...the AB challenge.
 

You know-other day I was talking to someone and I said-duece is a talented rb, but he\'s lazy and injury prone...they called me a hater of duece..no--i\'m just objective and realistic.

the same with AB-I give credit where it\'s due, but i\'mnot apologizing for him....the problem is is in our culture as of late-we no longer debate, we attack and live in fear when someone challenges our opinion.

that, I think is the problem that I have with Gumbo and several others in the AB is God camp...and yes, he will whine to the mods about me saying that but it\'s true..for a while, every arguement that he brought up was in line to show how great AB is/was....and that is not cool. YOu cannot have intelligent debate with someone who refuses to look at the facts and just expresses their own beliefs..and I think at times we all fall into this category.,,soime more than others.

It is one of my biggest pet peeves about forums (the other being people that use anomonity..to attack or belittle others..which is just rude. I\'ve had that done here,and other places as well--but the funny thing is that the person here is gone, and in other places they leave/change names quick..

...the AB challenge.
 

Do you mean in general or here at BnG, baron?

...the AB challenge.
 

in general-we argue, yes--like on jerry springer-withnoone really listening..but debate..oh no..

...the AB challenge.
 

I was just thinking more about QB play and its impact on W\'s and L\'s and I came up with this.

I believe that if AB has a really good year, we are more likely to win more games (kindof an obvious point). But, I believe that if he has a mediocre year, we could still win alot of games. (Depnding on how the D plays and how Deuce runs.)

My point is this (I think):

If the QB plays really good, there is a much greater likelihood of a win than the corresponding likelihood of a loss when a QB plays bad. Does that make sense? (Assuming the D doesn\'t give up 38 points.) Meaning that the team can over come mediocre-bad performances and gut one out with a running game and good D. But, show me a QB with 4 TDs/no picks or fumbles and I\'ll show you a winning QB most of the time.

I made this point earlier this year: Our D was bad this year and certainly didn\'t make the job of the offense any easier. But, I blamed the offense more because we never scored points in our losses. The only game that our offense really showed up in and lost was the minnesota game. 31 points should win a game. other than that, the O never really put up 20 points in a loss. (I looked the point totals up before....don\'t really feel like doing it again.)
We didn\'t go into the season expecting our D to hold people to 17 points every week, therefore you have to acknowledge that the offense needs to put at least 21 on the board to get a win.

If you\'re losing 38-35, 42-38, 35-31, then you say your O is holdning up their end of the bargain. Those games we lost early, neither side really showed up and they made each other\'s jobs harder.

...the AB challenge.
 

I see.

I\'ve always prefered the idea of a discussion over a debate. Is that what you have in mind, baron?

[Edited on 3/5/2005 by JKool]

...the AB challenge.
 

Finely put yas.

So it isn\'t W/L alone that allow you to evaluate even entire offenses or defenses. It is only once you know a bunch of other things about the games that you can make a judgement.

As for the QB and likelihoods, if you take Kelley\'s point above to be more or less right, and I do, then about 7-9% of the praise and/or blame for any given W or L goes to the QB. So I suppose the QB having an A game increases the likelihood of winning about 7-9%, and the QB having an F game increases the likelihood of losing by about 7-9%.

...the AB challenge.
 

[quote:02321ffa12]
Aaron Brooks has claimed he\'s a great QB. He has called himself top 5, and demanded to be paid at a top 5 QB salary. He got it.


Did\'nt AB sign a 6 yr, 36 million$ contract ? Is that top 5 ? I dont know alot about salery\'s but i figuard top 5 would be more then 6 mill a yr.


[quote:02321ffa12]

Yards: 9th (Delhomme was 7th)
Comp %: 24th (Delhomme was 20th)
TDs: 11th(tie) (Delhomme was 5th)
INTs: 23rd(tie) (Delhomme tied for 20th)
QB Rating: 19th (Delhomme was 12th)


Kinda sounds like your still in love with J Dellhomme. Maybe you should consider being a Panther fan.

...the AB challenge.
 

well..like in my example, just because someone says that player X has a serious flaw in their game-that doesn\'t make you a hater.

as a braves fan i liken it to the andruw jones arguement..those who love him, adore him..most of the rest of us see the fact that he can\'t hit in a pressure situation and has little patience at the plate. Ironically enough: those that love andruw..usually find fault in other players-typically chipper jones who is one of the braves top batters and will use any little flaw to jump on someone else to show that it\'s not just their player...wether it\'s these two or jake D/brooks.

As a fan-i want to look at the team for what it is, and call out the flaws I see...as a cheerleader-which i\'m not-i would root for my player and try to find him faultless...

I think that Brook\'s unaccountability and attitude are examples of what is wrong with the saints, as a QB brooks is high profile, and if yanked would show the whole team that the coaches are serious.

as it stands, brooks says he is top 5 QB in the league-not a factual statement based on performance--and it\'s the teams fault. I wonder how much the team would change if brooks was humbled?

I also see that after brooks had that highlite reel finish to the game that he lead the comeback--after he failed in the red zone for most of the season in the first quarter...that the cheerleaders would be giving him another year.

I think by benching brooks and making him into a team player before letting him back on the feild the saints would be a better team.
the saints problem is accountabilty

...the AB challenge.
 

Lot of huffing and puffing baron(ya know I love ya ;) ), but you got to a good point I have made this argument myself, and could not agree more. But when you attempt to suggest a player should be held accountable for not performig on the field, you get, generally, a there is no one else better argument, which then knocks accountability out of the equation. Because player B) appears to be a step back from player A), player A) should be allowed to continue in his current capacity no matter how much he errs. I have never been a fan of that thinking, but a lot of that type of sentiment is centered around AB. But again I agree, a big Saints problem has been accountability in my mind.

...the AB challenge.
 

Agreed.

When AB played instead of Jake, when he was clearly ailing, it set a precedent. I wouldn\'t have had a problem with AB getting his job back the next year, but he lost it in the stretch run. That showed the fans, the players and everyone else that AB would never be accountable. I think that resonates with other players on the team and that was just one manifestation of the lack of accountability. AB is seen as the poster child for this problem on the Saints.

...the AB challenge.
 

I agree that accountability matters.

There are many ways to hold a player accountable that do not involve benching him. I believe that we don\'t have enough information to say that Brooks isn\'t being held accountable in the locker room, during film studies, in the coach\'s office, etc. I\'m sure some general arguments can be made, but I\'m just not convinced (yet) that there is such a tremendous lack of accountability - especially in light of recent events (benching Sully, cutting T-buck, etc.

Say you have three QBs on your roster.
QB1 is 10 good.
QB2 is 4 good.
QB3 is 2 good.

QB1 continuously plays at 70%. He is frustrating, and has a giant ego.

Is it best to bench 10, or work with him on the side - like sending him to \"leadership school\", putting him in charge of work-outs, and generally doing things to help him grow up and see the value of the team?

Of course, that is a general argument. However, the point is, the \'we don\'t have anyone better\' argument does have some merit (though not as much as some give it). The fictional team here will do better by NOT benching the player and using other motivational strategies.

In the end, perhaps this dispute about what to do with AB comes down to how you think you motivate, improve, and coach players. Some coaches are \"punishment and embarassment\" are the best methods, others are \"build a sense of team and personal dignity\" coaches. It is not clear to me which is most effective, but they are both good methods.

...the AB challenge.
 

Good points Kool. Very good. Here are my thoughts:

1) Haslett has proven he is an example disciplinarian. Cutting T-suck, benching Sully, Devery not playing, Hand gone, Jackson gone, Craver told to leave camp last year, Smith cut after eating with Sully at the buffet. He has proven this is his MO with all but one player.

2) Which leads us to your QB example. And it is also a good example. Here\'s my thing. You have proven to be an example leader with all but the one player that should be held most accountable. There is no need to make a season or pemanent example. But if you are in a game, and QB 10 good makes a boneheaded play that you have worked to improve, bench QB 10 good for a series to make a point. You can thus progress from there. Maybe it will take a quarter, maybe it will take a game, but by doing nothing with QB 10 good, and making examples at every other position on the team, you are not holding a very high standard of integrity or fairplay when it comes to tolerance. And this is an example a coach can not fail it. You can not succeed on any level as a coach if certain players believe you tend to play favorites. That invites discension(sp?) and infighting. My favorite tea in the NBA is the Spurs, and I love Pop as a coach because he will yell at Tim Duncan for making a mistake just as he will yell at Sean Marks the 12th man. That welcomes a TEAM concept.

3) Just a rehash slightly, but noone is saying sit AB for a year. But you throw a backwards pass to a lineman, you should be on the bench the next series. Follow up in the next game with an underhanded pass to a LB for a TD, on the bench the next quarter. Thus although not as harsh, the standards would be the same for all, which It hink is one of the biggest problems.

...the AB challenge.
 

I think we agree then.

It is of note then that the \"sent messages\", once thought through are not always what people think they were. It is worth examining what \"message is being sent\" in some detail before making general claims about them.

...the AB challenge.
 

agreed..but the one instance that really irked me was the comments about \"it\'s not me, it\'s the team\"--that I definitly would\'ve benched him for.

as for the poor first halves-you take the starter out and go to them pen when the starter just ain\'t getting it done..and now we have that option with the two young guys.

my point excatly. I don\'t care if you\'re peyton manning or tom brady..I don\'t belive in letting one player dictate terms.






[Edited on 3/5/2005 by baronm]

...the AB challenge.
 

I\'m a huge spurs fan too..and larry brown\'s piston\'s..and the braves--so I guess I\'m a very team first fan..I think that the team concept wins championships, not the superstar...look at new england and the old cowboys.

...the AB challenge.
 

AMEN!!!!! Argue the point. If it\'s a bad one, then it should be apparent why it is and you should be able to use facts about football to show why it is illogical.

There is one exception of course. If you\'re talking to Billy, there is no logic, so you can only look at motives!!! :P LOL.

(For all of you posters who feel oppressed by such aggressive and mean-spirited comments, before you go cry yourself to sleep, that last comment about Billy was a JOKE!!! If he were around, he\'d know it and not be offended by it. If it offends you, PM me and I can clue you in. :casstet: )

[Edited on 3/5/2005 by WhoDat]

...the AB challenge.
 

for the record. :cool:

[Edited on 3/5/2005 by saintswhodi]

...the AB challenge.
 

... Whodi and JKool got the point of the question...

... you cannot give a single individual credit for the success and none of the blame... of course, the opposite it true also...

... football is the ultimate team sport in that, all things equal, to succeed it not only requires comparable success from the 3 distinctive units that compose the whole team, but individual success within those units, performing an especialized task...

...that said... there are some coaches/players who, as individuals, given their character, charisma, personality, \"it\", whatever you want to call it, have the ability to inspire the people around them to dig deeper, to want to do better, to give it theirall, to heed their words... these individuals aren\'t always the fastest, nor the strongest, but they have that something special that is rare among people, which makes the people around them better...


of course, there aren\'t as many as ESPN would like you to believe...

... now, to answer the original question...
... I don\'t know if \"laying off\" is the right term...
... again, I\'ll have to respond, for the nth time, it is not about the numbers...

... I don\'t demand too much of Brooks... just to hear him say
\"WE\"...





...

...the AB challenge.
 

Brooks had 22 INTs in 2001.

SFIAH