A Honest Look At Haslett/Brooks (‘00-‘04) (1 Viewer)

Joined
Aug 2, 1997
Messages
2,357
Reaction score
1,318
Location
PDX!
Offline
Brooks and Haslett should always receive respect for getting us our 1st playoff win, especially Brooks b/c Brooks' best WR (Joe Horn) got hurt on like the 2nd or 3rd play of the game and Ricky Williams was still out with an injury (Terry Allen's corpse was our RB1 in that playoff game) and we were playing the defending Super Bowl champs. With all those obstacles, Brooks still outplayed Kurt Warner. Willie Jackson also deserves more remembrance than he seems to get for his 3 TD game that day, too.

The thing that sticks in my craw about the era as a whole is after 2000 the team and Brooks both seemed to have so much potential but they never realized it. In 2002, we should have made the playoffs but Brooks was laboring with a shoulder injury and Haslett refused to put in Delhomme (a mistake I attribute to Haslett - if Brooks begs out, everyone would say Brooks was soft). That 3-game stretch to close out 2002 (losing to MIN on a game-ending 2 point conversion Culpepper initially fumbled and kicked around the backfield, losing to a then 1-win CIN team, then losing at home to a bad CAR team) was truly one of the most miserable stretches of football for me as a Saints fan. 2001 also saw the team completely no show the final 3 games of the season when a playoff birth was still quite possible. And yeah, Brooks after that often failed the eye test - he seemed erratic, prone to poor decisions.

All this said, I'd still rank Brooks above Bobby Hebert in my Saints QB list (Bobby had 3 chances to win a playoff game in the Dome and failed each time). In 2015 or 16, Brooks was a guest at a Saints game and some people actually booed him when he was introduced. That was ridiculous. He's still always and forever the QB who won us our first playoff game and he'll always get a polite round of applause from me when he returns to the Dome.

VERY well said!



NW.
 

USM_BlackAndGold

Veteran Starter
Joined
Apr 27, 2015
Messages
365
Reaction score
698
Location
Hattiesburg, MS
Offline
Well we did have a little success under them. BUT, towards the end, Brooks would just be smiling or giggling after some of his interceptions, like he just didn't care. Haslett very much looked like he didn't want to be there, looked lost, inept, and pretty much just hating his life when you saw him on the sidelines. Both of them drove me nuts. Basically their time here can best be described as a large firework being lit and taking off towards the sky, but ultimately just being a dud. Disappointing, and Katrina finished them off. After all the success we've had since then, it's easy to look back on the 2000-2004 time frame and bad mouth it, but it's important to remember how clueless this franchise was during the Ditka era. I mean.....Heath Shuler, Danny Wuerffel, the Billy Joe's? Oof.
 
Last edited:
OP
Saint Jack

Saint Jack

Super Forum Fanatic
VIP Contributor
Joined
May 11, 2010
Messages
11,427
Reaction score
20,201
Location
Marrero
Online
Archie was a good qb on a crap team. Brooks was a crap QB on an otherwise good team. At least at times.
I’d argue that Archie’s legacy has become a little inflated because he was really the only player of note for around 40 years.
If you take out the Katrina year, Brooks has a winning record as Saints QB.
And even if you include 05, Aaron beats Archie in wins, 38 vs 35, and winning percentage .463 vs .283.
 

fishing4food

Veteran Starter
Joined
Mar 18, 2013
Messages
922
Reaction score
1,726
Offline
The Jim Haslett era ended when Kyle Turdley pulled a helmet off the opposing teams' player and threw it. Everything fell apart after that game.
 

lavered

Pro-Bowler
Gold VIP Contributor
Joined
Oct 2, 2004
Messages
727
Reaction score
362
Location
NC by way of Algiers
Offline
Haslett did not want a QB controversy. I lost all respect when Jake Delhomme pulled out a win and looked good doing it. Brooks was injured (shoulder) and instead of letting Jake play, Haslett put in an obviously injured Brooks. We lost, if I remember correctly, the next four games and were out of the playoffs. Haslett's hard head. It angered Delhomme so much he wanted out and went to the Panthers and led them to the Super Bowl. Didn't win, but he got them there. That's my take.
 

Paul

Professional
Joined
Oct 20, 2004
Messages
17,417
Reaction score
14,145
Age
45
Offline
Haslett did not instill discipline in his teams and he, himself, lacked the leadership qualities and discipline needed to successfully lead a team. It was evident in their play on the field, in their attitudes, and the waste of potential, especially with Brooks. AB had the talent to be a long-term starting QB in the league, but he lacked discipline and I am not sure if he really wanted to be in it for the long haul. I enjoyed watching him play and we had some great moments with him and Haslett, but there was more waste than reward with them.
 

Booker

All-Pro
Joined
Aug 27, 2006
Messages
3,770
Reaction score
7,447
Age
47
Location
Littleton, CO
Online
Brooks was frustrating because he could look like a hall of famer one week, and then play like hot garbage the next, but I think Haslett bears responsibility for those teams shortcomings, and really for not pushing Brooks to be a better quarterback by accepting inconsistency from the position.

Naming Brooks the starter in 2001 was fine, I thought he earned it, but he was up and down and should have been benched during the four game losing streak at the end of the season. His play fell off a cliff, but instead of holding him accountable they committed to him with a big contract extension.

Then, when his play fell off after his shoulder injury late the next season against Tampa, Haslett kept playing him to avoid a quarterback controversy with Delhomme since they had committed big money to Brooks -- which just made things worse when they closed out the season with three straight losses. And then Delhomme signed with Carolina and rode that defense to the Super Bowl the next year, which just made things worse.

But there were a lot of bad decisions made during that time that had nothing to do with the quarterback position (Tebucky Jones, anyone?).
 

Day1

AA, XR, 602
Joined
Oct 22, 2009
Messages
3,043
Reaction score
4,619
Location
The Burg of Hattie, MS
Offline
I thought after the Brooks playoff win the braintrust tried too hard to make him think on the field instead of letting him play loose. The home game vs. Atlanta in 2001, which the Saints lost, stands out in my mind. Brooks rolled out, scans the field, and has 30 yards of daylight in front of him. Didn't run, almost like they had a shock collar on him. When he came in for Blake and lead the team to some memorable wins (SF on the road and 2/3 vs Rams. Wow!) Brooks played like he had nothing to lose. He was later over-coached.
 

OneSaintsFan

Want to Be in that Number
Joined
Aug 11, 2005
Messages
874
Reaction score
896
Offline
When you win a franchise's first playoff victory, you're never going to be underrated by those fans.

He turned the tide when that SF lineman bounced off of him and he hit Jackson to complete the comeback victory over SF. Old Saints before, New Saints (forever?) after.
 

Madmarsha

I default to sarcasm
VIP Contributor
Joined
Oct 11, 2006
Messages
35,577
Reaction score
50,502
Offline
The thing that sticks in my craw about the era as a whole is after 2000 the team and Brooks both seemed to have so much potential but they never realized it. In 2002, we should have made the playoffs but Brooks was laboring with a shoulder injury and Haslett refused to put in Delhomme (a mistake I attribute to Haslett - if Brooks begs out, everyone would say Brooks was soft). That 3-game stretch to close out 2002 (losing to MIN on a game-ending 2 point conversion Culpepper initially fumbled and kicked around the backfield, losing to a then 1-win CIN team, then losing at home to a bad CAR team) was truly one of the most miserable stretches of football for me as a Saints fan. 2001 also saw the team completely no show the final 3 games of the season when a playoff birth was still quite possible. And yeah, Brooks after that often failed the eye test - he seemed erratic, prone to poor decisions.
This, this, and all this ... and even more THIS. Even in realtime I thought this. We needed to win, IIRC, only ONE game. I just think that's the most pathetic epic fail in the annals of failing. (I'm also just going to throw in that they tried to make AB be a more rahrah leader -- which just didn't suit his personality -- instead of letting him be more himself).

But then add in hindsight what Delhomme went on to do with our most hated [at the time] division rival when WE had him on our bench LITERALLY for a couple years.
 
OP
Saint Jack

Saint Jack

Super Forum Fanatic
VIP Contributor
Joined
May 11, 2010
Messages
11,427
Reaction score
20,201
Location
Marrero
Online
When you win a franchise's first playoff victory, you're never going to be underrated by those fans.

He turned the tide when that SF lineman bounced off of him and he hit Jackson to complete the comeback victory over SF. Old Saints before, New Saints (forever?) after.
I consider two eras of Saints football. The first was Meacom when the team was ran by a trust fund kid and the Benson era. And they are totally different. Like night and day.
 

Madmarsha

I default to sarcasm
VIP Contributor
Joined
Oct 11, 2006
Messages
35,577
Reaction score
50,502
Offline
I thought after the Brooks playoff win the braintrust tried too hard to make him think on the field instead of letting him play loose.
Exactly. Another good example of just messing with his head.
 

Create an account or login to comment

You must be a member in order to leave a comment

Create account

Create an account on our community. It's easy!

Log in

Already have an account? Log in here.

Users who are viewing this thread

 

New Orleans Saints Twitter Feed

 

Headlines

Top Bottom