goleafsgo96 wrote:Brady has 11 more points than Brooks, thats an average of 1.1 over the 10 games theyve played so far. We had a huge argument on it where all the points were brought up, theres no reason to bring up every single point again, stick it out and watch the rest of the season, then we'll bring it up.
Or how about we don't bring up any x vs z threads that were debated to death in the preseason. The same arguments will be made. Some people are religious fanatics about ff. No one is gonna change their mind... and to be honest, no one should do a complete flip flop based on one season's worth of work.
Oh... in the MIKL (25/4 fractional scoring), Brooks is 3.46 FP ahead of Brady... So what was the point of bring this thread up declaring Brady better again?
And to go over your list of points.
1) Brooks has better top end receiving weapons (Horn >> Givens, Deuce >> Dillon). As McNabb and Culpepper have shown, you only need ONE to be the best, not that there's anything wrong with several above average ones.
2) Prove one is just better than the other.
3) New England executes their plays better, that's for sure.
4) New Orleans defense creates more chances to pass a lot.
5) I'm not sure that's necessarily valid. Carolina has a much worse offense and Delhomme's scoring is right on par with Brady. Houston and Jacksonville's offense are worse than New England, but Carr and Leftwich are (and were) right on par with Brady. In fact, given that New England has probably a top 5 offense in 2004, Brady is middle of the pack as far as fantasy QBs go. One thing I'll give Brady is that his production has been very consistent. Then again, consistency doesn't really carry over year to year, so who knows if you get 2002 Brady or 2004 Brady in 2005.