Brooks

TallySaint · 07-20-2005, 06:57 PM

Here's a novel approach...

Let's not let them score in the first quarter.

Just a thought....

8)

saintfan · 07-20-2005, 09:33 PM

f-ing priceless.

4saintspirit · 07-21-2005, 08:11 AM

I am always amazed when it comes to arguments about Brooks -- Amazed because there are so few people who actually look Brooks performance to see what type of QB he is. Most take the stat that is most in line with with their philosophy -- Brooks sucks or Brooks walks on water. The fact of the matter is that Brooks is neither -- Brooks has the talent to put up numbers -- has the offense around him at the skill positions to put up numbers -- period -- he has not shown leadership -- has not shown the ability to read defenses etc -- I also hear about if we had this type of defense AB would be great -- guys -- if we had a top 5 defense we wouldn't need a good QB -- you think Trent Dilfer is anything -- As for those who instantly hate Brooks -- fact is he is not the Saints biggest problem right now -- Personally I hate his attitude -- I hate his ego -- but lets fix all of our other problems first -- then lets worry about Brooks --

But lastly I hear all of this crapola about Brooks TD passes, yards etc -- and then use this to say he is so much better than Archie --- the game today is nowhere near the game was when Archie played -- no pampering the QB with roughing the passer penalties -- no pampering the receivers with the 5 yard rule -- get over it -- Archie was a class act who was loved by Saints fans -- if you think slamming Archie is going to turn me into a Brooks fan -- or if I actually believe Brooks is a better Qb because he throws for more tds than Archie you are fooling yourself.

saintfan · 07-21-2005, 10:34 AM

Stats have their place, but they can be skewed when all the factors aren't considered, and with the loudest and proudest here they seldom are. I posted the following here in a thread that was locked for some mysterious reason, so I'll post it again and we'll see what happens this time around...

Many have said (but there are a select few who say it often) that one of the things Brooks needs to do is get his percentage up from 57% to 60%. Well, if you run the numbers with his attempts last year, he'd need exactly 16 more completions, one more a game, to achieve this magical 60% completion percentage. The general theme of these "he needs to be at 60% posts" is that NOT being at 60% is his fault. Well, surely it's his fault to a degree, but it's not entirely his own fault.

Now, I'll not try and convince anyone that he doesn't throw a bad pass a game. I think MOST QB's throw an average of at least one pass per game we might consider to be "bad". I don't think that can be argued, at least not successfully, and certainly not without showing bias. Those of us that watch every play of every Saints game, if we're being honest, would probably have to admit that our WR's, all together, drop at least one catchable pass a game. I have suggested that individually they probably each drop on avearge one catchable pass per game. So, without giving Brooks this "ghost pass" some of us get blasted for, if you take the bad passes he throws out of the mix and consider the passes the WR's dropped but should have caught then you've got Brooks at 60% or likely even better for doing not one thing more. Now, if he corrected all or most of his own bad passes where might his percentage be? Of course dropped pass is a factor in the QB's completion percentage, and so too might we consider a WR that falls down or is held at the line or runs the wrong route. The QB might benefit from a tipped pass that a WR catches or a bad pass that a WR catches, but it would seem to me his completion percentage likely suffers more from the former than benefits from the latter.

The point is, as pretty much we all already know and some of us will admit, is that the completion percentage is a QB stat, but one the QB isn't solely responsible for...same goes for INT's and the mysterious QB rating and even the popular fumble issue.

Yes, there are some who see Brooks with Blinders, but I don't think there are many, and there certainly aren't as many as those who seem willing to omit these types of arguments and look at raw numbers to make their judgement.

Raw numbers? Where would Dan Marino have been if he'd been allowed to play based solely on his wonderlic score? For that matter, why wasn't Jake Delhomme even drafted? Why did Bill Parcells take a pass on Jake twice, once with the Jets and again with the Cowboys? Was Bill looking at Jake's numbers? Perhaps, and it looks like he made a mistake too huh?

It's a mistake in a game like Football (see ANY team sport) to be so one sided that you ignore all else for the sake of statistics. Unless of course you're just trying to "push buttons", in which case you should probably just be ignored.

saintswhodi · 07-21-2005, 10:49 AM

http://snap.stats.com/stats/nflinfo/...4781&Submit=Go

Scroll to the bottom and incomplete pass info. More than three times the number of poor throws to drops.

http://snap.stats.com/stats/nflinfo/...=232&Submit=Go

Stats for NFL drop leaders. Jacksonville led, yet Leftwich completed 60% of his passes. KC was second, yet Trent Green completed 66.4 % of his passes. Cincinnati was way ahead of us, yet Carson Palmer completed over 60% of his passes. Philly had more drops than us, yet McNabb completed 64% of his passes.

Euphoria · 07-21-2005, 10:53 AM

UGH... Listen... rank Manning against his peers during his era!!! Was he good sure. Rank his top ten finishes in TD's, Yards, ect... then do the same for Brooks against his peers. You'll see that they are tied going into this year. you don't match Brooks and Manning up yard for yard... you do have to consider such factors of era ect. That is why you rank them amoungst there peers!!!

4saintspirit · 07-21-2005, 01:26 PM

Originally Posted by Euphoria

UGH... Listen... rank Manning against his peers during his era!!! Was he good sure. Rank his top ten finishes in TD's, Yards, ect... then do the same for Brooks against his peers. You'll see that they are tied going into this year. you don't match Brooks and Manning up yard for yard... you do have to consider such factors of era ect. That is why you rank them amoungst there peers!!!

Okay lets rank AB against his peer -- Top 10 in yards and TDs -- granted
Top 10 in completion % -- nope; top 10 in QB rating; nope; top 10 in turnovers -- you betcha -- top 10 in football follies highlights (probably ranks #1); top 10 in bonehead mistakes -- yes siree;

But here are the 2 biggest -- top 10 in potential -- YES; top 10 in failing to reach his potential = another yes

So be careful when discussing top 10's this and that where you think you are proving some sort of cosmic point ---

Euphoria · 07-21-2005, 01:36 PM

well don't stop there... look up mannings...
here Bubba let me help you out.

A. Manning - '71-'82
completions 4 times finishing in the top 10
Yards 3 times finishing in the top 10
TD's 3 times finishing in the top 10

A. Brooks - '00-'04
completions 3 times finishing in the top 10
yards 4 times finishing in the top 10
TD's 3 times finishing in the top 10

10-10 is the total. SO on that level they are tired... if ya wanna go on big game wins, well there is Brooks 1 playoff victory to the rest of the Saints total which is 0.

4saintspirit · 07-21-2005, 01:45 PM

Originally Posted by Euphoria

well don't stop there... look up mannings...

Okay -- Manning -- in his first 4 years (since we need to be consistent with Mr Brooks -- Manning was in the top 10 completion % 2 out of 4. Didn't have Qb ratings so thats mute -- not in the top 10 turnovers (since he rarely fumbled) in any year -- certainly not in the top 10 football follies in any year -- bonehead mistakes -- not a stat so I can't look that up either --

Any thing else for you --

By the way -- Archie was a class act and a leader -- something I have not heard much said about Mr Ego

Euphoria · 07-21-2005, 01:53 PM

No, we are discussing Manning vs. Brooks over a career of being the best qb of all time as for as the Saints goes... so every year they don the uniform counts.

Manning not in football follies, I beg to differ he is in some of the greatest of all time and I have yet to see Brooks in that one... for the year sure but not all time. although he is a member of the River City Relay.

Don't get me wrong I love Manning, childhood hero even but ya gotta give Brooks a break.

07-21-2005, 08:11 AM	#83
4saintspirit 500th Post Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 690	I am always amazed when it comes to arguments about Brooks -- Amazed because there are so few people who actually look Brooks performance to see what type of QB he is. Most take the stat that is most in line with with their philosophy -- Brooks sucks or Brooks walks on water. The fact of the matter is that Brooks is neither -- Brooks has the talent to put up numbers -- has the offense around him at the skill positions to put up numbers -- period -- he has not shown leadership -- has not shown the ability to read defenses etc -- I also hear about if we had this type of defense AB would be great -- guys -- if we had a top 5 defense we wouldn't need a good QB -- you think Trent Dilfer is anything -- As for those who instantly hate Brooks -- fact is he is not the Saints biggest problem right now -- Personally I hate his attitude -- I hate his ego -- but lets fix all of our other problems first -- then lets worry about Brooks -- But lastly I hear all of this crapola about Brooks TD passes, yards etc -- and then use this to say he is so much better than Archie --- the game today is nowhere near the game was when Archie played -- no pampering the QB with roughing the passer penalties -- no pampering the receivers with the 5 yard rule -- get over it -- Archie was a class act who was loved by Saints fans -- if you think slamming Archie is going to turn me into a Brooks fan -- or if I actually believe Brooks is a better Qb because he throws for more tds than Archie you are fooling yourself.
4saintspirit 500th Post Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 690

07-21-2005, 10:34 AM	#84
saintfan Donated Plasma Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 18,556 Blog Entries: 5	Stats have their place, but they can be skewed when all the factors aren't considered, and with the loudest and proudest here they seldom are. I posted the following here in a thread that was locked for some mysterious reason, so I'll post it again and we'll see what happens this time around... Many have said (but there are a select few who say it often) that one of the things Brooks needs to do is get his percentage up from 57% to 60%. Well, if you run the numbers with his attempts last year, he'd need exactly 16 more completions, one more a game, to achieve this magical 60% completion percentage. The general theme of these "he needs to be at 60% posts" is that NOT being at 60% is his fault. Well, surely it's his fault to a degree, but it's not entirely his own fault. Now, I'll not try and convince anyone that he doesn't throw a bad pass a game. I think MOST QB's throw an average of at least one pass per game we might consider to be "bad". I don't think that can be argued, at least not successfully, and certainly not without showing bias. Those of us that watch every play of every Saints game, if we're being honest, would probably have to admit that our WR's, all together, drop at least one catchable pass a game. I have suggested that individually they probably each drop on avearge one catchable pass per game. So, without giving Brooks this "ghost pass" some of us get blasted for, if you take the bad passes he throws out of the mix and consider the passes the WR's dropped but should have caught then you've got Brooks at 60% or likely even better for doing not one thing more. Now, if he corrected all or most of his own bad passes where might his percentage be? Of course dropped pass is a factor in the QB's completion percentage, and so too might we consider a WR that falls down or is held at the line or runs the wrong route. The QB might benefit from a tipped pass that a WR catches or a bad pass that a WR catches, but it would seem to me his completion percentage likely suffers more from the former than benefits from the latter. The point is, as pretty much we all already know and some of us will admit, is that the completion percentage is a QB stat, but one the QB isn't solely responsible for...same goes for INT's and the mysterious QB rating and even the popular fumble issue. Yes, there are some who see Brooks with Blinders, but I don't think there are many, and there certainly aren't as many as those who seem willing to omit these types of arguments and look at raw numbers to make their judgement. Raw numbers? Where would Dan Marino have been if he'd been allowed to play based solely on his wonderlic score? For that matter, why wasn't Jake Delhomme even drafted? Why did Bill Parcells take a pass on Jake twice, once with the Jets and again with the Cowboys? Was Bill looking at Jake's numbers? Perhaps, and it looks like he made a mistake too huh? It's a mistake in a game like Football (see ANY team sport) to be so one sided that you ignore all else for the sake of statistics. Unless of course you're just trying to "push buttons", in which case you should probably just be ignored.
	C'mon Man...

07-21-2005, 01:26 PM	#87
4saintspirit 500th Post Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 690	Originally Posted by Euphoria UGH... Listen... rank Manning against his peers during his era!!! Was he good sure. Rank his top ten finishes in TD's, Yards, ect... then do the same for Brooks against his peers. You'll see that they are tied going into this year. you don't match Brooks and Manning up yard for yard... you do have to consider such factors of era ect. That is why you rank them amoungst there peers!!! Okay lets rank AB against his peer -- Top 10 in yards and TDs -- granted Top 10 in completion % -- nope; top 10 in QB rating; nope; top 10 in turnovers -- you betcha -- top 10 in football follies highlights (probably ranks #1); top 10 in bonehead mistakes -- yes siree; But here are the 2 biggest -- top 10 in potential -- YES; top 10 in failing to reach his potential = another yes So be careful when discussing top 10's this and that where you think you are proving some sort of cosmic point ---
4saintspirit 500th Post Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 690

07-21-2005, 01:45 PM	#89
4saintspirit 500th Post Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 690	Originally Posted by Euphoria well don't stop there... look up mannings... Okay -- Manning -- in his first 4 years (since we need to be consistent with Mr Brooks -- Manning was in the top 10 completion % 2 out of 4. Didn't have Qb ratings so thats mute -- not in the top 10 turnovers (since he rarely fumbled) in any year -- certainly not in the top 10 football follies in any year -- bonehead mistakes -- not a stat so I can't look that up either -- Any thing else for you -- By the way -- Archie was a class act and a leader -- something I have not heard much said about Mr Ego
4saintspirit 500th Post Join Date: Dec 2002 Posts: 690

07-20-2005, 06:57 PM	#81
TallySaint 1000 Posts + Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Tallahassee Posts: 1,367	Here's a novel approach... Let's not let them score in the first quarter. Just a thought.... 8)

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

07-20-2005, 09:33 PM	#82
saintfan Donated Plasma Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: San Francisco, CA Posts: 18,556 Blog Entries: 5	f-ing priceless.

07-21-2005, 10:49 AM	#85
saintswhodi 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: San Antonio, TX Posts: 6,941	http://snap.stats.com/stats/nflinfo/...4781&Submit=Go Scroll to the bottom and incomplete pass info. More than three times the number of poor throws to drops. http://snap.stats.com/stats/nflinfo/...=232&Submit=Go Stats for NFL drop leaders. Jacksonville led, yet Leftwich completed 60% of his passes. KC was second, yet Trent Green completed 66.4 % of his passes. Cincinnati was way ahead of us, yet Carson Palmer completed over 60% of his passes. Philly had more drops than us, yet McNabb completed 64% of his passes.

07-21-2005, 10:53 AM	#86
Euphoria 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Hollywood, CA Posts: 7,601 Blog Entries: 5	UGH... Listen... rank Manning against his peers during his era!!! Was he good sure. Rank his top ten finishes in TD's, Yards, ect... then do the same for Brooks against his peers. You'll see that they are tied going into this year. you don't match Brooks and Manning up yard for yard... you do have to consider such factors of era ect. That is why you rank them amoungst there peers!!!

07-21-2005, 01:36 PM	#88
Euphoria 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Hollywood, CA Posts: 7,601 Blog Entries: 5	well don't stop there... look up mannings... here Bubba let me help you out. A. Manning - '71-'82 completions 4 times finishing in the top 10 Yards 3 times finishing in the top 10 TD's 3 times finishing in the top 10 A. Brooks - '00-'04 completions 3 times finishing in the top 10 yards 4 times finishing in the top 10 TD's 3 times finishing in the top 10 10-10 is the total. SO on that level they are tired... if ya wanna go on big game wins, well there is Brooks 1 playoff victory to the rest of the Saints total which is 0.

07-21-2005, 01:53 PM	#90
Euphoria 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Hollywood, CA Posts: 7,601 Blog Entries: 5	No, we are discussing Manning vs. Brooks over a career of being the best qb of all time as for as the Saints goes... so every year they don the uniform counts. Manning not in football follies, I beg to differ he is in some of the greatest of all time and I have yet to see Brooks in that one... for the year sure but not all time. although he is a member of the River City Relay. Don't get me wrong I love Manning, childhood hero even but ya gotta give Brooks a break.