Brooks

WhoDat · 07-06-2005, 10:37 AM

Originally Posted by SaintFanInATLHELL

Quick Quiz: Name all NFL QBs that have had at least 20TD passes and 3500+ yards each of the last 4 years?

It's a really short list dude!

Quick Quiz: Name all STARTING NFL QBs that have averaged a QB rating of less than 81.5 for 4 years and still have their jobs as starters. It's a really short and very ugly list dude.

Originally Posted by SaintFanInATLHELL

Back to the quick quiz. What exactly kind of consistency do you want? Quantify it please.

Completion Percentages above 60%. QB ratings no less than 90 at a minimum. You can post all the articles you want about how QB rating isn't really a fair measure, wah wah wah. Bottom line, when I look at QB rating, I see it accurately measure the QBs in the league and where they fall. Peyton Manning is the MOST EFFICIENT QB in the game. AB is somewhere in the bottom half of the league. Furthermore, I'll take Joe Montana's and Steve Young's word for it when they say that it is bar none the best measure of how effective a QB is in a game - which they have both said on national TV. I think those two know something about quarterbacking, don't you?

Originally Posted by SaintFanInATLHELL

All I keep hearing about Brooks is that he's inconsistent, makes boneheaded plays and needs to be replaced. Please describe a realistic replacement to me.

Well, this relates to two issues to me. First, the frustration with past poor decisions. Jake Delhomme was a good candidate to replace Brooks. So was Marc Bulger. JT O'Sullivan might have developed into one, who knows? True, those aren't AB's fault, but then, saying the team should replace Brooks is not only a criticism of Brooks, but a criticism of the team's decision-making ability, or lack thereof, isn't it?

Currently, A-Mac is probably the best candidate on the team. That's not to say that the team couldn't seek replacements in FA. Ramsey and Vollek were two names that I heard speculation about this offseason and I particularly like those two. Mind you, there were never any confirmed trade rumors, etc, just two suggestions, but I like them. There are QBs available in FA and the draft every year. What the Saints need now is a veteran. A-Mac is as good a future prospect as any. They need a realistic substitute option for the right-now, not the two years from now.

saintz08 · 07-06-2005, 11:40 AM

Ramsey and Vollek were two names that I heard speculation about this offseason and I particularly like those two.

Did you forget Rivers and Brees ??? I would take a shot at Ramsey if he was cost effective .

WhoDat · 07-06-2005, 12:54 PM

I'm not interested in Rivers, personally. Brees is an interesting prospect, but I'm not sure that he's the real deal yet. He certainly took a huge step forward last season. Let's see if he can maintain it.

JKool · 07-06-2005, 02:03 PM

1. Brees and Vollek would be fine with me. We're not going to get either of them though. If they become available, I'd consider droping my mini-max approach to Brooks.

2. BMG, DAMN fine work (as usual)! I have to cavil a couple of points. As you note, no one falls in either extreme camp, but I guess, I'm pretty close to the first one, so I'm going to offer why I think your problems noted there aren't so severe.

2.1 Finger pointing is just a fallacy. If it is a team game, no one phase, player, unit, coach, etc. is to blame anymore than any other (while I think this is technically incorrect, see next, I'll go with it for now). I agree that taking the team line, usually leads to blaming everyone/thing but Brooks - but, of course, that is an error. Brooks shouldn't be insulated from blame, he should receive his fair share. However, this share is what is at issue in the "team game" response.

2.2 I agree that blame should not be distributed evenly accross all players, units, teams, coaches, and plays. This is why I started harping on "blame analysis/distribution". I certainly agree with the other camp on this - the QB is the figure head of the offense (and sometimes the whole team). As a result, he should be held MORE accountable than many other players, units, plays, etc. Of course, given a 45 man roster and a number of coaches on any game day, you'd be hard pressed to argue that his responsibility is anymore than 4-5% (you do need to include the other team, and it seem unreasonable to me that any player who played could be less than say 0.1% responsible for the outcome of the game). It is here that I have to say the other camp doesn't look so promising to me - the QB can't be held so darned accountable that things like Wins and Losses are all his.

Damn fine work my friend. I thought it quite an interesting an helpful breakdown.

Finally, Who, why can't people let the whole JT thing go. We got McKenzie for cryin' out loud. No one seems to doubt his value. We traded a "maybe" for an impact player. Sure JT looked alright to some in preseason, but I still just don't get it.

BrooksMustGo · 07-06-2005, 03:07 PM

I agree that taking the team line, usually leads to blaming everyone/thing but Brooks - but, of course, that is an error.

Agreed, my critique is less with the argument itslef and more along the lines of its use as a device to protect AB from accountability by his more serious defenders.

This is why I started harping on "blame analysis/distribution". I certainly agree with the other camp on this - the QB is the figure head of the offense (and sometimes the whole team). As a result, he should be held MORE accountable than many other players, units, plays, etc. Of course, given a 45 man roster and a number of coaches on any game day, you'd be hard pressed to argue that his responsibility is anymore than 4-5%

Could be, I haven't ever really thought about it like that. It's an interesting idea. I've always thought about it in terms of the number of snaps the QB takes per games: more in terms of the QB calling the plays, reading the defense, audibles, executing the plays, etc. Not saying thatI think you're wrong, I'll just need to think more about it, it's an interesting idea.

why can't people let the whole JT thing go. We got McKenzie for cryin' out loud. No one seems to doubt his value. We traded a "maybe" for an impact player.

I agree completely. We may regret picking up MM, if he expects to be paid like Champ Bailey.

RDOX · 07-06-2005, 04:23 PM

Having read of of this thread, I must comment on the way that everyone has handled themselves here. This is the finest thread that I have ever read about the Aaron Brooks debate. Congrats to all. Well thought out discussions on both sides of the ball.

With that said, I have to come down on the side of the argument that trades Brooks to some other team. While statistics are great, they tend to be misleading, because with Brooks at the helm and the "Starting QB" (Read Team Leader) we are still cruising at the 8-8 marks since 2000. There are a number of factors here that need to be looked at, but strictly looking at Brooks, his numbers are good, but his winning percentage is poor. He doesn't seem to inspire his teammates to go "lights out" except for Sully who went "lights out" for the media buffet table.

With Brooks in the QB seat, there is dissention, fights, arguments, and essential disloyalty in the Organization and I truly don't believe that he has the strength of personality that it takes to move this organization to another level. Is that his fault? NO!! It is the fault of Hazlett, McCarthy, Sheppard, Loomis, and the higher ups of the Coaching Staff. Hazlett had the chance to compare Brooks with Delhomme when Brooks was hurt. That's not Brooks' fault, that's Hazlett's fault. He is to blame for this entire debacle. The trouble is that Brooks is taking the heat for a lack of decision making ability on the part of the coaching staff.

I am on the side of letting Brooks seek another team. Not because he is a poor athlete, but because he has lost the respect of his team and the fans. Dumbing down the offense is not the key either. I blame Brooks' inability to produce on the Coaching staff and Front Office. He does need to go elsewhere and find another team that will get him a fresh start. Chucky may be about ready to take him on. I'd be interested to see what would happen if Brooks went to Tampa.

I do believe that Brooks will never be "DA MAN" here. He has burned too many bridges with both fans and team mates.

My two cents.

4saintspirit · 07-06-2005, 04:44 PM

Originally Posted by RDOX

With that said, I have to come down on the side of the argument that trades Brooks to some other team. While statistics are great, they tend to be misleading, because with Brooks at the helm and the "Starting QB" (Read Team Leader) we are still cruising at the 8-8 marks since 2000. There are a number of factors here that need to be looked at, but strictly looking at Brooks, his numbers are good, but his winning percentage is poor. He doesn't seem to inspire his teammates to go "lights out" except for Sully who went "lights out" for the media buffet table.

While I am no fan of Brooks -- I do not in any way think he is even mostly responsible for going 8-8. Other QBs may have won 1 or at most 2 more games last year but not on a consistent basis -- so trading him because of the record is not in my mind

With Brooks in the QB seat, there is dissention, fights, arguments, and essential disloyalty in the Organization and I truly don't believe that he has the strength of personality that it takes to move this organization to another level. Is that his fault? NO!! It is the fault of Hazlett, McCarthy, Sheppard, Loomis, and the higher ups of the Coaching Staff. Hazlett had the chance to compare Brooks with Delhomme when Brooks was hurt. That's not Brooks' fault, that's Hazlett's fault. He is to blame for this entire debacle. The trouble is that Brooks is taking the heat for a lack of decision making ability on the part of the coaching staff.

Cannot agree here -- it is his fault -- he has no control of the team -- he was even involved in some of the dissensions -- caused some of them. As for Delhomme -- I blame Haz but also AB -- AB should have been man enough to tell Haz he was not playing at full speed - a true leader would want wins not safety in his starting job.

I am on the side of letting Brooks seek another team. Not because he is a poor athlete, but because he has lost the respect of his team and the fans. Dumbing down the offense is not the key either. I blame Brooks' inability to produce on the Coaching staff and Front Office. He does need to go elsewhere and find another team that will get him a fresh start. Chucky may be about ready to take him on. I'd be interested to see what would happen if Brooks went to Tampa.

I do believe that Brooks will never be "DA MAN" here. He has burned too many bridges with both fans and team mates.
My two cents

I can agree with the statement let Brooks look for another team if he doesn't perform well this year -- Saints fans will give him slack if we go deep into the playoffs so if we make the NFC championship and he plays championship quality ball -- I say let him stay

RDOX · 07-06-2005, 04:50 PM

Originally Posted by 4saintspirit

Originally Posted by RDOX

With that said, I have to come down on the side of the argument that trades Brooks to some other team. While statistics are great, they tend to be misleading, because with Brooks at the helm and the "Starting QB" (Read Team Leader) we are still cruising at the 8-8 marks since 2000. There are a number of factors here that need to be looked at, but strictly looking at Brooks, his numbers are good, but his winning percentage is poor. He doesn't seem to inspire his teammates to go "lights out" except for Sully who went "lights out" for the media buffet table.

While I am no fan of Brooks -- I do not in any way think he is even mostly responsible for going 8-8. Other QBs may have won 1 or at most 2 more games last year but not on a consistent basis -- so trading him because of the record is not in my mind

With Brooks in the QB seat, there is dissention, fights, arguments, and essential disloyalty in the Organization and I truly don't believe that he has the strength of personality that it takes to move this organization to another level. Is that his fault? NO!! It is the fault of Hazlett, McCarthy, Sheppard, Loomis, and the higher ups of the Coaching Staff. Hazlett had the chance to compare Brooks with Delhomme when Brooks was hurt. That's not Brooks' fault, that's Hazlett's fault. He is to blame for this entire debacle. The trouble is that Brooks is taking the heat for a lack of decision making ability on the part of the coaching staff.

Cannot agree here -- it is his fault -- he has no control of the team -- he was even involved in some of the dissensions -- caused some of them. As for Delhomme -- I blame Haz but also AB -- AB should have been man enough to tell Haz he was not playing at full speed - a true leader would want wins not safety in his starting job.

I am on the side of letting Brooks seek another team. Not because he is a poor athlete, but because he has lost the respect of his team and the fans. Dumbing down the offense is not the key either. I blame Brooks' inability to produce on the Coaching staff and Front Office. He does need to go elsewhere and find another team that will get him a fresh start. Chucky may be about ready to take him on. I'd be interested to see what would happen if Brooks went to Tampa.

I do believe that Brooks will never be "DA MAN" here. He has burned too many bridges with both fans and team mates.
My two cents

I can agree with the statement let Brooks look for another team if he doesn't perform well this year -- Saints fans will give him slack if we go deep into the playoffs so if we make the NFC championship and he plays championship quality ball -- I say let him stay

I believe the problem is that he will not perform up to expectation due to the fact that he believes that he is doing all he can. I suspect that he could use someone who is more of a disciplinarian, like Parcells or Coughlin. Someone to push him and MAKE him produce. I truly don't see this staff doing that.

WHODATNJ · 07-06-2005, 06:37 PM

Well gotta tell ya WHODATNJ , you aint starting out with a bang here .

I have a few simple rules here .

1. Do not make an entire post directed at members or a member with negative remarks about them . In other words , " I think " should always be football related and preferably Saints oriented if posted on this board .

2. When in doubt on the matter refer back to point number 1 .

B and G Moderator

saintz08 · 07-07-2005, 12:52 AM

He certainly took a huge step forward last season. Let's see if he can maintain it.

WhoDat

Speaking of Brees and his development . Have you seen the bio on Turk Schonert , the new quarterbacks coach ??? Man , this guys resume is like the Grim Reapers goin out on the town list . You need to see it , Turk is the guy brought in to develop Chris Weinke in Carolina ....What a fine job he did there .....

07-06-2005, 10:37 AM	#31
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631	Originally Posted by SaintFanInATLHELL Quick Quiz: Name all NFL QBs that have had at least 20TD passes and 3500+ yards each of the last 4 years? It's a really short list dude! Quick Quiz: Name all STARTING NFL QBs that have averaged a QB rating of less than 81.5 for 4 years and still have their jobs as starters. It's a really short and very ugly list dude. Originally Posted by SaintFanInATLHELL Back to the quick quiz. What exactly kind of consistency do you want? Quantify it please. Completion Percentages above 60%. QB ratings no less than 90 at a minimum. You can post all the articles you want about how QB rating isn't really a fair measure, wah wah wah. Bottom line, when I look at QB rating, I see it accurately measure the QBs in the league and where they fall. Peyton Manning is the MOST EFFICIENT QB in the game. AB is somewhere in the bottom half of the league. Furthermore, I'll take Joe Montana's and Steve Young's word for it when they say that it is bar none the best measure of how effective a QB is in a game - which they have both said on national TV. I think those two know something about quarterbacking, don't you? Originally Posted by SaintFanInATLHELL All I keep hearing about Brooks is that he's inconsistent, makes boneheaded plays and needs to be replaced. Please describe a realistic replacement to me. Well, this relates to two issues to me. First, the frustration with past poor decisions. Jake Delhomme was a good candidate to replace Brooks. So was Marc Bulger. JT O'Sullivan might have developed into one, who knows? True, those aren't AB's fault, but then, saying the team should replace Brooks is not only a criticism of Brooks, but a criticism of the team's decision-making ability, or lack thereof, isn't it? Currently, A-Mac is probably the best candidate on the team. That's not to say that the team couldn't seek replacements in FA. Ramsey and Vollek were two names that I heard speculation about this offseason and I particularly like those two. Mind you, there were never any confirmed trade rumors, etc, just two suggestions, but I like them. There are QBs available in FA and the draft every year. What the Saints need now is a veteran. A-Mac is as good a future prospect as any. They need a realistic substitute option for the right-now, not the two years from now.
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631	\"Excuses, excuses, excuses. ThatÃ¢Â€Â™s all anyone ever makes for the New Orleans SaintsÃ¢Â€Â™ organization.\" - Eric Narcisse \"Being a Saints fan is almost like being addicted to crack,\" he said.[i]\"You know you should stop, but you just can\'t.\"

07-06-2005, 11:40 AM	#32
saintz08 1000 Posts + Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 3,020	Ramsey and Vollek were two names that I heard speculation about this offseason and I particularly like those two. Did you forget Rivers and Brees ??? I would take a shot at Ramsey if he was cost effective .
saintz08 1000 Posts + Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 3,020

07-06-2005, 12:54 PM	#33
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631	I'm not interested in Rivers, personally. Brees is an interesting prospect, but I'm not sure that he's the real deal yet. He certainly took a huge step forward last season. Let's see if he can maintain it.
WhoDat 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 5,631

07-06-2005, 02:03 PM	#34
JKool 1000 Posts + Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Madison, WI Posts: 2,423	1. Brees and Vollek would be fine with me. We're not going to get either of them though. If they become available, I'd consider droping my mini-max approach to Brooks. 2. BMG, DAMN fine work (as usual)! I have to cavil a couple of points. As you note, no one falls in either extreme camp, but I guess, I'm pretty close to the first one, so I'm going to offer why I think your problems noted there aren't so severe. 2.1 Finger pointing is just a fallacy. If it is a team game, no one phase, player, unit, coach, etc. is to blame anymore than any other (while I think this is technically incorrect, see next, I'll go with it for now). I agree that taking the team line, usually leads to blaming everyone/thing but Brooks - but, of course, that is an error. Brooks shouldn't be insulated from blame, he should receive his fair share. However, this share is what is at issue in the "team game" response. 2.2 I agree that blame should not be distributed evenly accross all players, units, teams, coaches, and plays. This is why I started harping on "blame analysis/distribution". I certainly agree with the other camp on this - the QB is the figure head of the offense (and sometimes the whole team). As a result, he should be held MORE accountable than many other players, units, plays, etc. Of course, given a 45 man roster and a number of coaches on any game day, you'd be hard pressed to argue that his responsibility is anymore than 4-5% (you do need to include the other team, and it seem unreasonable to me that any player who played could be less than say 0.1% responsible for the outcome of the game). It is here that I have to say the other camp doesn't look so promising to me - the QB can't be held so darned accountable that things like Wins and Losses are all his. Damn fine work my friend. I thought it quite an interesting an helpful breakdown. Finally, Who, why can't people let the whole JT thing go. We got McKenzie for cryin' out loud. No one seems to doubt his value. We traded a "maybe" for an impact player. Sure JT looked alright to some in preseason, but I still just don't get it.
	"... I was beating them with my eyes the whole game..." - Aaron Brooks

07-06-2005, 03:07 PM	#35
BrooksMustGo 1000 Posts + Join Date: Sep 2003 Posts: 1,762	I agree that taking the team line, usually leads to blaming everyone/thing but Brooks - but, of course, that is an error. Agreed, my critique is less with the argument itslef and more along the lines of its use as a device to protect AB from accountability by his more serious defenders. This is why I started harping on "blame analysis/distribution". I certainly agree with the other camp on this - the QB is the figure head of the offense (and sometimes the whole team). As a result, he should be held MORE accountable than many other players, units, plays, etc. Of course, given a 45 man roster and a number of coaches on any game day, you'd be hard pressed to argue that his responsibility is anymore than 4-5% Could be, I haven't ever really thought about it like that. It's an interesting idea. I've always thought about it in terms of the number of snaps the QB takes per games: more in terms of the QB calling the plays, reading the defense, audibles, executing the plays, etc. Not saying thatI think you're wrong, I'll just need to think more about it, it's an interesting idea. why can't people let the whole JT thing go. We got McKenzie for cryin' out loud. No one seems to doubt his value. We traded a "maybe" for an impact player. I agree completely. We may regret picking up MM, if he expects to be paid like Champ Bailey.

Latest Blogs
2023 New Orleans Saints: Training Camp Last Blog: 08-01-2023 By: MarchingOn Puck the Fro Browl! Last Blog: 02-05-2023 By: neugey CFP: "Just Keep Doing What You're Doing" Last Blog: 12-08-2022 By: neugey

07-06-2005, 04:23 PM	#36
RDOX 100th Post Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 264	Having read of of this thread, I must comment on the way that everyone has handled themselves here. This is the finest thread that I have ever read about the Aaron Brooks debate. Congrats to all. Well thought out discussions on both sides of the ball. With that said, I have to come down on the side of the argument that trades Brooks to some other team. While statistics are great, they tend to be misleading, because with Brooks at the helm and the "Starting QB" (Read Team Leader) we are still cruising at the 8-8 marks since 2000. There are a number of factors here that need to be looked at, but strictly looking at Brooks, his numbers are good, but his winning percentage is poor. He doesn't seem to inspire his teammates to go "lights out" except for Sully who went "lights out" for the media buffet table. With Brooks in the QB seat, there is dissention, fights, arguments, and essential disloyalty in the Organization and I truly don't believe that he has the strength of personality that it takes to move this organization to another level. Is that his fault? NO!! It is the fault of Hazlett, McCarthy, Sheppard, Loomis, and the higher ups of the Coaching Staff. Hazlett had the chance to compare Brooks with Delhomme when Brooks was hurt. That's not Brooks' fault, that's Hazlett's fault. He is to blame for this entire debacle. The trouble is that Brooks is taking the heat for a lack of decision making ability on the part of the coaching staff. I am on the side of letting Brooks seek another team. Not because he is a poor athlete, but because he has lost the respect of his team and the fans. Dumbing down the offense is not the key either. I blame Brooks' inability to produce on the Coaching staff and Front Office. He does need to go elsewhere and find another team that will get him a fresh start. Chucky may be about ready to take him on. I'd be interested to see what would happen if Brooks went to Tampa. I do believe that Brooks will never be "DA MAN" here. He has burned too many bridges with both fans and team mates. My two cents.
RDOX 100th Post Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 264

07-06-2005, 04:44 PM	#37
4saintspirit 500th Post Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 690	Originally Posted by RDOX With that said, I have to come down on the side of the argument that trades Brooks to some other team. While statistics are great, they tend to be misleading, because with Brooks at the helm and the "Starting QB" (Read Team Leader) we are still cruising at the 8-8 marks since 2000. There are a number of factors here that need to be looked at, but strictly looking at Brooks, his numbers are good, but his winning percentage is poor. He doesn't seem to inspire his teammates to go "lights out" except for Sully who went "lights out" for the media buffet table. While I am no fan of Brooks -- I do not in any way think he is even mostly responsible for going 8-8. Other QBs may have won 1 or at most 2 more games last year but not on a consistent basis -- so trading him because of the record is not in my mind With Brooks in the QB seat, there is dissention, fights, arguments, and essential disloyalty in the Organization and I truly don't believe that he has the strength of personality that it takes to move this organization to another level. Is that his fault? NO!! It is the fault of Hazlett, McCarthy, Sheppard, Loomis, and the higher ups of the Coaching Staff. Hazlett had the chance to compare Brooks with Delhomme when Brooks was hurt. That's not Brooks' fault, that's Hazlett's fault. He is to blame for this entire debacle. The trouble is that Brooks is taking the heat for a lack of decision making ability on the part of the coaching staff. Cannot agree here -- it is his fault -- he has no control of the team -- he was even involved in some of the dissensions -- caused some of them. As for Delhomme -- I blame Haz but also AB -- AB should have been man enough to tell Haz he was not playing at full speed - a true leader would want wins not safety in his starting job. I am on the side of letting Brooks seek another team. Not because he is a poor athlete, but because he has lost the respect of his team and the fans. Dumbing down the offense is not the key either. I blame Brooks' inability to produce on the Coaching staff and Front Office. He does need to go elsewhere and find another team that will get him a fresh start. Chucky may be about ready to take him on. I'd be interested to see what would happen if Brooks went to Tampa. I do believe that Brooks will never be "DA MAN" here. He has burned too many bridges with both fans and team mates. My two cents I can agree with the statement let Brooks look for another team if he doesn't perform well this year -- Saints fans will give him slack if we go deep into the playoffs so if we make the NFC championship and he plays championship quality ball -- I say let him stay
4saintspirit 500th Post Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 690

07-06-2005, 04:50 PM	#38
RDOX 100th Post Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 264	Originally Posted by 4saintspirit Originally Posted by RDOX With that said, I have to come down on the side of the argument that trades Brooks to some other team. While statistics are great, they tend to be misleading, because with Brooks at the helm and the "Starting QB" (Read Team Leader) we are still cruising at the 8-8 marks since 2000. There are a number of factors here that need to be looked at, but strictly looking at Brooks, his numbers are good, but his winning percentage is poor. He doesn't seem to inspire his teammates to go "lights out" except for Sully who went "lights out" for the media buffet table. While I am no fan of Brooks -- I do not in any way think he is even mostly responsible for going 8-8. Other QBs may have won 1 or at most 2 more games last year but not on a consistent basis -- so trading him because of the record is not in my mind With Brooks in the QB seat, there is dissention, fights, arguments, and essential disloyalty in the Organization and I truly don't believe that he has the strength of personality that it takes to move this organization to another level. Is that his fault? NO!! It is the fault of Hazlett, McCarthy, Sheppard, Loomis, and the higher ups of the Coaching Staff. Hazlett had the chance to compare Brooks with Delhomme when Brooks was hurt. That's not Brooks' fault, that's Hazlett's fault. He is to blame for this entire debacle. The trouble is that Brooks is taking the heat for a lack of decision making ability on the part of the coaching staff. Cannot agree here -- it is his fault -- he has no control of the team -- he was even involved in some of the dissensions -- caused some of them. As for Delhomme -- I blame Haz but also AB -- AB should have been man enough to tell Haz he was not playing at full speed - a true leader would want wins not safety in his starting job. I am on the side of letting Brooks seek another team. Not because he is a poor athlete, but because he has lost the respect of his team and the fans. Dumbing down the offense is not the key either. I blame Brooks' inability to produce on the Coaching staff and Front Office. He does need to go elsewhere and find another team that will get him a fresh start. Chucky may be about ready to take him on. I'd be interested to see what would happen if Brooks went to Tampa. I do believe that Brooks will never be "DA MAN" here. He has burned too many bridges with both fans and team mates. My two cents I can agree with the statement let Brooks look for another team if he doesn't perform well this year -- Saints fans will give him slack if we go deep into the playoffs so if we make the NFC championship and he plays championship quality ball -- I say let him stay I believe the problem is that he will not perform up to expectation due to the fact that he believes that he is doing all he can. I suspect that he could use someone who is more of a disciplinarian, like Parcells or Coughlin. Someone to push him and MAKE him produce. I truly don't see this staff doing that.
RDOX 100th Post Join Date: Oct 2004 Posts: 264

07-06-2005, 06:37 PM	#39
WHODATNJ 100th Post Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Lafayette Posts: 109	Well gotta tell ya WHODATNJ , you aint starting out with a bang here . I have a few simple rules here . 1. Do not make an entire post directed at members or a member with negative remarks about them . In other words , " I think " should always be football related and preferably Saints oriented if posted on this board . 2. When in doubt on the matter refer back to point number 1 . B and G Moderator

07-07-2005, 12:52 AM	#40
saintz08 1000 Posts + Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 3,020	He certainly took a huge step forward last season. Let's see if he can maintain it. WhoDat Speaking of Brees and his development . Have you seen the bio on Turk Schonert , the new quarterbacks coach ??? Man , this guys resume is like the Grim Reapers goin out on the town list . You need to see it , Turk is the guy brought in to develop Chris Weinke in Carolina ....What a fine job he did there .....
saintz08 1000 Posts + Join Date: Jul 2002 Posts: 3,020