latest joke of a column by william c.

Wrong. He also wrote that the GMs he talked to thought Brooks was above average.

 

The joke is that Rhoden is an ignorant buffoon. If Brooks was great he'd be playing. If he could play better, he'd be playing. If sports in America teaches us anything, it's that performance trumps everything. Crack heads get third chances. Kill someone? Can you still sack the QB? Come on back. Did you beat your coach? Can you still do a crossover and score from 15 feet? Come on back. Did you cheat? Can you still play? Come on back.

NO ONE gives a shit what Aaron Brooks ever said, not at the time and not now. Another attempt by Rhoden to relieve a man of the responsibility for his own life by blaming larger, darker and more sinister forces. WHAT AN ASSHOLE.

 

yeah, i believe that one, too.

 

Why the use of anonymous sources on this one? Brooks is not on a roster so he's not subject to tampering rules, so why wouldn't a GM go on record as stating Aaron Brooks is an above average QB? Is Rhoden lying about this? Where's the sources? Did the Times fact checkers call and get confirmation? Even if Rhoden is to be believed, the fact that a GM can't be quoted as giving this opinion, makes it highly suspect.

There are 36 quaterbacks who have a QB rating and attempted more than 60 passes in the NFL.
For the sake of Argument lets call the median the average and that would make an 84 QB rating the average rating so far this season with Jay Cutler being at 84.2 and Philip Rivers being at 83.8.

Some below average QBs so far this season, Eli Manning, Steve McNair, Drew Brees, Vince Young.

Above average QBs this season McNabb, Anderson, Palmer, Kitna.

So BULL SHIT on Rhoden, no GM would want to be quoted as saying Aaron Brooks is an above average QB because it would show they are as ignorant as him. BTW one GM that Rhoden regularly talks to is the Giants GM, and the Giants were in search of a 2nd and 3rd string QB, they went with Anthony Wright and Jared Lorenzen. Those guys are better Brooks.

Brooks maybe an above average QB if the universe of QBs consists of only those players not holding a signed NFL or CFL contract.

 

Jeff George, Curt Flood, and Jim Bouton will agree to disagree with you.

 

Why is Gary Sheffield on a major league roster?
In sports terms Flood and Bouton played biblical generations ago.

Jeff George was given lots-o-chances. 5 teams over 12 years and was a better player than Brooks. The only thing that the NFL holds against Brooks is his ability and talent, not any criticism he leveled against the NFL 2 years ago.

 

Doesn't mean the others did not have something held against them for non-football/baseball reasons.

So?

 

Honestly, how many people were even aware of Brooks' Saints/Katrina comments? I wasn't, and I doubt many others were either. I'm fairly certain this has more to do with his awful play his last couple seasons than anything else. But Rhoden always has to look for conspiracy, evil intent, and someone else to blame for everything.

However, assuming that Rhoden's right, so what? He's not claiming its b/c of race, he's claiming its because of a history publicly ripping his employer, which is a legally valid reason for a team to decide against signing someone. If a team has a choice between two similarly talented backup QBs, one who's eager and happy to please, another who ripped his last team in the press by basically calling them heartless bastards, which one does Rhoden think they're gonna lean toward?

And it would hardly make Brooks alone. Jeff George was certainly still better than most of the league's backup QBs (and several starters) when he suddenly could no longer find a job a few years ago. He was essentially blackballed only b/c of a rep as a malcontent, and the same applies to many other players whose careers ended years before they should have for reasons that had nothing to do with their game.

 

What Sheffield's existence on a Major League roster indicates is that regardless of the irrationality, stupidity or controversial comments one may make, it's ability and talent that puts you on the roster. Brooks isn't playing because there are arguably 90 better QBs. Could someGMs be mistaken and Brooks may be the 87th best QB? Sure. But it's not because he may have said something to hurt someone's feelings 2 years ago.

And given Rhoden's track record, the only reason he wrote about Brooks is because he's a black QB, which is his version of a black Phd recipient.

 

If Sheffield were average instead of HoF caliber, he wouldn't sniff a roster.

 

I don't think Brooks' Katrina comments have much to do with his being out of a job, but something must be up. The Panthers brought back 107-year-old Vinny Testaverde and the Jags just signed Todd Bouman, who's 35 -- four years older than Brooks -- and has never accomplished a damn thing in the NFL. I have a hard time believing that picking those guys over Brooks were purely football decisions. Rhoden might not have the right answer, but he's asking a valid question.

 

Brooks was a baby, first and foremost. It's been two years since Katrina, and the Saints, Brooks, and Jim Haslett, can't blame the hurricane on their current situations. Brooks whined like a fucking baby so much, the Saints were better off landing Brees and letting him go. Brooks made no effort to improve his play, rather to chuck it up for grabs.

Post-Katrina can cause psychological and emotional stress after the fact. Haslett quit (on the team IMO), and with Payton coming in, Brees was available and they seized on it. The Raiders are a mess, and Brooks didn't help improve their lot. It actually showed how much he did not improve and when given a chance to prove himself, he didn't.

Al Sharpton could have written a better column about race than Rhoden could.