refined and we could poll to know the camps on this issue.

02-21-2005, 11:46 AM	#8
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631	Props to JKool (Warning: AB Here - Enter at own Risk) Notice that on your analogy, the QB is the whole car and the other players are parts of the car. It doesn\'t seem obvious to me that when the team isn\'t winning it is time for a new car ... I\'ll chalk this one up to your post being made at 1:00 am. Look again J... or see below. \"Let me use an analogy, if I may, that we have used a lot in the past: a car. AB is like a porsche fuel injection system. Under perfect conditions the system has the ability to seriously boost horsepower, efficiency, and general performance from the car\'s engine.\" In fact, in my analogy, I listed AB as a part or system within the car(TEAM), just as I listed the LBs and OTs as parts. Also, my system isn\'t one that seeks to fix blame. I am one that is, in case you haven\'t noticed, big on fixing the problem, not assigning blame - thus my desire to strike quickly when I believe I\'ve IDed the problem (Haslett, Brooks, Loomis, etc.). Certainly, one could make the argument that by a$$igning blame you\'re really trying only to identify the root or primary CAUSE of the problem. That\'s valid. But my system makes it simple - or at least tries to. What\'s the biggest problem with our \"car\" (Team)? We\'ll, we\'ve got two flat tires (LBs). We\'re gonna need to fix that before this car can make any progress at all. Then move down the line and fix the next most pressing issue. If AB were to be a broken A/C system, for example, then you could show how most people fall in the AB debate. Some might say, \"I\'ve got two flat tires! A broken A/C isn\'t a problem at all, how can you be talking about A/C?! Look at the damn tires!\" Others on the opposite side of the spectrum might say, \"No s--t the tires, but no A/C makes me uncomfortable! We\'ve been trying to fix the tires for years and they keep popping. Just fix the A/C so at least I\'m comfortable.\" The middle ground (where I stand despite what some will tell you), might be \"Fix the tires first and buy a fan. Worry about making the car mobile, but figure out how and when you\'re going to fix the A/C eventually. Just b/c the tires are flat doesn\'t mean the A/C isn\'t a problem - it\'s simply a lesser problem at the moment.\" Ya dig? At any rate, before anyone gets the idea that I\'m supporting AB, I just want it to be said that I see it as very hard to evaluate our QB given all the other problems. That is, how the blame distribution should finally fall is beyond my grasp yet, and I\'m not sure how I feel about merely stating how long he has had to develop as a big factor in determining the actual distribution. That time and lack of development (though not completely clear) is one part of finally determining the right distribution, but it is not enough on its own. In other words, you\'re going the granola route and copping out!
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631	\"Excuses, excuses, excuses. ThatÃ¢Â€Â™s all anyone ever makes for the New Orleans SaintsÃ¢Â€Â™ organization.\" - Eric Narcisse \"Being a Saints fan is almost like being addicted to crack,\" he said.[i]\"You know you should stop, but you just can\'t.\"

02-21-2005, 05:53 PM	#9
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	Props to JKool (Warning: AB Here - Enter at own Risk) Granola... so yummy. Ok, Who, my bad. I\'m down with the car analogy now. You also anticipated one of my concerns - fixing a problem involves identifying the problem, which involves fixing a blame distribution. I think we\'re on the same page.

02-22-2005, 09:26 AM	#10
4saintspirit 500th Post Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 690	Props to JKool (Warning: AB Here - Enter at own Risk) 1. want brooks only, no change, no competition 2. want brooks as starter, bring in not a competitor but a better back up 3. keep brooks but bring in someone to compete for starting job, if not winning it, push ab, and be a better #2 guy 4. open to change but must be on par or better track record. looking for even exchange if replaced 5. desire a replacement, even if less proven but one deemed worth the risk. get a youngster to groom. use cap savings to address team needs 6. replace anyway possible including outright release how\'s that? get it refined and we could poll to know the camps on this issue. Have to say that presently I am in the #3 category for the following reasons -- 1) Have more pressing concerns than dumping Brooks 2) think he deserves another year to see what happens with a better defense (optimistically thinking we are going to have one of course) 3) Feel that we need a better backup that can push him to play with intensity all of the time and maybe step in if we need him to
4saintspirit 500th Post Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 690