Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Aaron Brooks to be a FA (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Z-Dog
- Start date
saintfool
Dead sexy
brooks did nothing to shake the aura of inadequacy he has. some of it was his fault but the raiders share in the bame too. he's not a starter, i think. he backs up someone who is shaky. miami maybe, if harrington leaves? how sweet the irony if he backed up delhomme in carolina!
ICON211
Footballguy
I am fine with getting rid of Brooks, but I hope this means the Raiders are prepared to hand the reins to Russell immediately or sign someone else. The only thing worse than starting off the season with Brooks at QB is starting the season with Walter under center. Andrew Walter is a younger version of Kerry Collins or Drew Bledsoe, probably a bit worse though.
DA RAIDERS
Footballguy
i had this thought as well. but he would have to be released by denver as i don't see us making any kind of deal with them. i would rather see almost anyone other than statue walters under center.
no because garcia clearly wants to be a starter and that's not gonna happen(assuming oakland drafts rusell) also considering garcia's age he isn't a long term solution
Buckgooner
Footballguy
LOL... Garcia + Moss = Lots of fun for us!
Kit Fisto
Footballguy
Denver?Oh sorry, wrong position...
Last edited by a moderator:
TheGreatest
Footballguy
I think Brad Johnson will be a good fit.
TheGreatest
Footballguy
Brad Johnson-QB- Vikings Feb. 14 - 1:31 am et The Vikings are expected to cut Brad Johnson and Fred Smoot by March.Both players have roster bonuses due early next month. Minnesota is also evaluating the future of Jim Kleinsasser, due $2.9 million in 2007.
Yitbos69
Footballguy
I agree that Garcia is not a long term fix but I could see him as the starter and Russell coming in learning the system and then Russell takes over late 2007 or the start of 2008
massraider
Footballguy
I could too. But I don't think Jeff Garcia could see it at all.
LHUCKS
Footballguy
If I was him I'd go to a place where he could compete for a starting job...there are several.
Ron_Mexico
I Love Doggies
I think every GM in the NFL realizes that Brooks is nothing more than a backup for the remainder of his career.
LHUCKS
Footballguy
Is Charlie Fry the second coming? How about Gradkowski? Aaron Campbell?
Ron_Mexico
I Love Doggies
Browns - I'll take Frye over Brooks eight days a week. If they want to give up on Frye andbegin to groom a younger QB, ie Brady Quinn, I suggest going after Garcia, definately NOT Brooks.TBay - Chris Simms has a lock on the starting job.Washington - Jason Campbell has just been brought in and has been performing well,why would Washington mess with his confidence at this point ?Brooks has shown he is a poor decision makerand does not deserve a starting gig in the NFL.This is painfully obvious, year after year.
LHUCKS
Footballguy
simply not true.Here is Brooks' career before Oakland
Code:
+---------------------------------------+-----------------+ | Passing | Rushing |+----------+-----+---------------------------------------+-----------------+| Year TM | G | Comp Att PCT YD Y/A TD INT | Att Yards TD |+----------+-----+---------------------------------------+-----------------+| 2000 nor | 8 | 113 194 58.2 1514 7.8 9 6 | 41 170 2 || 2001 nor | 16 | 312 558 55.9 3832 6.9 26 22 | 80 358 1 || 2002 nor | 16 | 283 528 53.6 3572 6.8 27 15 | 61 256 2 || 2003 nor | 16 | 306 518 59.1 3546 6.8 24 8 | 54 175 2 || 2004 nor | 16 | 309 542 57.0 3810 7.0 21 16 | 58 173 4 || 2005 nor | 13 | 240 431 55.7 2882 6.7 13 17 | 45 281 2 |
Last edited by a moderator:
SammyJankis
Footballguy
Kip Dynamite
Footballguy
Brooks wouldn't make my flag football team.
Ron_Mexico
I Love Doggies
These stats are OLD.Time moves quickly in the NFL as well all know.His best years seem to be 3 years behind him.I guess I should have qualified my statementby saying that the past 2 years have been dismal.And he shows no signs of his 2002 / 2003 performances.For an interesting comparison, put Drew Brees Saints numbers from 2006and Aaron Brooks Saints numbers from 2005 side by side.
Mediocrity
Footballguy
Yeah, the whole sit on the bench and make millions shtick has to suck.
LHUCKS
Footballguy
totally different personnel and totally different coaching staffs. That being said I do believe Brees is one of the top QBs in the NFL.
Last edited by a moderator:
Ron_Mexico
I Love Doggies
I don't think you can campare the two.Garcia is a more intelligent decision maker.I wrote Brooks off long ago,and I haven't lost a wink of sleep yet.
LHUCKS
Footballguy
so a QB that is capable of the year below in year four of his career can't do that in years 7 or 8?
Code:
+---------------------------------------+-----------------+ | Passing | Rushing |+----------+-----+---------------------------------------+-----------------+| Year TM | G | Comp Att PCT YD Y/A TD INT | Att Yards TD |+----------+-----+---------------------------------------+-----------------+| 2003 nor | 16 | 306 518 59.1 3546 6.8 24 8 | 54 175 2 |Cleveland would be a nice home for him. He can throw a nice deep ball and both Winslow and Edwards can "break your back" with a long catch. They could draft Peterson and....major improvement in the O.
If you guys wanna say he won't win the games that matter, will choke when games are close, or whatever that's your prerogative but the Browns' fans haven't been in meaningful games in a long time.
IF IF He could get them to play in meaningful games, then they hit the FA market the next year for a QB that can.
Romeo's likely gone after this year, why not let him chuck it around for a year
If you guys wanna say he won't win the games that matter, will choke when games are close, or whatever that's your prerogative but the Browns' fans haven't been in meaningful games in a long time.
IF IF He could get them to play in meaningful games, then they hit the FA market the next year for a QB that can.
Romeo's likely gone after this year, why not let him chuck it around for a year
Ron_Mexico
I Love Doggies
Yes, without hesitation.Look at his QB ratings since that year....88.879.570.061.7Looks like a QB on the decline to me.
The last sentence- Is it possible you said that about Garcia(not Brooks) before this past season?I don't think you can campare the two.Garcia is a more intelligent decision maker.I wrote Brooks off long ago,and I haven't lost a wink of sleep yet.
LHUCKS
Footballguy
well, the last two years he was on teams that were in total decline...it's all about the situation for some of these guys.
He just chucks it alot and many years of his career he has locked onto one WR way too much.Are his habits change-able or is he too "old" and set in his ways?
Ron_Mexico
I Love Doggies
Of course it's possible,but we are talking about 2 different QBs,2 different styles.I would rather compare Brooks of 2007 / 2008,which is what this dicussion is about,to the Brooks of recent history, the past 2 or 3 years.And what I see personally, is a backup QB.The last sentence- Is it possible you said that about Garcia(not Brooks) before this past season?I don't think you can campare the two.Garcia is a more intelligent decision maker.I wrote Brooks off long ago,and I haven't lost a wink of sleep yet.
Ron_Mexico
I Love Doggies
There are plenty of excuses,but I think this is an indicator ofa pattern of poor decision making. You latch onto the stats from 2002 and 2003,but you dismiss the stats from recent years, come on LH.
Not to pester you just curious.Why do you think Garcia "got it together" and Brooks can't. Each seemed to have a gap in their career where they wereOf course it's possible,but we are talking about 2 different QBs,2 different styles.I would rather compare Brooks of 2007 / 2008,which is what this dicussion is about,to the Brooks of recent history, the past 2 or 3 years.And what I see personally, is a backup QB.The last sentence- Is it possible you said that about Garcia(not Brooks) before this past season?I don't think you can campare the two.Garcia is a more intelligent decision maker.I wrote Brooks off long ago,and I haven't lost a wink of sleep yet.
but quite good before.You mentioned Garcia's intelligence earlier. Do you think that's why he was able to? Do you think Brooks isn't intelligent("football intelligence")IE Can you expound on that some?
LHUCKS
Footballguy
I'm definitely dismissing 2006 Raiders stats for all players, not just for Brooks...the freaking O-coordinator had been out of the NFL for several years as a rancher for the love of Christ.Is it troubling that Brooks hasn't had a good year in the last two years, sure. Am I going to write him off, No.There are plenty of excuses,but I think this is an indicator ofa pattern of poor decision making. You latch onto the stats from 2002 and 2003,but you dismiss the stats from recent years, come on LH.
Last edited by a moderator:
Ron_Mexico
I Love Doggies
The Semi-Pro Merced Raiders
just wrote him off.
This does not bode well for his 2007 starting QB hopes.
Bottom line is he has shown that
he no longer posesses the intangibles
to be a starting QB in the NFL, and I'm
certain that most if not all GMs realize this.
imo....
Brooks = = Backup
just wrote him off.
This does not bode well for his 2007 starting QB hopes.
Bottom line is he has shown that
he no longer posesses the intangibles
to be a starting QB in the NFL, and I'm
certain that most if not all GMs realize this.
imo....
Brooks =
= Backup
msommer
Footballguy
The knock on Brooks has been two things 1) that he just doesn't seem smart enough (they had to simplify the playbook in NO more than once for him, and as late as the last offseason he had there) and 2) that he just doesn't seem to care in the game situation - joking on the sideline when he just threw a horrible INT.These were the reasons I stayed away from Brooks when moving to OAK and they will be the reasons I stay away from him in his future gig. Now does an NFL GM see things the same way? Hard to tell, Harrington got another shot but he is younger and seemingly more serious on the sideline.Not to pester you just curious.Why do you think Garcia "got it together" and Brooks can't. Each seemed to have a gap in their career where they wereOf course it's possible,but we are talking about 2 different QBs,2 different styles.I would rather compare Brooks of 2007 / 2008,which is what this dicussion is about,to the Brooks of recent history, the past 2 or 3 years.And what I see personally, is a backup QB.The last sentence- Is it possible you said that about Garcia(not Brooks) before this past season?I don't think you can campare the two.Garcia is a more intelligent decision maker.I wrote Brooks off long ago,and I haven't lost a wink of sleep yet.
messinwithu
Footballguy
Brooks stats for 2005 were not good but that was the hurricane year when they played no home games. The entire team suffered and his stats took a hit. Has there ever been a starting QB that had to lead his team without a home game? The entire year was messed up for the city and certainly the football team. I also did not like the previous coaching staff in NO = delete 2005.
As some have said 2006 with the Raiders should not be considered I do agree with that = delete 2006.
If you delete 2005 and 2006 stats and remove his name and just look at the stats I would say that you are looking at a decent QB. Prior to 2005 he never had a season with more Int's than TD's. Looking at 2004 stats he was not too bad, his interceptions were up some 21TD/16Int but with his 4 rushing TD's he was not terrible.
| 2000 nor | 8 | 113 194 58.2 1514 7.8 9 6 | 41 170 2 |
| 2001 nor | 16 | 312 558 55.9 3832 6.9 26 22 | 80 358 1 |
| 2002 nor | 16 | 283 528 53.6 3572 6.8 27 15 | 61 256 2 |
| 2003 nor | 16 | 306 518 59.1 3546 6.8 24 8 | 54 175 2 |
| 2004 nor | 16 | 309 542 57.0 3810 7.0 21 16 | 58 173 4 |
107 TD's
67 INT's
I am not saying they should bench Payton for him but I think he could make a great backup and there are some teams that might be able to upgrade if they had him start for them.
FWIW - I have a co-worker that is a big NO fan and he hates Brooks, hated the decisions he made in tough spots and would want nothing to do with him.
As some have said 2006 with the Raiders should not be considered I do agree with that = delete 2006.
If you delete 2005 and 2006 stats and remove his name and just look at the stats I would say that you are looking at a decent QB. Prior to 2005 he never had a season with more Int's than TD's. Looking at 2004 stats he was not too bad, his interceptions were up some 21TD/16Int but with his 4 rushing TD's he was not terrible.
| 2000 nor | 8 | 113 194 58.2 1514 7.8 9 6 | 41 170 2 |
| 2001 nor | 16 | 312 558 55.9 3832 6.9 26 22 | 80 358 1 |
| 2002 nor | 16 | 283 528 53.6 3572 6.8 27 15 | 61 256 2 |
| 2003 nor | 16 | 306 518 59.1 3546 6.8 24 8 | 54 175 2 |
| 2004 nor | 16 | 309 542 57.0 3810 7.0 21 16 | 58 173 4 |
107 TD's
67 INT's
I am not saying they should bench Payton for him but I think he could make a great backup and there are some teams that might be able to upgrade if they had him start for them.
FWIW - I have a co-worker that is a big NO fan and he hates Brooks, hated the decisions he made in tough spots and would want nothing to do with him.
Last edited by a moderator:
T Man
Footballguy
Listen to your friend! Numbers do not always tell the story. Brooks played with no passion. He made bad decisions under pressure. He could not hang on to the ball. New Orleans had offensive fire power in the years of Brooks (Horn, Deuce, even Ricky). He just continued to make bad decisions at inopportune times that cost the team -- and with a weak defense, the team could not afford such blunders. Much of Brooks yardage was garbage time -- even if garbage time started in the second quarter due to his earlier turnovers putting NO in a big hole.
messinwithu
Footballguy
The funny thing was that when I told him the actual #'s TD to INT's (107/67) prior to the 2005 season he was shocked. He thought that he would have had more INT's than TD's. Just pulled some starting QB career stats up
Frye 14TD - 23 INT
Simms 12TD - 17 INT
Smith 17TD - 27 INT
Carr 59TD - 65 INT
Plummer 161TD - 161 INT
Leinart 11TD - 12 INT (far greater WR talent than Brooks ever had)
Again prior to 2005 Brooks didn't have one year where his INT's were higher than TD's
I just find it strange that Brooks numbers look good compared to other starting QB's in the league yet he has made bad decisions. I am not sure about the fumble #'s so there is certainly an opportunity for more turnovers there but passing numbers are very good. I did see some games but I didn't see that many games so I am more looking at numbers and getting the info from NO fans. I was never a fan of the NO coaching staff either.
Brooks first 5 years TD/INT ratio of 1.597 TD for every INT is good when comparing that to other good QB's in their first 5 years. I doubt there are 10 starting QB's that had a better 1st 5 years? Not enough time to check but I looked up Pennington - NO, Leftwich - NO, P Manning - NO, Brady - Yes, Hasselbeck - Yes. I am surprised that he did as good as he did with the WR's that he had. I like Horn and he was a top player at that time but the team was not strong with other WR's or TE's during that time was it?
Jeff Pasquino
Footballguy
I think Brooks might back up McNair.
TheFanatic
Footballguy
Al Davis does NOT start rookie QB's. That will never happen unless a serious injury occurs.
I was referring to the raiders resigning brooks, but I suppose it's possible the vike will resign johnson
