Brooks: "I'm a great QB" (1 Viewer)

[cstu]

This quote by Favre yesterday made me think of this thread:

“He’s a great kicker and I like to think I’m a great quarterback,” Favre said. “I’m kidding myself if I think great quarterbacks don’t have bad days, bad throws, bad reads.”

I guess the theory that great QB's don't call themselves great isn't quite true.  Perhaps the key is "I like to think" since it sounds a little more humble.

The key is the fact that he didn't put down his team in the process of building himself up as a "great QB". In fact, he admitted that he has "bad days, bad throws, bad reads", thereby admitting blame that he had a bad day, not that he's a great QB on a team that had a bad day.

This was by no means a defense of Brooks, just pointing out that other QB's call themselves great (though Favre is deserving of it). After looking like he had turned the corner and was becoming a good QB last year, Brooks regressed in 2004. He's still making rookie mistakes even after his 5th year as a starting QB. I think he's destined to tease us with greatness the way Bledsoe has for some many years, just to let us down with dumb mistakes.

Teased with greatness? Anyone else feel teased here? A bit giddy, maybe. But, I'm not sure there are many out there feeling teased at all.

I was talking about Brooks. Maybe you think Brooks is already great....

 

[Zigg]

This thread is irritating. How can a QB whose best defense has been #18, be fairly judged. How about this stat:14-4That is Brooks' record in games when the Saints allow 20 points or less. This shows two things. When given a good defensive effort he wins, and in 4.5 seasons, or 71(I think) starts, the Saints have held the opposition to 20 or less 18 times.Yeah, Brooks is the problem. He isn't great, but he'll win you games with support.

 

[8623]

This thread is irritating. How can a QB whose best defense has been #18, be fairly judged. How about this stat:14-4That is Brooks' record in games when the Saints allow 20 points or less. This shows two things. When given a good defensive effort he wins, and in 4.5 seasons, or 71(I think) starts, the Saints have held the opposition to 20 or less 18 times.Yeah, Brooks is the problem. He isn't great, but he'll win you games with support.

Good "bottom line" post here.18 times in 71 starts? That's appalling.

 

[Marc Levin]

I think ANY QB would be able to compile a pretty good record if the D holds the other team under 20 points.The mark of a great QB is whether he can keep you in the games when your D is falling apart on you. Another mark is good decision making - IOW, having your head in the game. I find it hard for anyone to defend Brooks' decision making when he's under pressure considering some of the things I've seen him do.Think of a guy like Ben Roethlesberger - first year in the league, composure and decision making of a 15 year vet. Brooks is BEHIND Roeth when I think of the decisions he makes under pressure - and you can't say Brooks has faced tougher pass Ds than Roeth, who had Philly, NE, Buffalo, Miami, and the Ravens - twice - on his schedule this year.What I will concede is that Brooks has TALENT - I will also concede that he has been hampered by play calls as much as poor decision making. But he definitely shares a ton of the blame for stalled drives - some of the throws I've seen from him on second or third and long - especially once the team crosses the 50 - are simply atrocious. Not from lack of talent - from lack of having his head in the game - simply poor throws to receivers in situations where a "great" QB will make the throw - or at least give the receiver a SHOT at the ball.Finally, and I think this was the original point, I will concede that Brooks has been placed in a position where he has to make good decisions and lead comebacks much more often than your average QB - at least he has this past year. But what I will not concede is that this point is a defense of Brooks - great QBs step up (sorry, Joe) in those situations, and they don't blame their teammates for the job not getting done.

 

[8623]

league, composure and decision making of a 15 year vet.  Brooks is BEHIND Roeth when I think of the decisions he makes under pressure - and you can't say Brooks has faced tougher pass Ds than Roeth, who had Philly, NE, Buffalo, Miami, and the Ravens - twice - on his schedule this year.

Roethlisberger has not faced the kind of pressure Brooks did this year. I'm pretty sure if he had 3 blitzers in his face within half a second of taking the snap he'd be making some terrible decisions too, especially when he knew he didn't have the luxury of a defense that could hold the other team off the scoreboard while his offensive line got their act together.If you think I'm exaggerating how bad the offensive line was, I've got a few tapes I'll gladly send you.Also, as for the 20 points allowed stat, keep in mind, they weren't just allowing 20 points a game. They were allowing 26 points a game -- 5th worst in the NFL if I'm not mistaken. And they've been right around 26 or 27 PPG every year for the last four years.________________________________________________________________Is Brooks "great"? No. (Contrary to what certain people here would have you believe, I have never said he is great or perfect).But is he good enough to get the job done with a decent team around him? Absolutely. And that's been proven every time Haslett has been able to get the team to play well for any length of time (first 3/4 of 2001, first 3/4 of 2002, last four games of 2004).

 

[guderian]

This thread is irritating.  How can a QB whose best defense has been #18, be fairly judged.  How about this stat:14-4That is Brooks' record in games when the Saints allow 20 points or less.  This shows two things.  When given a good defensive effort he wins, and in 4.5 seasons, or 71(I think) starts, the Saints have held the opposition to 20 or less 18 times.Yeah, Brooks is the problem.  He isn't great, but he'll win you games with support.

How can you blame the fact that the Saints offense only scored 2 TDs in the first quarter all season on the defense? The Saints' defense averaged 20.4 points against last year. Their record: 8-8. Brooks QB rating in wins was 93 and his rating in losses was 68. Brooks had 4 INTs/Fumbles in the 8 wins and 17 in the 8 losses. The issue is that the Saints have invested more time, effort, money and talent in the offense than the defense. Therefore, the expectations for the offense are much, much higher. If the investments were the same then we could compare the two.

 

[guderian]

The Steelers have allowed 36 sacks. The Saints 41. A pro bowl line would be nice, but how many times have we seen Brooks hit the hot read? None. Every week when I drop my fanny in my seat in the dome, I hope I'll see Brooks hit the hot receiver. Every time I'm disappointed. If a team is blitzing with 3 players that can and should be beat.

 

[guderian]

This is my favorite thread of all time.  Sort of like taking your hacks in the "60mph" batting cage.  The persistence of these Aaron Brooks fanatics is remarkable.  I'm beginning to think they actually DO think he's a great QB.

In their defense, this argument comes down to a he said/she said type deal. Did the receiver run the wrong route or did Brooks miss the throw? Was the QB pressured or was he just slow to make a decision and adjust. As fans we don't know the route, so we see what we want to see. The anti-Brooks crowd sees tons of offensive talent and years of mediocre performance. The pro-Brooks crowd sees dropped balls and wrong routes. I can admit when Brooks has a good game or makes a good play, but I don't understand how some can absolve Brooks of the offense's first quarter futility, inconsistencies and his lack of development as a QB. Here are Brooks' QB ratings:2000-862001-762002-802003-882004-80How can a QBs rating be 6 points lower after his 71st start than after his 5th start?How can a "great" QB be ranked in the bottom third of the NFL after his 71st start? He does have tons of talent, but I'd like to see more leadership from a QB and even Brooks admits he lacks in that respect.The knock on Brooks coming out of college was that he wasn't considered to be a "smart" QB by virtue of his play and low wonderlic scores. I haven't seen anything from him to change my opinion.

 

[cobalt_27]

league, composure and decision making of a 15 year vet. Brooks is BEHIND Roeth when I think of the decisions he makes under pressure - and you can't say Brooks has faced tougher pass Ds than Roeth, who had Philly, NE, Buffalo, Miami, and the Ravens - twice - on his schedule this year.

Roethlisberger has not faced the kind of pressure Brooks did this year. I'm pretty sure if he had 3 blitzers in his face within half a second of taking the snap he'd be making some terrible decisions too, especially when he knew he didn't have the luxury of a defense that could hold the other team off the scoreboard while his offensive line got their act together.If you think I'm exaggerating how bad the offensive line was, I've got a few tapes I'll gladly send you.Also, as for the 20 points allowed stat, keep in mind, they weren't just allowing 20 points a game. They were allowing 26 points a game -- 5th worst in the NFL if I'm not mistaken. And they've been right around 26 or 27 PPG every year for the last four years.________________________________________________________________Is Brooks "great"? No. (Contrary to what certain people here would have you believe, I have never said he is great or perfect).But is he good enough to get the job done with a decent team around him? Absolutely. And that's been proven every time Haslett has been able to get the team to play well for any length of time (first 3/4 of 2001, first 3/4 of 2002, last four games of 2004).

ISF, we all know you think Aaron Brooks is a great QB. It's ok. We're just trying to put a little reason here amidst the insanity.You've talked about how bad their defense is; how it puts poor, victimized AB in tough situations, right? Or, are you denying that one now, too.Well, if you stand by your statement about the defense (a feat in and of itself), are you willing to call Trent Green a "great" QB, too? If you take the last 3 years, Kansas City has ranked in the bottom pool of defenses:2002: 242003: 302004: 28New Orleans has ranked as follows:2002: 172003: 212004: 26And, yet, by almost every measure Trent Green has outplayed BrooksGREEN ('02-'04):986 comp1549 att61.8 comp%12320 yards77 TDs42 INTs93 QB RatingBROOKS ('02-'04):898 comp1588 att56.4 comp%10928 yards72 TDs39 INTs82.8 QB RatingMore attempts by Brooks, less completions, less yards, less TDs, and a full 10 points lower in the QB rating. This, despite the fact that Brooks has had a better defense and better receivers at his disposal. Deuce isn't the second coming of Priest Holmes, but he ain't chicken scratch, either. Plus, Green has had to deal with Priest's injury situation, particularly this year. Back to Brooks, he plays the majority of his games indoors, so the weather variable can't be used as an excuse, either.Now, most folks would look at Green and not say he's a "great" quarterback. They'd say he's adequate--good even. Green would not say of himself that he's a "great" quarterback. And, he certainly hasn't gone to the media to stab his teammates in the back, to blame his defense and others on the Saints' woes. Brooks, on the other hand, having more to work with, has performed below Green over the last three years. So, what gives? Why is it that Green can overcome his team's deficiencies, whilst Brooks cannot? Maybe it is that Wonderlic score of 17 (administered 3 x). The guy is just a flat out idiot. A microcosm of this was seen just this year, throwing a forward pass...BEHIND him. Great quarterbacks do not make such egregiously-stupid decisions, and Brooks is the author of many a decisions like that.Blame it all on everyone else, ISF. We know how much you think of your boy. But, he just doesn't cut it. He's physically talented and has a door knob for a brain. Not ever going to be a "great" QB using that calculus. Sorry.

 

[cobalt_27]

league, composure and decision making of a 15 year vet. Brooks is BEHIND Roeth when I think of the decisions he makes under pressure - and you can't say Brooks has faced tougher pass Ds than Roeth, who had Philly, NE, Buffalo, Miami, and the Ravens - twice - on his schedule this year.

Roethlisberger has not faced the kind of pressure Brooks did this year. I'm pretty sure if he had 3 blitzers in his face within half a second of taking the snap he'd be making some terrible decisions too, especially when he knew he didn't have the luxury of a defense that could hold the other team off the scoreboard while his offensive line got their act together.If you think I'm exaggerating how bad the offensive line was, I've got a few tapes I'll gladly send you.Also, as for the 20 points allowed stat, keep in mind, they weren't just allowing 20 points a game. They were allowing 26 points a game -- 5th worst in the NFL if I'm not mistaken. And they've been right around 26 or 27 PPG every year for the last four years.________________________________________________________________Is Brooks "great"? No. (Contrary to what certain people here would have you believe, I have never said he is great or perfect).But is he good enough to get the job done with a decent team around him? Absolutely. And that's been proven every time Haslett has been able to get the team to play well for any length of time (first 3/4 of 2001, first 3/4 of 2002, last four games of 2004).

Also, I find it interesting that you've indicted the O-line for Brooks' failures as well. The Saints went 8-8 this season. In their 8 losses, he was sacked 16 times. In their 8 wins, he was sacked 25 times. So, the measure of sacks does not seem to correlate at all to the Saints' win/loss record.Meanwhile, when the Saints lost, Brooks threw six more INTs (11 v. 5 in wins), threw one less TD (10 v. 11 in wins), completed only 54% of his passes (compared to 60% in wins), and posted a 68.4 QB rating (compared to 93.4 in wins).Seems to me, Brooks' performance is more the barometer of his team's failures than his O-line.Oh, and he is still not a "great" quarterback.

 

[Marc Levin]

Plus, no matter how you try to cut it, none of the OL, defense, Jim Haslett, or receiver drops account for some of the straight up bone-head plays Brooks has made over the last couple of years - and especially this past year - and especially in 2nd or 3rd and long.I seriously wonder how anyone can defend Brooks as a "great" quarterback given some of the decisions he has made - the comment that started this thread is simply one more in a string of on and off the field incidents that show Brooks does not have his head in the game. Those types of things are acceptable from "great" QBs on occasion - but throws in the dirt 10 yards in front of an open receiver from the 50 are NOT the marks of a great QB. Guys like Brady, Manning, Green, Culpepper, etc have 4 or 5 of those a year - maybe. Brooks seemed to be averaging a couple of those a game at one point this season.Also, if he DID have his head in the game and was a "great" QB (which contains the element of being a team leader and field general), he'd have never said what he said, and he certainly wouldn't have made a ton of the bonehead plays I saw from him this year that rank right up there with Favre's forward lateral on Sunday.Anyone can have a bad game or make a bad decision - for a 6 to 8 game stretch this year you could count on at least 3 simply jaw dropping plays from Brooks - and not the good jaw dropping, the jaw dropping where you say "I can't believe I just saw an NFL quarterback do that."

 

[guderian]

Brooks History Lesson:

A couple years ago (2002) Brooks was injured (throwing shoulder)and Haslett denied it. The Saints just needed to win one of three games against weak competition to make the playoffs. At the time the fans loved Brooks because he led us to a division championship and playoff win in 2001. Still, it was obvious that he was injured and many fans felt that an OK performance by Delhomme would have secured at least one win. Haslett opted to go with Brooks to avoid any QB controversy with the local boy and protect Brooks' ego. The Saints lost all 3 games on a dismal performance by Brooks (48% completion percentage) and missed out on the playoffs--so much for protecting his ego.

At the point that Haslett made that decision the Saints were 27-19 under him with one playoff win. Since that time they are 16-19 with no playoff appearances and they haven't been the same since.

This was when the criticism of Brooks started to heat up and when he followed up 2002 with 11 fumbles in 2003 his lackadaiscal nature and laughing off of miscues the criticism became white hot. Couple that with an 8-8 season while Delhomme led Carolina to the Superbowl and Brooks had begun to wear out his welcome in New Orleans.

The Saints coaching staff tried to protect Brooks again during the middle of 2003. The went as far as to hold a film session with the local media to point out how many of the faults and errors were the blame of other players and not Brooks. This again backfired.

From time-to-time some of the members of the team would question Brooks. This started when some felt that Jeff Blake didn't get a fair shot after his injury. Now, the coaching staff had played up Brooks as the golden boy while scapegoating some of the other members of the team.

Many of the fans first lost their love for Brooks because of his attitude and laughing off of miscues. Then Brooks--who has never been held accountable for his mistakes--started to blame the fans for the team losing. Now the marriage, IMO is beyond repair. Perhaps Brooks can do better if he goes to another team. However, having been in many other stadiums and lived in other NFL cities, I don't think the media glare will be any less hot or antagonistic elsewhere.

 

[Pskov1420]

The Saints coaching staff tried to protect Brooks again during the middle of 2003. The went as far as to hold a film session with the local media to point out how many of the faults and errors were the blame of other players and not Brooks. This again backfired.

That the Saints would even think of doing this shows what a pathetic organisation they have become.

 

[cobalt_27]

The Saints coaching staff tried to protect Brooks again during the middle of 2003. The went as far as to hold a film session with the local media to point out how many of the faults and errors were the blame of other players and not Brooks. This again backfired.

That the Saints would even think of doing this shows what a pathetic organisation they have become.

I'm beginning to seriously consider the prospect that Imprisoned Saints Fan is actually Tom Benson.

 

[Bri]

I don't wanna hijack but I'd love to know if any of these Brooks fanatics would mind going with Bouman and getting a #1 for Brooks. I loved Bouman when he played in Minny, he's been relatively silent since. Curious what you saint fans think.If there's a way you could add a sentence here or there and not hijack.....thanks

 

[Gr00vus]

Through Fouts' first five seasons he threw for a total of 7600 yards, 34 TDs, 57 int.Through his next 10 he averaged 3500, 22/19.

"I was a human turnover." -- Dan Fouts, in this interesting article

thread hijack:Great article. I miss the old days of wide open offenses - now I know why they're gone. Even the Rams of recent years aren't like that - they're pretty much all about getting the ball out as quick as you can and getting the yac.

 

[8623]

I'm beginning to seriously consider the prospect that Imprisoned Saints Fan is actually Tom Benson.

And I'm beginning to think you're a bigger stupid ### than I had you pegged for.And believe me, that would be an accomplishment.

 

[8623]

I don't wanna hijack but I'd love to know if any of these Brooks fanatics would mind going with Bouman and getting a #1 for Brooks. I loved Bouman when he played in Minny, he's been relatively silent since. Curious what you saint fans think.If there's a way you could add a sentence here or there and not hijack.....thanks

Bouman is the same player as Brooks. Athletic, big arm, not necessarily the most cerebral guy, struggles with touch passes sometimes.Wouldn't make much of a difference, but fans such as cobalt and gueridan would be more accepting of him for sure.

 

[cobalt_27]

I don't wanna hijack but I'd love to know if any of these Brooks fanatics would mind going with Bouman and getting a #1 for Brooks. I loved Bouman when he played in Minny, he's been relatively silent since. Curious what you saint fans think.If there's a way you could add a sentence here or there and not hijack.....thanks

Bouman is the same player as Brooks. Athletic, big arm, not necessarily the most cerebral guy, struggles with touch passes sometimes.Wouldn't make much of a difference, but fans such as cobalt and gueridan would be more accepting of him for sure.

Nah, I think Brooks is probably in Bouman's league.

 

[Bojang0301]

Brooks throwing the ball backwards is the absolute worst thing I have ever seen in football.

 

[guderian]

I don't wanna hijack but I'd love to know if any of these Brooks fanatics would mind going with Bouman and getting a #1 for Brooks. I loved Bouman when he played in Minny, he's been relatively silent since. Curious what you saint fans think.If there's a way you could add a sentence here or there and not hijack.....thanks

Bouman is the same player as Brooks. Athletic, big arm, not necessarily the most cerebral guy, struggles with touch passes sometimes.Wouldn't make much of a difference, but fans such as cobalt and gueridan would be more accepting of him for sure.

Nah, I think Brooks is probably in Bouman's league.

ISF can't go a page without telling me what I think or how I'd react. I also noticed that his new signature went right out the window on his first post in the thread.

 

[8623]

I also noticed that his new signature went right out the window on his first post in the thread.

He insulted me first, I insulted him back. I never said I wouldn't retaliate.

 

[guderian]

I don't wanna hijack but I'd love to know if any of these Brooks fanatics would mind going with Bouman and getting a #1 for Brooks. I loved Bouman when he played in Minny, he's been relatively silent since. Curious what you saint fans think.If there's a way you could add a sentence here or there and not hijack.....thanks

Bouman struggled during preseason. I'd be very concerned if we were forced to go with him for any reason. He did do well in Minnesota though, but he was almost bumped to third string here behind JT O'Sullivan after the preseason.

 

[8623]

ISF can't go a page without telling me what I think or how I'd react.

Pot, meet kettle.

 

[valhallan]

The Saints coaching staff tried to protect Brooks again during the middle of 2003. The went as far as to hold a film session with the local media to point out how many of the faults and errors were the blame of other players and not Brooks. This again backfired.

That the Saints would even think of doing this shows what a pathetic organisation they have become.

Become? That would imply they were, at some point, not pathetic.

 

[Cojones]

Great arm + velocity + sometimes accuracy <> talent"Talent" seems to be tossed around as a synonym for physical ability. I think there is more to "talent" than being able to toss a ball. Like maybe being able to toss a slippery ball!

 

[cobalt_27]

FROM AARON BROOKS:

"I'm a great quarterback"

FROM IMPRISONED SAINTS FAN:

Brooks said nothing that wasn't the truth...not a single thing said is a misrepresentation of the truth.

I never said he was a "great" quarterback. Please stop lying.

MORE HIGHLIGHTS FROM ISF:

If you disagree with me on this subject, that's fine, but try not to make it personal, and by all means, please refrain from littering the site with snide remarks and rude behavior.

Cut it out with the asinine bullcrap.

You are clearly an idiot and not worth my time.

Could you possibly be ANY more full of crap?

Like I said, I'm done with your idiocy.

You need to learn to read, dude. I can't hold your hand.

You're full of crap.

Learn to read jackass.

You ####ing hypocrite.

Bull####!!!!!!!

If you can't see the difference between the two, you obviously ARE an idiot.

I have no time for that garbage.

And I'm beginning to think you're a bigger stupid ### than I had you pegged for.

Much of this was directed at me. I think the worst thing I called ISF was a "delusional homer." Just find the ISF highlight reel interesting as it comes from a guy pleading everyone to "refrain from littering the site with snide remarks and rude behavior."

 

[8623]

:rotflmao: Somehow I get the feeling that nobody is really buying this crap you're spewing, but I'll be out of town for the next few days so I don't really care.Enjoy yourself.

 

[cobalt_27]

:rotflmao: Somehow I get the feeling that nobody is really buying this crap you're spewing, but I'll be out of town for the next few days so I don't really care.Enjoy yourself.

I don't know what crap it is I'm spewing. I'm simply revisiting the things YOU'VE said. All I've tried to do is get you to clarify your earlier position that Brooks said nothing that wasn't true. This struck me as odd, given that he said he was a "great QB." I thought that must mean YOU thought he was a great QB. You have said, "I never said he was a great QB," which is true. But, you haven't said he isn't, either. So, given that you've said nothing he said was untrue and the fact that you won't say he isn't a great QB, AND the fact that you've either evaded the issue or resorted to name-calling indicates your support for his greatness.Your words are a priceless measure by which I'm sure all have found quite ironic and amusing. I have spewed nothing; I've just stuffed your own words in your face.Enjoy your time out of town.

 

[Marc Levin]

Where is that pissing contest smilie face again?ISP, correct me if I'm wrong, I think you are feeling attacked a bit as one of the lone Brooks defenders, and I think others are feeling like you are not taking a position, but are simply being contrarian on any attacks on Brooks.All that said, I am glad for the offseason as the aggression from the in-season feelings turn into cerebral, if heated, football discussions.

 

[Aaron Rudnicki]

Where is that pissing contest smilie face again?ISP, correct me if I'm wrong, I think you are feeling attacked a bit as one of the lone Brooks defenders, and I think others are feeling like you are not taking a position, but are simply being contrarian on any attacks on Brooks.All that said, I am glad for the offseason as the aggression from the in-season feelings turn into cerebral, if heated, football discussions.

My QB could beat up your QB

 

[Marc Levin]

Where is that pissing contest smilie face again?ISP, correct me if I'm wrong, I think you are feeling attacked a bit as one of the lone Brooks defenders, and I think others are feeling like you are not taking a position, but are simply being contrarian on any attacks on Brooks.All that said, I am glad for the offseason as the aggression from the in-season feelings turn into cerebral, if heated, football discussions.

My QB could beat up your QB

What would he do?Take out his dentures and gum me to death?LOL!

 

[Jason Wood]

In reading the selected quotes from ISF highlighted on the last page, I kept having visions of Ignatius J. Reilly. Classic.

 

[guderian]

...Much of this was directed at me. I think the worst thing I called ISF was a "delusional homer." Just find the ISF highlight reel interesting as it comes from a guy pleading everyone to "refrain from littering the site with snide remarks and rude behavior."

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...oned+saints+fanThat's a link to a thread on this topic about a year ago. Here is an excerpt from from the guy who claims "I have not, and will not ever, initiate name calling and condescension simply because of a difference of opinion.":

It's amazing the amount of people on a website such as this who truly do not understand what football is all about.

BTW, that was his first post in the thread. His second post he calls the anti-Brooks crowd racist:

I can't help but think that things might be a lot different if Brooks was a white guy from Mississippi.

Third post:

Thanks for that most excellent prediction, Miss Cleo

By his fourth post he was in full stride:

Gee, you're acting like a know-it-all jackass.

Saints fans are a strange bunch. You just have to try and sort your way through all the garbage and make your own judgements, because by and large, their opinions are generally worthless.

This was his very first post in reference to me:

And don't even bother with that other crap. I've been a fan since I was about 6 years old, so that that #### and stick it where the sun don't shine.

 

[cobalt_27]

In reading the selected quotes from ISF highlighted on the last page, I kept having visions of Ignatius J. Reilly. Classic.

Call this thread "The Mockery of a Dunce."

 

[Jason Wood]

Hey Guys,This thread (like SO many Saints threads) has officially devolved into a tet-a-tet between one very vocal Brooks defender and a group of Brooks bashers. I think it's best to end it. I'm sure this conversation will rise again over the coming months, so no loss one way or the other.Woodrow