It's time for the Brooks/anti-Brooks debates again.

GoldenTomb · 07-01-2005, 01:59 PM

You cannot win the SB without a top 10 defense. Period.

See '99-'00 Rams.

If our O was firing on all cylinders we would have had an excellent chance to at least GET to the SB, with the abysmal state the NFC was in last year.

Are you guys gonna tell me that we wouldn't have pulled some of those lost games out last year had we scored on the first drive???

For those of you who have never actually played the game of football....scoring first has a psychological effect on the game. 3 and outs can change the complexion quickly. Obviously it's reflected in the stats.

I'm willing to say that the D has far more pressing issues than the O. That's why I think it's imperative that the O comes with it's "A" game to compensate for our weakness, which is the D.

Brooks supporters are saying "He's the best we have so we just have to deal with him as our starter all season, so long as he doesn't get hurt."

That's a loser's mentality. The case SHOULD be that NO ONE is beyond reproach and no one is indispensable. I say if he struggles the first two or so games, yank him and put McPherson in. Is Brooks better....absolutely, but he shouldn't be untouchable because of that fact.

07-01-2005, 01:59 PM	#11
GoldenTomb 500th Post Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 591	Re: It's time for the Brooks/anti-Brooks debates again. You cannot win the SB without a top 10 defense. Period. See '99-'00 Rams. If our O was firing on all cylinders we would have had an excellent chance to at least GET to the SB, with the abysmal state the NFC was in last year. Are you guys gonna tell me that we wouldn't have pulled some of those lost games out last year had we scored on the first drive??? For those of you who have never actually played the game of football....scoring first has a psychological effect on the game. 3 and outs can change the complexion quickly. Obviously it's reflected in the stats. I'm willing to say that the D has far more pressing issues than the O. That's why I think it's imperative that the O comes with it's "A" game to compensate for our weakness, which is the D. Brooks supporters are saying "He's the best we have so we just have to deal with him as our starter all season, so long as he doesn't get hurt." That's a loser's mentality. The case SHOULD be that NO ONE is beyond reproach and no one is indispensable. I say if he struggles the first two or so games, yank him and put McPherson in. Is Brooks better....absolutely, but he shouldn't be untouchable because of that fact.
GoldenTomb 500th Post Join Date: Jan 2004 Posts: 591