Saints = No Leadership
 

What, are you expecting Gumbo to crawl out of the woodwork and try to defend little Aaron\'s honor by handing me a verbal lashing? Well then, take it easy on me Gumbo, I\'m just a rookie.

Speaking of Brooks, when we cut his ugly arse, I\'d really like to see the FO make a run at Doug Flutie. I know alot of teams are going after him but I think that he would be the missing piece of a championship puzzle. Even if he didn\'t take us all the way, at least he would bring more to the table than Brooks. Fluite is twice the QB Brooks is. Flutie would bring leadership, skill, the ability to throw the ball beyond the line of scrimmage, and he\'s alot better looking.

If we can\'t land Flutie I say we take a long hard look at Akili Smith or Ryan Leaf. Either would be an upgrade over our current quarter-bum.

God please send us a REAL QB before I die !!!

Saints = No Leadership
 

Whoa dude, chill. I am not expecting Gumbo to give you anything. It has been a while though since this board has had a good Aaron Brooks debate, and I was just sitting back seeing if you would succeed in trying to start one. No worries. I am sure Gumbo will be along shorty to defend AB\'s virtue as an honest, pure, and upright QB.

Saints = No Leadership
 

You would think so, wouldn\'t you. Where is he, the clock is ticking. Maybe he is taking so much time because he is concocting a post to end all posts. Gee, I\'m getting a little excited waiting in anticipation. Come on, Gumbo, don\'t let us down. Don\'t tell me you got us on ignore.

[Edited on 21/3/2005 by Saint_LB]

Saints = No Leadership
 

:sleeping:

Saints = No Leadership
 

Gumbo are you there? Gee I hope he\'s alright. :comp03:

Saints = No Leadership
 

Ok, I\'ll bite (but only a little, and only if you ask nicely).

Bignic,

We agree that better leadership is needed. I found the discussion very interesting, I hope you did too. Rocky, ya say...

There is no need for Gumbo to defend Brooks from this. That sentence is just obviously false.

Saints = No Leadership
 

There is no need for Gumbo to defend Brooks from this. That sentence is just obviously false. [/quote:bfc49acfbc]

No JKool it\'s not false, it\'s true, literally. Are you serious? That sentence is just obviously false, ( I hate to use a oldie but goodie) No Duh !!! :D

Saints = No Leadership
 

Ask Peyton Manning .....

That sloppy play on a continued basis earns his swift right foot on the offenders butt .Of course with Peyton we are talking about a quarterback of a higher standard .... ;)

Saints = No Leadership
 

Man, if Gumbo takes the bait on Brooks, I\'m all in....

Saints = No Leadership
 

Much higher...a leader if there ever was one!! (If this doesn\'t work then nothing will)

Saints = No Leadership
 

I woulda been all over this but 08 beat me to it.

Yeah those things can\'t be directly attributed to AB but bearing those pearly whites after each one of those things is what he does instead of giving people the cursing out that they deserve. I even saw ol\' mild mannered Peyton Manning get in the face of Reggie Wayne during one of their games. I\'m sure that everyone on the Colts knows that if you\'re in Manning\'s doghouse, then you\'re in the team\'s doghouse. AB can have that same pull around here, but he just doesn\'t give a damn.

Gumbo you and so many other people on here are all about the stats. There is no stat for leadership, heart, intelligence, or player savvy. Can you honestly say that your Brooks has these things. He is about as far as you can get on talent alone.

Guys....Gumbo won\'t be responding because there\'s no argument for him here. There are people INSIDE the organization are doubting Brooks. I don\'t see any material for a quality rebuttal.

Saints = No Leadership
 

Ummm... I suppose leadership could be what\'s holding this team back. Maybe having a verteran QB with great leadership qualities would get some of the underachieving players to step their game up.

Maybe it was a mistake to let Victor Riley get away. Riley certainly had the skills to be a very good RT. Maybe he just need some veteran leadership to get him to perform.

Now that I think about it, maybe it was a mistake to let Tebucky Jones get away. Maybe Tebucky just needed someone to hold him accountable.

Sedrick Hodge and James Allen ... It\'s no telling what a little leadership could do for their careers.

Jonathan Sullivan ... just image for a moment if we could find the right leader to get this guy motivated.

Yeah, that\'s it. We need some leadership on this team and the rest of the NFL had better look out. \\

Inspiration, Leadership, Motivation, Confidence, ...

I\'ll have an order to go, with fries!!

Saints = No Leadership
 

In a way, I agree with Gumbo. But hear me out.

In order for there to be effective leadership, there must be a consequence for not following. There must be some downside associated with not putting in the hours of practice and planning and not executing.

There are few players on the Saints for whom non-comliance will result in reduced playing time, reduced featuring. While there is a limit to how that can play out, watching the moves the coaching staff made by allowing underperformers to hold onto their spots gives the impression that non-winning behaviors and sub-par performances are tolerated. It\'s worse when it\'s a high profile skill player. What messages are sent to the team by allowing Brooks to continue to play hurt (or stupid)? What message does it send when Deuce is inserted hurt when Stecker was a more than adequate replacement? How does it look when you release a practice squad player for the same (and simultaneous) infraction that another player gets no punishment for?

This game is about winning. Those moves (and countless others) send a message that some things are more important than winning. If I\'m on a team and we\'re not committed to winning, then all I\'m going to do is make sure I don\'t get hurt until I can get the hell out to a team that is.

Saints = No Leadership
 

Xan - I think Billy\'s point is that leadership is worthless. So is a good GM, good coach, and a good RB, WR, defense and O-line are only important when you\'re evaluating how good a QB is. Otherwise, nothing else matters. The Saints will be 13-3 this year. The Saints will be 13-3 this year. The Saints will be 13-3 this year. Oceania has always been at war with East Asia.

Saints = No Leadership
 

Leadership worthless? Never said that, WhoDat. Still making things up I see.. Hey, that\'s cool ... You gotta do what ya gotta do ...

It\'s not like leadership hasn\'t been discussed at length on this site.

But, for the newcomers who think leadership is the cure-all ... I think you are misguided.

Donavan McNabb isn\'t noted for being a leader. Maybe he is now .. but that surly hasn\'t been the case in the past. Mike Vick isn\'t known as a leader, either. Niether the Falcons nor Eagles have struggled too much with their QBs.

Now, I\'m sure their are a bunch of 20/20 hind-sight guys who knew all along that Donavan McNabb was a great leader. Yeah .... RIGHT !!!

In fact, if you want to look at RESULTS ... McNabb has led his team much further than what Peyton Manning has managed to do.

I COULD make the case the Colts lack leadership and that\'s why they can\'t get over the hump. Even one of his own teammates suggest that very thing.

But, I\'m no fool. The Colts lack talent on defense and their all time great offense can\'t overcome it.





[Edited on 22/3/2005 by GumboBC]

Saints = No Leadership
 

Whats with all the venom dudes?
Ya\'ll sound like a bunch of high schoolers.

Saints = No Leadership
 

Here I don\'t agree with Gumbo...

I don\'t think that McNabb is as good a leader as Coach Andy Reid is a leader and strategist. He\'s the ones pulling the strings in that organization and he doesn\'t take any c&*p from anyone- it\'s his way or your cut. McNabb\'s just proficient (and he doesn\'t make idiotic mistakes).

If I played defense, I\'d fear Payton Manning, because he\'s smart enough to see what I\'m doing and capable of communicating what he wants the team to do in reaction. And he\'s right the vast majority of the time. Feared, great judgment, good communicator = LEADER. But if I were him, I\'d throw a little of that gluttonous contract money back into the system for a few more good defenders. His team won 12 games with a D that was dueling the Saints D for worst in the league.

Saints = No Leadership
 

So, basically what you\'re are saying is that great leadership isn\'t needed at the QB position?

At least you\'re are admitting that the Eagles and Falcons don\'t need it. And both the Eagles and Falcons have enjoyed more success than Peyton Manning and the Colts.

And let\'s carry this further. Mark Bulger or Mike Martz aren\'t considered leaders of the Rams. Yet, they make the playoffs every year. How could that be?

Is Matt Hasselbeck a good leader?

Facts are facts ... and I see no good evidence that Peyton is any more of a leader than Donavan McNabb. All I see is Peyton hanging his head after he blows a playoff game. And I saw that for a while with Donavan McNabb too.

Maybe it\'s not leadership at all that\'s responsible for a team\'s success. Maybe it just takes the right combination of players and coaches? That could be it!!

Saints = No Leadership
 

Gumbo, while you missed the point entirely, I will try to make it obvious as I clearly didn\'t before.

If I ever imply that great (at a minimum) leadership is NOT a requirement of the QB position, you have my permission to remove my feeding tube.

Leaders know what they are doing, understand the ramifications and communicate the plan so that everyone\'s on the same page. Those who deviate from the plan are either herded back into the fold or cut loose.

Do you think that Payton Manning knows what he\'s doing when he plays? Is he effective? Do his players believe that he will deliver and sacrifice for the team? Does ha enforce his will on the team?

Do you think that Brooks knows what he\'s doing when he plays? Is he effective communicating what he wants to do? Do his players believe he will sacrifice for his team? Does he inforce his will on the team?

You bring up Bulger/Martz. They made the playoffs more than the Saints did, won more games, scored more points, kept more players happy (except for Turley.) Gotta be leading there to get that accomplished. Bulger\'s 27-12 as a starter, with 2 playoff appearances and won more playoff games than the Brooks led Saints in the last 3 years. And that\'s with and arguably terrible defense just like the Saints. Like you said, facts are facts.

I know nothing of Hasselbeck, other than he made the playoffs and made the Brooks led Saints look inept by comparison last season (including in the only game I got to watch in person).

Saints = No Leadership
 

Just a little insight on Hasselbeck xan, his receivers drop WAY more balls than ours, line is just as bad, and defense is not so great. Their best receiver spent half the year with his head in the clouds, and 4 games suspended for drug issues. SO they had to get Jerry Rice. Woulda beat the Rams in the playoffs had his receiver not dropped ANOTHER pass in the endzone at the end of the game that would have won it. I wish he would have hit the open market and we coulda took a run at him. Just a little about Hass. ;)

Saints = No Leadership
 

xan --

Look, I respect your opinion on leadership. But, you have yet to answer my questions to a point where you\'ve convinced me that our problem(s) are leadership.

Do me this one favor? FORGET AARON BROOKS. I don\'t think we\'re going to get anywhere using Aaron as a reference point. The subject is too volatile.

Let\'s compare Peyton Manning to Donavan McNabb.

According to you, Peyton is a great leader where McNabb really isn\'t. Peyton has a probowl RB, probowl WR, and pretty much the best supporting cast in the NFL on offense.

Donavan McNabb, on the other hand, hasn\'t had much help on offense the past 4 years. Before Terrell Owens, McNabb had a bunch of cast-offs at WR. And he\'s never had a premeir RB, either.

Yet, under McNabb\'s guidance, the Eagles have had a very potent offense. McNabb has gotten the most out of the talent on offense and has proven time and time again that he can lead his team DEEP in the playoffs.

BUT -- was it really McNabb\'s leadership that got the Eagles to 3-straight NFC championship games and then to the super bolw in 2005?

Accoding to your logic, leadership is vital at the QB position. But, when it comes to McNabb and the Eagles, you say it\'s Andy Reid who provides the leadership.

The only conclusion I can come to by using your logic is that leadership at the QB isn\'t needed so long as it comes from somewhere? In this case, it\'s HC Andy Reid.

It seems to me that you have a preconcieved notion of what leadership is and when you don\'t see exactly what it is you\'re looking for, you start to make excuses for why teams can be successful without it.

Look, I\'m not missing your point. It\'s just that it just doesn\'t add up to me.

I\'ve never heard anyone say Mark Bulger was a great leader. Or Mike Martz.

I\'ve never heard anyone say Mike Vick was a great leader.

Yet, they\'ve alll been successful.

Hey, I have an open mind .. I\'m still listening.

Saints = No Leadership
 

I\'d like to say that leadership is just like pornography, but I\'ve been through too many leadership seminars/forums/retreats to know that\'s just not true.

Living as I do 55 miles from Philadelphia, I can honestly say that I\'ve seen more Eagles games than I ever EVER wanted to. That bias being said, I\'m not saying that McNabb isn\'t a good leader. He fits the Philadelphia system and is a relatively smart guy. He exercises good judgement (most times) and doesn\'t try to do more than he is capable of. He and his coaching staff are on the same page. It is his coaching staff who run the team\'s offense. McNabb doesn\'t get to call his plays, and has limited audible freedom. Phily\'s offense has been run oriented but not because the team lacked good receivers (I\'ll admit they get picked on by the media a fair bit). Andy Reid\'s philosophy is hold the ball, beat up the opposing defense, and play field position. The team is built to function at all levels in that regard, and McNabb is very proficient at running it from the offensive side. He has 3 quality running backs who can alternately pound the ball, break outside and catch short passes and he had a great tight end until he went down in the NFC championship game. Until this season, McNabb didn\'t have a deep threat, but even when he did, he didn\'t throw the ball downfield as much as you\'d think adding Owens. Owens did more for that team\'s self image and confidence than McNabb did. But as a good leader, McNabb absorbed any blame in losses. He fell on swords meant for other teammates regularly. In the end, Reid is the \"go-to\" decisionmaker and ultimate leader. (I would bring up McNabb\'s apparent 4 minute long brain cramp at the end of the Super Bowl, but that\'s piling on)

Manning on the other hand is a different kind of leader. The 2004 season was by far and away the worst defense Indy has had in 5 years. Still, Manning managed to create an offense that outscored opponents in 13 of 18 games. He had bad games, as everyone does. The 2004 loss to the Pats was his worst playoff game, not because he didn\'t lead well, he just couldn\'t figure out what was going on. However, he took on the responsibility of driving the bus, and he, like McNabb took responsibility for the wrecks. Because Manning owns his offense, constructs the strategies, creates and calls the plays, manages the personnel, and is capable of executing at a consistently All-Pro level, the demands of his leadership skills are far greater than McNabbs. You are right to attribute the team\'s failure to advance beyond the eventual Super Bowl champs to Manning. Even the 2003 \"holding festival\" loss in the AFC championship game. But that doesn\'t detract from his ability and proven skills in leading his team.

No one would ever expect McNabb to be able to do the kind of things that Manning could do. As a business analogy, McNabb is a product manager and Manning is a COO. Both have leadership skills, but one takes it to a different level.

In the end, it\'s all about execution. Who, when called upon, will deliver. And just as ultimately, who is doing the calling. The leaders do the calling.