jnormand

Whodi, I think Euph is just trying to say that, if you guys are saying that you can't compare quarterbacks from the past to AB, then you can't say that past quarterbacks are better because thats doing the exact opposite. I.E. You can't say Manning was better than AB because you guys were just saying that you can't compare AB to Manning. In other words, in a way you are going against your own idea. I can understand both views that Euph and everyone else is trying to make. Brooks is statistically better, but because of his offensive weapons, he should be MUCH MUCH better. But, Euph is saying that he has more weapons but, regardless, statistically has been very effective. He has fumbled and thrown a lot of INT's but he also has thrown for alot of yards, tds. The "Brooks Debate" will never be solved unless he does REALLY BAD or REALLY GOOD this year. I see both points that people try to make, therefore I just look at Brooks for what he is. A really good QB sometimes, and a really average QB other times. Even a really bad QB other times. He is what he is. I hope he can be a GREAT QB this year, but who knows.