You are what you are?
 

Last night I was thinking about the Saints and about our offseason improvements. Let me restate that! "Potential" improvements.

After much thinking I came to one conclusion. And the conclusion I came to was: Bill Parcells is right.

Bill Parcells has a saying !! The saying is ....

You are what you are!!

And here's the way I see it ...

The New England Patriots are the best team in the NFL. Anyone disagree with that?

The Eagles are the best team in the NFC. Anyone disagree with that?

The Colts' offense is the best in the NFL. Does anyone disagree with that?

I think there is little to no disagreement with any of those statements?!

Now let's carry that kind of logical reasoning over to the New Orleans Saints.

The Saints have the worst defense in then NFL.

The Saints have one of the worst running attacks in the NFL. (26th)

The Saints have a QB (Aaron Brooks) who has yet to establish himself as one of the better QBs in the league.

We have no proven LBs on our team.

Jonathan Sullivan is our staring DT and is totally unproven.

So, in conclusion ... We are what we are. And that's an 8-8 team.

I'd like to think we're going to improve our 26th ranked rushing attack.

I'd like to think Brooks is going to establish himself as one of the better QBs in the NFL.

I'd like to think to think our defense is going to hold most of our opponents to under 20-pts. per game.

All of the those things need to happen.

The question(s) is ... which of those are more likely to happen? How much as our offseason paid off for us?







[Edited on 25/4/2005 by GumboBC]

You are what you are?
 

that\'s not really fair-mccalister is one of the top backs in the league..and if healthy the running game will be better.

he\'s not even in the top ten...and mark my words-if we do to AM what we\'ve done to brooks and have this attitude-that no matter what he does it\'s someone else\'s fault (and go ahead admit it.. ost brooks supporters base their arguements on this) then AM will suck just as bad as AB has...no accountability=unprofessional and inconsistent player...hopefully with AM to spur him, brooks will actually study the playbook instead of free lancing and throwing passes to Offensive lineman....

he\'s proven-proven that he sucks...

that might or might not change..I think that we definitly brought in some good players, but we need a new coach to really make it better, smith, watson and colby are just going to be better....mckenzie for a full year will help and smith will be a heckuva an upgrade on jones....

You are what you are?
 

Well --- it is hard to say -- Our offensive line is better this year than last -- that should improve the running game as well as the passing game

We have upgraded our defense -- Smith is definitely an upgrade over Jones --- other than that I\'d say we are the same old defense. At the same time the defense has played together for a year now --

The question here is whether the imrpovements translate into a win. I think it does -- 9-7

You are what you are?
 

..I actually disagree with the Patriots being the best team in the NFL, or the Eagles being the best team in the NFC..

... the Colts would\'ve beaten the Patriots in the RCA dome...
... the Panthers at full force I think are better than the Eagles...

You are what you are?
 

You are what you are. Ahh, what a truism. Wherever you go Bill, there you are!

We made several successful changes along that dismal path to the #32 ranked defense that bode extremely well for what we will be next year.

We are not what we were.

1. McKenzie (basically our 2nd 2005 2nd round draft pick) learned the system, replacing Thomas.
2. Brown settled in, finally and thankfully replacing Ambrose.
3. Will Smith officially announced his arrival with a few \"upside the heads\"
4. Bockwoldt replaced Rodgers, and is bulking up as we speak.
5. Allen appeared to grasp the mental part of the game, even if it did take 3 years.
6. Smith will replace Tebuckey Jones. No one thinks this is a downgrade.
7. Watson has a valuable year under his belt.
8. Venturi was replaced, err, I mean an \"assistant to the assistant DC\" was brought in to help coordinate the defense.

So when Bill says \"you are what you are\", it really doesn\'t apply to our team in 2005.
Because we ARE the team that ranked top 10 over the last 4 games. After all the majority of that specific unit is returning, and they are what they are right now, right?

Or does Mr. Bill mean you are what you are, even if you\'ve not what you were?

He\'s got me confused now. Is this a question on the Wonderlic?

You are what you are?
 

Danno --

Actually I made this post just so we\'d look at things a little differently.

Many fans (and it\'s hard to argue with) aren\'t going to believe we\'re anthing more than an 8-8 team until they prove otherwise.

Hence: You are what you are!!

But, that\'s not totally true.

We\'re not the 26th ranked rushing team going into next season. Even though we were last year. And I\'ll bet ANYone on that?!

And I don\'t think we\'ll give up 46 sacks next season.

And I don\'t think we\'re anywhere close to the 32nd ranked defense next season. Maybe only middle of the pack. But nowhere close to the 32nd ranked defense.

We are what we are?

Well ... until I see us win more than 8-games. Then we are what we are. I have no predictions before I see us play. And our record isn\'t soley dependent on how much we\'ve improved. Other teams have gotten better and worse since last year.

You are what you are?
 

Where are you getting your info that AB dosen\'t study the playbook? I wish people would simply cease that statement. Ive heard for three years straight by the brass and all other accounts, about how AB is a good student. None of you are attending camp with him.

AB has beeen rated 7th in the league with a good line and running game. He is practically ALWAYS in the top ten, in terms of production. To state that he isn\'t a top ten QB means to me....

a) Some simply want him to fail

b) No matter what he does, some will never be pleased
Why do his supporters blame everyone else? Simple. His detractors blame everything on him.

You are what you are?
 

This is false. Can you go back and find a why didn\'t we take Aaron Rodgers thread from draft day? If Brooks was getting ALL the blame, surely there would be at least one huh?

You are what you are?
 

I see a comment about how lame AB is in every thread. 80% of the time, AB wasn\'t even the topic. How many times do you see anyone mention that AB is in the top ten every year in production, or that he has rated 7th in the league before, with a good line? When I bring it up.

People are already proclaming A-Mac to be starting next season. Since he hasn\'t even received his uniform, I can only assume that this is wishful thing on the part of the AB bashers.

You are what you are?
 

So you must not watch sportscenter or anything cause they certainly AB bash on that show. Trey Wingo, Golic and Salisbury recently had a roundtable about the NFC South and their question for Brooks was will he finally show he is ready to step up MENTALLY and play like the QB the Saints thought he could be. they showed the backwards pass and the pass to Mobley repeatedly during that clip. They said AB has regressed. ESPN must be AB bashers too. AB brings it on himself. Great on a struggling team. False love. Give me a break. You are defending an ego maniac who has done nothing to back up that ego. Have at it. AB has never completed 60% of his passes in any season. You wanna talk about that? AB had the most lost fumbles in 2003 to go with his best QB rating ever of 88.1(Still nto over 60% completions), wanna talk about that? Ab committs the most bone-headed plays as a 4th year starter you ever wanna see. Wanna talk about that. Any QB who is in this offense should have good numbers, that\'s not impressive at all. How about he hasn\'t gotten this team to the playoffs since Blake\'s 7-4 head start. Wanna talk about that? Come on man with this whoa is AB stuff. Everything he has gotten he has deserved. If he would just shut his smiling face he wouldn\'t get half the grief he is getting. Until he shows the maturity a 5th year starter should, every boo he gets is well deserved. Oh, and he led the league in red zone turnovers this year, you know, points OFF the board, wanna talk about that? Come on zulu, just cause everyone isn\'t locign on AB is no reason to defend him, but have at it.

[Edited on 25/4/2005 by saintswhodi]

You are what you are?
 

Significantly upgraded O-line will result in the resurgence of the offense. Duece will have a Pro Bowl year barring injuries...receiving corps is terrific. At this point our only major weakness on offense is at tight end. The improved offense will take some pressure off the defense. This should result in more wins and a better record vs. last year.

But it doesn\'t seem to me that we have done enough on defense to make us real contenders. We have excellent DEs...pitiful DTs, a young linebacking group that would not break the starting line up on any of the top ranked defensive teams in the league...we\'re better in the secondary with McKenzie and Smith vs last year...Teams will run on us and kills us with the tight end. I think we have improved the defense but not enough to make the Saints a serious playoff team.

So, we\'ll be better...our D will not be in the bottom third of NFL teams next year but I don\'t see us in the top third either. And that means better but not good. 9-7...

You are what you are?
 

Gotta run to the the store , Whodini. I\'ll be back. You know me...

You are what you are?
 

Other teams had a Draft too..and even the ones with poor drafts still improved...

The Free Agent signing was our real bread and butter this off season..the Draft may or may not be good..I think we MAY have gotten 2 starters...(Brown, Fincher)...but..I\'m not sure we improved more than our Division rivals...and that\'s where you HAVE to win to make a run into the playoffs...

You are what you are?
 

I don\'t think you just look at this years draft to determine if we improved. Every team also has players they drafted to develop into starters over the next 2 or 3 years.

This year we should see significant contributions from players that didn\'t contribute as much last year.

Henderson-undeniable talent.
Watson-A 2nd year LB with good upside
Leisle-A year of development and off-season work that he couldn\'t do last year should benefit this run stuffer type.
Bockwoldt-You could see him blossom, and now after a year of conditioning he should contribute much more.
Smith-no comment necessary
Stinchcomb-Should provide much better support.

So when you look for improvements from your draftees, you can\'t just look at the current class. You need to look back over the last couple for new contributors.

So Yes, there may only be 2 new starters from the 2005 class, but maybe 5 new starters (or at least solid contributors) from the 2004 class, And a couple more from the 2003 class etc.

McPherson wasn\'t drafted to help in 2005. He was drafted to help in 06 or 07. Probably the same with the Lymon kid.

You are what you are?
 

Danno --

Very good points.

Many fans evaluate a team by who they sign in free-agency and by who they drafted.

They never consider improvement by players on the current roster. Which is a bad bad mistake.

You guys think Ed Hartwell was Ed Hartwell in his first season?

Not hardly!!!

Ed Hartwell first year = 6-tackles
Ed Hartwell second year = 103 tackles.

Players often improve drastically in their 2nd year. And it takes some players longer. Some players have break-out seasons in their 3rd and even 4th years.

We need some of our young linebackers to show signifcant improvement. Fortunately we have some promising young LBs on our team.

Good point on current players improving our team.

You are what you are?
 

I\'m gonna have to say that if Pittsburgh can get one game away from the Super Bowl with a rookie QB that they might just be the best team in the AFC/NFL...

And I agree about Carolina being better than Philly if for no other reason Philly proves year in and year out that they are a bunch of chokers. Every time the chips are down, Philly cracks like a cheap watch.

You are what you are?
 

Had to scratch my chin a bit regarding this \"you are what you are\" stuff. While I\'m inclined to agree with Danno\'s responses - and I mostly do - after thinking a bit further outside the box I determined that his responses can be loosely applied to every NFL team.

Obviously nobody intends to field a worse team than they had last season, and their existing players (as well as draftees) will be expected to step up and contribute in the same way ours will. So maybe the question really is: Will our improvements be more significant than the improvements of other teams in the league? Thereby resulting in the Saints being better than an 8-8 team?

Sure we want our players from recent drafts (not just 2005) to step up and become bigger role players ... that\'s what player development is all about. But we\'re hardly the only team expecting the same thing. Have our guys developed into better, more game-ready players than those on other teams? Maybe that will determine if we really \"are what we are.\"

You are what you are?
 

Hate when I do that.
First of all., I also question AB\'s mental progression. The fact is that AB receives 10times more venom than the O line, LBs, drops, or penalties. I\'m also tired of his fumbles, but like I said, Jake had one fewer, and Moon had just as many.

You\'re reaching, when you accuse him of \"smiling all the time. He hasn\'t grinned all season. Besides, Favre always grins, and makes just as many bone headed plays. He\'s your hero though,huh? Despite AB being practically neck & neck with Favre in production.
To me,your digging up his grinning from a couple years ago is no better than others simply fabricating the quotes I\'m reading about him not watching film.

As for the playoffs, QBs don\'t lead teams anywhere. Ask Peyton & Green. Did Montana bring the Chiefs to the playoffs? Were you commending AB for his heroics during our only playoff win? Many factors go into why we aren\'t in the playoffs. Did we go when AB was rated 7th in the league? Nope. He\'s still in the top ten in yrds & TDs practically every year.

You\'re crying about him never completing 60%, but he was 59.3 % that season. Like BC pointed out, (before I could) last season was the only season he regressed. That was due to the WR drops, lack of running game, and constant pressure. That\'s not an excuse, just facts.

You are what you are?
 

Another fact is that the amount of false start penalities and plays called back that we had, would throw any QB out of sorts.

The elite Os around the league simply don\'t make half the mistakes that we do.

You are what you are?
 

I see you took this the wrong way. I don\'t care that he smiles, I would never use that in my argument(except for when he was smiling and clapping when Vick took the lead from us last year). I meant he needs to keep his mouth shut. Do you disagree? I said smiling mouth as a shot at him.

So your point is Jake fumbled one less time than AB? Was Jake a first year starter or 4th? Think a first year starter would have more problems than a 4th? You see Jake in the Superbowl? You see JAke last year with worse problems than AB put up bette rnumbers than AB ever has? Please don\'t disgrace Jake by comparing AB, cause there is none.

Brady didn\'t lead the Pats to the Superbowl? He had two Superbowl MVPs and his receiver got the 3rd. Okay. Peyton doesn\'t lead his team to the Superbowl? McNabb didn\'t lead his team to 3 straight NFC champ games and a Superbowl? QBs don\'t lead anything? Wow.

And yes I did commend AB during our playoffs win, it wasn\'t until after that I saw what poo he really was. He hasn;t proven me wrong yet, except for initially believing in him.

IS stats the only argument you have for AB? Top ten in yards and TDs almost every year? He is top ten in most boneheaded plays too. And top ten in fumbles, as well as number one in red zone turnovers this year. I am sure you are proud.

And your last statement is why AB will never get a break. Talk about AB without blaming everybody around him. Seattle had WAY more drops, they did okay. Their best receiver played like crap all year, and was suspended 4 games. Please. Constant pressure is due to AB dropping back 6 steps on a 3 step drop, being slow to get from under center, rolling into pressure, AND cause of poor line play. AB made the line look as poor as you are trying to say they made him look.

You are what you are?
 

Not half you say? St. Louis and Philly had two less offensive penalties. Buffalo 8 less. Kansas City and Minnesota 12 less. San Diego 19 less. All were well within half. All except KC and Buff went to the playoffs.

You are what you are?
 

Other than Peyton singlehandedly ending the Colts playoff runs, Id say that the Colts would\'ve had the same results with Kitna at QB. They\'re contending for the most talented O ever assembled.

Peyton is the man, while I\'ve seen McNabb called \"overrated\" or \"OK\" in here Please. McNabb would\'ve been off the charts in Indy. Hell, here, also. Just another example of how people selectively give QBs props.

Dont get me wrong, McNabb is my favorite QB. My point is, that playoff runs take a TEAM effort, and the elite teams have fewer injuries and mistakes, and great coaching. The Pats & Eagles have great Ds, which get them turnovers and prevent the other team from scoring. Their QBs aren\'t under as much pressure to score, as our O is. We knew we had to score 31 + to win. I think trying too hard had a lot to do with the mistakes weve had. We\'ve done pretty well with injuries,though. Yep, and ABs stats are also equal to Brady\'s production

As far as half the penalties and drops, I just pulled that figure out of the sky. Those other teams are mostly vets on O, and can overcome that type of adversity in a relaxed manner.

Could it be that AB turns 3 step drops into 6 step drops, because no one is initally open, and the heat is coming? How many times have he and Haz said that players are running the wrong routes? How many times have you heard that from the Pats, Eagles, Colts Chiefs, or Rams?

You are what you are?
 

So basically you are saying Kitna could throw 48 TDs in Indy if he were the QB, McNabb is overrated or ok(when NFL experts say he is the reason the Eagles have been as good as they are), and the fact that the elite teams in the playoffs had elite QBs is coincidence? Wow. The only years that was true for the Superbowl is Baltimore\'s year and Tampa\'s year. Other then that, Superbowl teams have had elite QBs, that\'s coincidence?

And first it\'s elite offenses don\'t have half, then when it\'s wrong you pulled the figure out the air and they have vets who can oversome it. So Gandy isn\'t a vet, nor AB, nor LeCharles, nor Joe, nor Pathon, nor Donte, nor Bentley, not Riley, nor Folau or Jacox, nor Deuce. No vets? They\'re rookies or something? Looks like we are mostly vets on O too.

And so when AB turns a short drop into a long run, it\'s ALWAYS cause receivers ran the wrong routes. I don;t recall Haz Saying that, you have a link? I know AB would say it cause he says he is great on a struggling team, but damn Zulu I see you think that\'s true. But the Kitna could get 48 TDs in Indy\'s offense thing has killed me, so whatever you say next is the final word on this subject. I have no words for that.

You are what you are?
 

Ummm No. I said that the Colts would get the same results with Kitna at QB meaning they would have the same records, and be bounced out of the playoffs with their suspect D. Peyton could throw for 60 TDs and have no ring. That\'s what I meant by team effort. Would Peyton have 48 TDs in NY or Houston?

My view was that McNabb is just as good, and more mentally hardened than Peyton. I said that I\'m reading McNAbb is called \"OK\" and \"overrrated\" in here, and in most groups.

Most of the the teams having rings, while sporting elite QBs, also had RBs, great coaching, and D\'s. You know, a TEAM. Why dosen\'t Marino have a ring? Would\'nt he have just as may as Montana, if he had gone to SF? I think even Boomer would\'ve had rings in SF.

Our having vets like the other teams suffering with mistakes at O only means that we have the wrong vets at some positions. Coaching the players we do have, has a lot to do with how they react to adversity, and handle success. The lack of focus this team exibits can be directly traced to coaching. Nowhere did I say that \"EVERYTME\" AB miscuses, it\'s because of wrong routes, etc.

I saw both Haz & AB whine about wrong routes on WWL tv. Once, Haz said \"by a player who has been here two years\". I suspect he means Donte. Don\'t believe me? Too bad. I\'m an honest man. I want AB to get his act together, or hit the bricks, just like anyone else. You aren\'t questioning all these quotes about AB not studying film, because they serve your purpose.

You\'re bordering on desperation, when you twist practically everything I say. I\'ve grown weary of this topic.

You are what you are?
 

ME: RESPONSE: Too good. :rollinglaugh:

You are what you are?
 

Yeah well, your lame stance on Jake leading the Panthers to the big dance made me giggle, also. Their D and Davis led the Panthers. Also, some excellent coaching from their staff, and discipline. AB would\'ve been there, had he been traded to CAR. Chew on that.

You are what you are?
 

Guess he told you, Whodi! ;)

You are what you are?
 

Yeah LB. I\'m converted. Shucks almighty dat Brooks sho nuff throw a pretty ball to that Gandy fella. I hope they have his bust ready for the hall of fame, cause if not for everyone else on the team holding him back for 4 straight years, he\'d really be something. :nutz:

You are what you are?
 

The other thing that\'s funny is I never said this LMAO. I said this Did I say Jake led them to the Superbowl? No. I did see Jake almost single handedly WIN The Superbowl for them while NE was racking up 32 points on their defenseand their running game sucked. Jake in the Superbowl, 3 TDs no INTs. :o I did see Jake put up better number this year than AB EVER with a WORSE TEAM. I really should just leave this alone. Why is it that I can\'t see AB for the hall of famer he is? Guess I hate him or something. I mean Peyton is a hall of famer, or will be. And had AB been on the Colts, or Eagles, or anywhere else he would have done the same thing apparently. SO if he was in NE, I am to believe AB would be Tom Brady. Fascinating. :seeingstars:

You are what you are?
 

it seems half the threads on this site develop into Pro- or Anti- Brooks debates.
So I guess I\'ll join in...
Just watch an old game... Take that Indi game for instance, where the Saints were bent over and... well, you know...
Peyton is on the bench studying film when his defense is on the film... and on the phone with his guys upstairs...
Brooks is on the sideline smiling with his helmet dangling in his hand...
Doesn\'t inspire much confidence.

You are what you are?
 

You never saw AB on the phone, simply because you didn\'t want to. That had to be the most irrelevant post I\'ve seen this month.

Why don\'t you enlighten the group about how many times you\'ve seen Peyton fold like a tent during Hurricane Betsy practically EVERY playoff game?

You are what you are?
 

I\'m starting to figure out why you\'re so maligned in this camp. Most of your responses were simply misquoting me, in an attempt to make me look silly.

I hope you\'re not the one that someone said \"sic em\" when I submitted my comparisons about AB to the \"elite\" QBs. Nothing you have shown would cause me to rethink my views, out of fear of reprisal from you.

Like I said the other night, I\'m a 5 yr vet of the wild, wild, west called usenet. You did\'nt merely express your opposing views. You called me out, in front of the whole camp. Therefore, I will be all up in you like an ovarian cyst. Just like I do every day in my other camp, with people like you.

It was all good, when I agreed with you when you were debating Whodat. Regarding misquoting you about Jake.. annoying, huh?
I read posts twice before my response, and know exactly why I said what.

You\'re swingin from Jake\'s jock about his Super Bowl performance, but give AB no credit for anything he has accomplished. For the record, I was just as impressed with Jake for that particular game. My feelings run hot and cold for AB. Difference between us? I\'ll give any player props for a great performance, just as I\'ll tear AB a new one for any lame outing.

You are what you are?
 

You guys need to chill or this ones locked!

You are what you are?
 

ZK,

It happened so much during the season last year I claimed it and named it SFIAH\'s Connundrum: every thread there eventually devolves into an AB debate.

Whodi, Billy, JKool, Saints-LB, Whodat, and the others have taken a break from it in the offseason. You\'ve been holding up the AB fort pretty well since you\'ve come on the scene. Billy (GumboBC) stridently supports Brooks because he know that it\'ll stir the pot.

My bottom line hasn\'t changed on Brooks. He has his problems. He needs to keep his yap shut. He does make mistakes. But at the end of the day when the defense comes to play, he runs the offense well enough for the team to win. The Saints with Brooks starting are 20-8, with a .714 winning percentage, when the team holds the opposition to under 21 points. To me that points to the fact that despite his imperfections, he\'s certainly good enough to help the team win.

The AMac pick probably signals the end of the AB era. AB still considers himself
a top 5 Pro Bowl QB. He isn\'t. Next offseason when the Saints ask him to restructure his contract for cap relief, his ego and his big yap will get in the way. Since the Saints will be upside down with his contract, from a cap perspective it\'ll make sense to release him.

Look to AMac to play sparingly this season, get a season of NFL Europe under his belt next Spring, and come back and be annointed the Man by the team starting in 2006.

The AB will be dead to the Saints, and the AMac debates will then begin.

SFIAH

[Edited on 26/4/2005 by SaintFanInATLHELL]

You are what you are?
 

:rollinglaugh: Misquotes? Let\'s look.

Does this quote say AB would have taken the Panthers to the Superbowl or no? :o

Does this quote say Jon Kitna could lead the Colts to a 13-3 record or no? Since the Colts were 13-3, and the biggest part of it was Peyton\'s 48 TDs, then wouldn\'t Kitna have to throw 48 TDs to get them to that record? :o

Same results, Peyton had 48 TDs. Kitna would have too? :o

Saints D was top ten in turnovers. :o

As with most of the rest of these falsehoods.


Interesting.

Wouldn\'t wanna misquote or anything. :o :o

You are what you are?
 

Zulu,

I\'d help you out, but last time I got embroiled in this particular debate, I nearly quit the site.

You\'re doing a fine job, buy you\'re going to find that there are several pretty good positions one could take and defend on Brooks. It is almost impossible to move some people on this - I\'m convinced that is because the facts can be interpreted in radically different ways, and there is just a touch of how you extrapolate from those facts causing a problem too.

Eitherway, Whodi is a good guy, you just got to get to know him.

I\'m with Joe on this one though, this thread is going south fast.

You are what you are?
 

The caps are yours...

So I say...

You are what you are?
 

Just for the record, The Colts are 3-3 in playoff appearances wit Manning at QB, 2 of those losses to eventual SB champion N.E.

... at least he gets to fold like a tent in the playoffs...

You are what you are?
 

Tell Bill Parcell he is what he is since we shoved that 27-13 victory up his azz. hehe