Derrick Brooks vs. Keith Brooking

What shiver?

Derrick Brooks is in the Cover 2, we rarely go with man coverage. That doesn't make much sense.

I don't even think Atlanta goes zone, but correct me on this because I don't know what kind of defense Atlanta runs besides the fact it is 4-3.

[SuperMcGee]

If you wanna go by stats, Angelo Crowell had 120 total tackles while playing significantly in only 14 games. He also had as many sacks and forced fumbles and one more interception than Brooks. All in his first year starting. But obviously Brooks is a better player. Of course the stat argument has been made already, but I just love Crowell

[Shiver]

Originally Posted by Simms2Clayton

What shiver?

Derrick Brooks is in the Cover 2, we rarely go with man coverage. That doesn't make much sense.

I don't even think Atlanta goes zone, but correct me on this because I don't know what kind of defense Atlanta runs besides the fact it is 4-3.

Worded wrong on my part. He is better in coverage, not just man-to-man, he is more fluid. But Brooking has outproduced Brooks at being a ball-hawk, than post-prime Brooks.

[Boston]

Originally Posted by YoJoeBucsFan

Brooks hands down.

If you're going to say "hands down" and happen to be a bucs fan, explain, or don't post that.

[bofadabizzles]

Originally Posted by Shiver

Yeah, Brooks and that defense were the reason Tampa Bay won those two games. (27 Points, 443 Net Yards, and 24 Points allowed, 281 Net Yards) :roll: Not to mention, Brooks didn't cause the fumble, Dunn's helmet did. It was the O-Line that let Brooks go untouched, forcing Dunn to jump in front of Vick, thus his helmet and the football collided.

No debate from me, over their career, Brooks is much better. But that isn't the question in this thread, nor my point.

The D was the reason we won those games, the first game we had no offense outside of Caddy, we only had 1 or 2 decent drives all game, the Falcons moved the ball up and down the field until it came time to punch it in. Our D was on the field most of the game and each drive some way they came up with a play to keep us in the game.

[cunningham06]

Derrick Brooks of course. Stats aren't everything, often times interceptions are a result of just being in the right place at the right time. That being said Keith Brooking is good in coverage, but he is not Derrick Brooks. Brooks is one of the best coverage OLB's in the NFL. He is more experienced and is more of a team leader than Brooking.

lol Falcons fans are kinding themselves if they actually think Brooking is even in the same class as Brooks let alone better or as good. hahaha I love it, they think Vick is actually a good QB too.

[Shiver]

Originally Posted by GermaineRace

lol I am kidding myself that I actually think I know everything about the game of football. hahaha I love it, nothing like being a pompous know it all.

*fixed

Originally Posted by GermaineRace

lol Falcons fans are kinding themselves if they actually think Brooking is even in the same class as Brooks let alone better or as good. hahaha I love it, they think Vick is actually a good QB too.

[NIN1984]

Its not even close, Derrick Brooks all the way

[A Perfect Score]

Originally Posted by Moses

I'd probaly go with Derrick Brooks if I had one season to win the Super Bowl. He has the experience and talent to lead a defence both physically and mentally. Also, analyzing stats (especially when they're this similar) won't determine who the better player is.

Moses u have to be one of teh smartest posters on here. us canadian boys know our stuff eh? ur totally right, stats dont mean s**t, especially for defense. INTs can jsut be being in thje right place at the right time, then it becomes a tip drill. Anyone can get some of those INTs. Look at Ty Law. 10 INTs last year, but 8 of them dropped right into his hands. Im not knocking brooking, cause i voted for him. just saying stats dont mean jack. The reason i chose brooking is cause derrick brooks plays in a cover 2 defense, which is so differant from any other defense, especially for LB. Im not sure how well he would do in a prototypical defense. But Brooking can play any LB postion in the more traditional 4-3, and im sure hed do fine in a 3-4 as well. I take brooking, not by much, but by the versatility factor.

[scar988]

Originally Posted by A Perfect Score

Moses u have to be one of teh smartest posters on here. us canadian boys know our stuff eh? ur totally right, stats dont mean s**t, especially for defense. INTs can jsut be being in thje right place at the right time, then it becomes a tip drill. Anyone can get some of those INTs. Look at Ty Law. 10 INTs last year, but 8 of them dropped right into his hands. Im not knocking brooking, cause i voted for him. just saying stats dont mean jack. The reason i chose brooking is cause derrick brooks plays in a cover 2 defense, which is so differant from any other defense, especially for LB. Im not sure how well he would do in a prototypical defense. But Brooking can play any LB postion in the more traditional 4-3, and im sure hed do fine in a 3-4 as well. I take brooking, not by much, but by the versatility factor.

Brooking has played all of these in his college and pro career:

4-3 WLB, MLB, SLB
3-4 WILB, SILB

[The Unseen]

I'm torn on this one, but I voted for Brooking because I know that Jack Del Rio would take him. He's a big fan of versatility.

Just because you are versatile, doesn't mean you are more talented.

Troy Brown can play WR, CB, NB, KR, and PR, but that doesn't mean he is better than T.O.

[The Unseen]

Yeah, great comparison there. TO and Troy Brown are close in ability. :roll:

He has versatility at the LB position, which Del Rio is a fan of. That's why I voted for him. I don't know why I have to re-explain something as simple as this.

Originally Posted by The Unseen

Yeah, great comparison there. TO and Troy Brown are close in ability. :roll:

I was making my point. Troy Brown is the most versatile player in the NFL, but he will never be as good as T.O., which means just because you are versatile doesn't make you as valuable, or more valuable, than another player.

[PACKmanN]

Next Season- Derrick Brooks
8 years- Keith Brooking

[The Unseen]

You don't get it then. Troy Brown is a #3 sometimes #2 WR who has played totally different positions. TO is a top-5 #1 receiver. Keith Brooking, even if he is not as good as Derrick, is versatile as a linebacker. Not only that, if he is not as good, it's not by much. Derrick Brooks is the epitome of the WLB in the Tampa 2, and that's probably it.

[Jensen]

Derrick Brooks is the better linebacker right now, but in a couple years it'd be Brooking.

[Jonathan_VIlma]

I'll take Derrick Brooks. The defense revolves around him and the WLB position in general. If he doesn't drop deep enough in coverage then it throws the whole cover 2 zone scheme off. He's been amazing at it and is a clear cut Hall of Famer because of it.

Four more passes defended, and ten more tackles is what most forget. Brookings stats looked better on paper, but I'd bet teams are a lot more hesitant to throw towards Brooks weakside because of the underneath coverage and the depth he gets. That's not to say it's a knock on Brooking, but Brooks is a monster at what he does, with incredible football instincts and game skills.

If the basis is on one year, I'll take Derrick Brooks.

[Jonathan_VIlma]

Originally Posted by PACKmanN

Next Season- Derrick Brooks
8 years- Keith Brooking

Neither will be playing eight years for now, and I doubt Brooking will stack up against Brooks if you're comparing career accolades.

Originally Posted by Jonathan_VIlma

Four more passes defended, and ten more tackles is what most forget. Brookings stats looked better on paper, but I'd bet teams are a lot more hesitant to throw towards Brooks weakside because of the underneath coverage and the depth he gets. That's not to say it's a knock on Brooking, but Brooks is a monster at what he does, with incredible football instincts and game skills.

If the basis is on one year, I'll take Derrick Brooks.

I love this point you make. It is like elite CBs, teams never threw at Deion Sanders for this same reason.

Brooks had a few years where he intercepted 3, 4, 5 balls, but after our Super Bowl year, he had only 1 or 2 because teams finally realized how good he was against the pass.

Originally Posted by Jensen

Derrick Brooks is the better linebacker right now, but in a couple years it'd be Brooking.

Of course, because DB might be retired.

Originally Posted by The Unseen

Derrick Brooks is the epitome of the WLB in the Tampa 2, and that's probably it.

That's probably it? Like saying Anthony Munoz is the best LT of all time, "but that's probably it."

Brooking is more versatile, but he will never be as good as Derrick Brooks because Brooks' athleticism is unreal.

Keith Brooking isnt even a top 5 OLB

Brooks is