baronm

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..

JKool

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

baronm

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

yasoon

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.

JKool

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]

JKool

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%.

"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks

natedogg02

[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.

baronm

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

saintswhodi

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.

yasoon

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.