WR..... Who stays? Who goes? who comes back?

[Red_One43]

I stand by my opinion that if they have drafted a player that can return kicks and contribute in other ways (play on coverage teams, or even catch a pass or two) Banks will be gone. If they have drafted guys that can return kicks but can't get on the field as a wideout (like Banks) then Banks will still be wearing B&G.

It does no good to state I feel a certain way if I didn't say that's how I feel. Just makes it seem like you can't read or can't comprehend what you are reading.

"can't get on the field as a wideout (like Banks)..." This is PURE speculation on your part and once again you fail to recognize that he had knee surgey and you don't risk a return threat getting hurt making cuts on routes. You are claiming that he couldn't get on the field. What is your basis for that claim if not a low opinion of Banks? Like Hogsters stats point out returnmen are rarely used as wr's anyway. Here are two reasons why he may not have got on the field as often as you may have wanted. Where is your support that he CAN'T get on the field as a wideout?

[1niksder]

"can't get on the field as a wideout (like Banks)..." This is PURE speculation on your part and once again you fail to recognize that he had knee surgey and you don't risk a return threat getting hurt making cuts on routes. You are claiming that he couldn't get on the field. What is your basis for that claim if not a low opinion of Banks? Like Hogsters stats point out returnmen are rarely used as wr's anyway. Here are two reasons why he may not have got on the field as often as you may have wanted. Where is your support?

How am I speculating when he couldn't/didn't get on the field as a WR. It's not a low opinion of Banks. It's a fact that he got very few reps at WR. You claim he didn't get out there because he was hurt, that in itself means you agree he wasn't on the field. Does that mean you have a low opinion of Banks?

It's not that I wanted him on the field or didn't want him on the field. I simply stated that if there is someone on the roster that can return kicks on the same level as Banks and can play on cover teams OR get time as a WR Banks spot will be in jeopardy.

Where did I limit the debate to Banks playing WR or he would lose his job?
I even pointed out RBs were drafted that return kicks and are big enough to play on coverage teams. It's not about Banks as a return man and not playing WR. It's about weather or not you think Banks will make the roster with his limited role if someone can fill his role and contribute elsewhere on the field. I stated that I think he will be one of four players fighting for one of the last two spots at WR, if Tana is resigned and they bring in a UFA. That's not a low opinion of Banks. It was a question to find out what you all thought.

Some people must be having trouble knowing what they think, so they try to tell me what I think. I didn't think you were one of them but if you are, it's truely pointless because I know what I think.

[The Hogster]

He has nothing. He won't acknowledge the stats because he has no ability to recognize his error. He "Banks" on people not checking his links or doing their own research. Oh, and insults your reading comprehension when you prove his BS wrong.

[1niksder]

He has nothing. He won't acknowledge the stats because he has no ability to recognize his error.

What do the stats of other return men around the NFL have to do with Banks making the Redskins roster this year?

The stats were mentioned because ch1 call Banks a great return man...

Again NOTHING....

[1niksder]

So let's use your link. The facts are the same, if you are using averages, you have to know what an average is. Returning one kick for 60 yards doesn't mean you "average" 60 yards per kick. Someone explain this to this guy. Lol

I'm always wrong

I thought it was just a reading problem but you have trouble with math too.

[1niksder]

He "Banks" on people not checking his links or doing their own research. Oh, and insults your reading comprehension when you prove his BS wrong.

I always provide links, you're the one that attribute a link to me. I didn't insult you reading comprehension, I questioned weather you were actually reading the post that you were talking about. I question where you read thinks you say I wrote but didn't. but I do question your math

[The Hogster]

He has nothing. He won't acknowledge the stats because he has no ability to recognize his error.

What do the stats of other return men around the NFL have to do with Banks making the Redskins roster this year?

The stats were mentioned because ch1 call Banks a great return man...

Again NOTHING....

Because ...

1) you brought them up when trying to claim Banks was ranked in the bottom tier of returners.

2) you said he might lose his job because he is "one dimensional" and "doesn't do enough".

The stats show that no other player who is a top 10 kick and punt returner caught a single pass. Put simply, he does more than any other player that returns kicks and punts. You never said what else he needs to do to "contribute". You're welcome. Get a clue.

[Red_One43]

"can't get on the field as a wideout (like Banks)..." This is PURE speculation on your part and once again you fail to recognize that he had knee surgey and you don't risk a return threat getting hurt making cuts on routes. You are claiming that he couldn't get on the field. What is your basis for that claim if not a low opinion of Banks? Like Hogsters stats point out returnmen are rarely used as wr's anyway. Here are two reasons why he may not have got on the field as often as you may have wanted. Where is your support?

How am I speculating when he couldn't/didn't get on the field as a WR. It's not a low opinion of Banks. It's a fact that he got very few reps at WR. You claim he didn't get out there because he was hurt, that in itself means you agree he wasn't on the field. Does that mean you have a low opinion of Banks?

It's not that I wanted him on the field or didn't want him on the field. I simply stated that if there is someone on the roster that can return kicks on the same level as Banks and can play on cover teams OR get time as a WR Banks spot will be in jeopardy.

Where did I limit the debate to Banks playing WR or he would lose his job?
I even pointed out RBs were drafted that return kicks and are big enough to play on coverage teams. It's not about Banks as a return man and not playing WR. It's about weather or not you think Banks will make the roster with his limited role if someone can fill his role and contribute elsewhere on the field. I stated that I think he will be one of four players fighting for one of the last two spots at WR, if Tana is resigned and they bring in a UFA. That's not a low opinion of Banks. It was a question to find out what you all thought.

Some people must be having trouble knowing what they think, so they try to tell me what I think. I didn't think you were one of them but if you are, it's truely pointless because I know what I think.

1nik, when you say "can't" that sounds like you are saying "ability" and when Banks actually got on the field in one of the last games known as the "evaluation" games and caught a high pass over the middle that proves that he could get on the field and regardles of tghe ocntext that you used "can't," it doesn't fly.

Why he got less reps, you are clearly implying that it is a possible factor that he might not beat out some one who can play, RB or WR or ST as well as Kick returner. I am and I Believe hogster are saying that there are several factors why Shanny may have purpoesly given Banks less reps and less evaluation - injury, ace returner, "don't need to evaluate Banks because I know what I got." We have given you reasons why you say he wasn't pon the field. You have chosen, for some unknown reason, look at Banks' miniscule porduction at the wideout as some negative indication that he was not on the field as a wideout as much as you think he should have been. On what do you base this as a negative? Hogster is showing you that is is quite a positive because that is the norm that teams want to rpotect valuable returnmen. You may not mean it as a negative, but it sure comes across that way. As someone once told me on this site, quit defending it (my clearly written passage that wasn't clear to the readers) and word it so it is clear to the readers. I balked at that at first, but I realized that that poster was right. If I want to be heard on this site, I have to write to the readers. As a reader of your posts on this thread, you sound negative toward Banks and I don't mean that in any insultig way. I do enjoy your posts and I do like to debate with you as well. Just food for thought.

[crazyhorse1]

"can't get on the field as a wideout (like Banks)..." This is PURE speculation on your part and once again you fail to recognize that he had knee surgey and you don't risk a return threat getting hurt making cuts on routes. You are claiming that he couldn't get on the field. What is your basis for that claim if not a low opinion of Banks? Like Hogsters stats point out returnmen are rarely used as wr's anyway. Here are two reasons why he may not have got on the field as often as you may have wanted. Where is your support?

How am I speculating when he couldn't/didn't get on the field as a WR. It's not a low opinion of Banks. It's a fact that he got very few reps at WR. You claim he didn't get out there because he was hurt, that in itself means you agree he wasn't on the field. Does that mean you have a low opinion of Banks?

It's not that I wanted him on the field or didn't want him on the field. I simply stated that if there is someone on the roster that can return kicks on the same level as Banks and can play on cover teams OR get time as a WR Banks spot will be in jeopardy.

Where did I limit the debate to Banks playing WR or he would lose his job?
I even pointed out RBs were drafted that return kicks and are big enough to play on coverage teams. It's not about Banks as a return man and not playing WR. It's about weather or not you think Banks will make the roster with his limited role if someone can fill his role and contribute elsewhere on the field. I stated that I think he will be one of four players fighting for one of the last two spots at WR, if Tana is resigned and they bring in a UFA. That's not a low opinion of Banks. It was a question to find out what you all thought.

Some people must be having trouble knowing what they think, so they try to tell me what I think. I didn't think you were one of them but if you are, it's truely pointless because I know what I think.

The chances that we'll find a KR PR as good as Banks is incredibly remote.
He's the best we've had since Mitchell. People here (not you) are talking about all sorts of guys "who can return kicks" and play WR as well as if that means something. Nonsense. "Can return kicks" means nothing. I can return kicks. The question is whether or not we can find a returner as good or better than Banks. If we can't, our returner will be Banks.

[1niksder]

As a reader of your posts on this thread, you sound negative toward Banks and I don't mean that in any insultig way. I do enjoy your posts and I do like to debate with you as well. Just food for thought.

I'm not negative towards Banks but I kind of see where you are coming from, I have a negative view of his chances to make the roster this year. But I happen to like the guy and a Redskins player, Redskins return man and as a person. In fact this thread was started after he pointed it out to me. If I had a low opinion of him I wouldn't have started a thread about him while he was dominating the discussion in this one. I know Banks had a negative opinion of Parks Smith

I'll try this one more time and I'll type slow for those that needed it

The chances that we'll find a KR PR as good as Banks is incredibly remote.
He's the best we've had since Mitchell. People here (not you) are talking about all sorts of guys "who can return kicks" and play WR as well as if that means something. Nonsense. "Can return kicks" means nothing. I can return kicks. The question is whether or not we can find a returner as good or better than Banks. If we can't, our returner will be Banks.

I said "as good as", "close to what Banks does" and contribute in other ways. Not once did I say Banks had to do more to keep his job. I might have come off as negative about Banks because so many members here support the guy. My original post stated

Paul was a pretty good return guy in college but also plays on the cover units... What does that say about Banks who's still not 100% after running into the blade of a knife and doesn't/can't play on cover units.
Banks may have a better shot at keeping a roster spot than Williams and Kelly or may battle Austin for the last slot.

Will they keep 6 or will they keep 7.

That wasn't about Banks playing WR it Paul (a WR) also plays on coverage units, it doesn't even mention he plays WR.

The next time I mentioned Banks I wrote

Banks is undersized and one dimensional, on top of the changes to the rules for kickoff the team drafted at less 3 players that maybe as fast as Banks and are able to play on the cover team (Banks is too small). The details of his stabbing doesn't help in a battle for a roster spot. I'm not saying it will be a factor, just that it won't help.

One dimensional is the only thing some of you read, I also called him undersized (granted he's be my last option for a fade route in the red zone), but - Bid I say it related to him as a receiver? No I mentioned 3 players (not 3 WRs) that might have Banks type speed and can play on cover teams. They happen to be WRs because this started out about ALL the WR on the roster.

I posted a link and quote in response to ch1 3 days ago and The Hogster quoted it as something I said yesterday, Red_One43 quoted the same post and mentioned that Parks Smith wrote it in his post. One guy figured out who he was quoting within 10 mins. of me posting it and one doesn't have a clue. Regardless of who reads what they reply to and who just do what they've always done the fact is, if I didn't say it I ain't gonna say I said it.

I said Banks had to earn a roster spot as a receiver but you have read which was

Banks is the best Returner the Skins have had in a long time and may be the next Devin Hester, who knows, but as a WR he'll have to earn a spot on the roster if he is out performed or equaled as a return-man.

"He'll have to earn a spot IF he is out performed or equaled as a return-man" Does that say he's not a receiver or does it say he'll have to out perform other WR if he is out performed as a KR?

but still didn't put it all on not being a good WR

Whenever camps open Banks will be the No.1 return man and it will be his spot to lose, if there is someone that challenges him for that roll and can fill other rolls as well, Banks will be in trouble.

Some people read that as

1) you brought them up when trying to claim Banks was ranked in the bottom tier of returners.

2) you said he might lose his job because he is "one dimensional" and "doesn't do enough".

The stats show that no other player who is a top 10 kick and punt returner caught a single pass. Put simply, he does more than any other player that returns kicks and punts. You never said what else he needs to do to "contribute". You're welcome. Get a clue.

I said he was ranked 27th.... there were 194 players ranked, Never said he doesn't do enough. I need a clue but he missed the many,many, times I stated how the other player needs to contribute. I said Banks didn't contribute on anything but the returns, not once have I said he needs to contribute. I referred to other possible KR needing to do more to replace Banks. Some people make it up as they go, but like I said it nothing new.

Return stats weren't even in the discussion until Banks was called a great return man, I chose to use the average yards per return and everyone that returned a kick. because we were talking about Banks greatness after one year, even then I tried to limited it to Redskins return men.

It wasn't about if he was a top ten KR it was weather or not he is a great return man.

Next came the production of KR as WR around the league. Nothing to do with what I was talking about and no relevance. Followed by this BS from the peanut gallery

1niksder - You are trying to make stats support your low opinion of Banks. They don't. It's clear that Banks was 9th in PR Average and 12th in KOR Average despite having 46 returns and other players having in the 20's.

No other WR who was that productive in KR an PR caught ANY passes. What player do you know of who produces as a WR, KR, & PR to the level you expect??? We'll wait.

None of that was relevant I never said we needed anyone to produce as a WR, KR, and PR on any level and anyone comprehending what I wrote would have known that. I say Banks isn't great than I have a low opinion of his because that was the propose of the stats that I used. Other stats were thrown out there just to make us think he knew what he was looking at.

Through out this thread I've been asked the same question over and over by one person

What do you mean "contribute" in other ways?

But I need to get a clue

I get this

It's better to be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

and this

I'm sure you will come up with some rude retort without accepting the egg on your face.

from the same genius that wrote

The facts are the same, if you are using averages, you have to know what an average is. Returning one kick for 60 yards doesn't mean you "average" 60 yards per kick.

[Red_One43]

As a reader of your posts on this thread, you sound negative toward Banks and I don't mean that in any insultig way. I do enjoy your posts and I do like to debate with you as well. Just food for thought.

I'm not negative towards Banks but I kind of see where you are coming from, I have a negative view of his chances to make the roster this year. But I happen to like the guy and a Redskins player, Redskins return man and as a person. In fact this thread was started after he pointed it out to me. If I had a low opinion of him I wouldn't have started a thread about him while he was dominating the discussion in this one. I know Banks had a negative opinion of Parks Smith

I'll try this one more time and I'll type slow for those that needed it

The chances that we'll find a KR PR as good as Banks is incredibly remote.
He's the best we've had since Mitchell. People here (not you) are talking about all sorts of guys "who can return kicks" and play WR as well as if that means something. Nonsense. "Can return kicks" means nothing. I can return kicks. The question is whether or not we can find a returner as good or better than Banks. If we can't, our returner will be Banks.

I said "as good as", "close to what Banks does" and contribute in other ways. Not once did I say Banks had to do more to keep his job. I might have come off as negative about Banks because so many members here support the guy. My original post stated

Paul was a pretty good return guy in college but also plays on the cover units... What does that say about Banks who's still not 100% after running into the blade of a knife and doesn't/can't play on cover units.
Banks may have a better shot at keeping a roster spot than Williams and Kelly or may battle Austin for the last slot.

Will they keep 6 or will they keep 7.

That wasn't about Banks playing WR it Paul (a WR) also plays on coverage units, it doesn't even mention he plays WR.

The next time I mentioned Banks I wrote

Banks is undersized and one dimensional, on top of the changes to the rules for kickoff the team drafted at less 3 players that maybe as fast as Banks and are able to play on the cover team (Banks is too small). The details of his stabbing doesn't help in a battle for a roster spot. I'm not saying it will be a factor, just that it won't help.

One dimensional is the only thing some of you read, I also called him undersized (granted he's be my last option for a fade route in the red zone), but - Bid I say it related to him as a receiver? No I mentioned 3 players (not 3 WRs) that might have Banks type speed and can play on cover teams. They happen to be WRs because this started out about ALL the WR on the roster.

I posted a link and quote in response to ch1 3 days ago and The Hogster quoted it as something I said yesterday, Red_One43 quoted the same post and mentioned that Parks Smith wrote it in his post. One guy figured out who he was quoting within 10 mins. of me posting it and one doesn't have a clue. Regardless of who reads what they reply to and who just do what they've always done the fact is, if I didn't say it I ain't gonna say I said it.

I said Banks had to earn a roster spot as a receiver but you have read which was

Banks is the best Returner the Skins have had in a long time and may be the next Devin Hester, who knows, but as a WR he'll have to earn a spot on the roster if he is out performed or equaled as a return-man.

"He'll have to earn a spot IF he is out performed or equaled as a return-man" Does that say he's not a receiver or does it say he'll have to out perform other WR if he is out performed as a KR?

but still didn't put it all on not being a good WR

Whenever camps open Banks will be the No.1 return man and it will be his spot to lose, if there is someone that challenges him for that roll and can fill other rolls as well, Banks will be in trouble.

Some people read that as

1) you brought them up when trying to claim Banks was ranked in the bottom tier of returners.

2) you said he might lose his job because he is "one dimensional" and "doesn't do enough".

The stats show that no other player who is a top 10 kick and punt returner caught a single pass. Put simply, he does more than any other player that returns kicks and punts. You never said what else he needs to do to "contribute". You're welcome. Get a clue.

I said he was ranked 27th.... there were 194 players ranked, Never said he doesn't do enough. I need a clue but he missed the many,many, times I stated how the other player needs to contribute. I said Banks didn't contribute on anything but the returns, not once have I said he needs to contribute. I referred to other possible KR needing to do more to replace Banks. Some people make it up as they go, but like I said it nothing new.

Return stats weren't even in the discussion until Banks was called a great return man, I chose to use the average yards per return and everyone that returned a kick. because we were talking about Banks greatness after one year, even then I tried to limited it to Redskins return men.

It wasn't about if he was a top ten KR it was weather or not he is a great return man.

Next came the production of KR as WR around the league. Nothing to do with what I was talking about and no relevance. Followed by this BS from the peanut gallery

1niksder - You are trying to make stats support your low opinion of Banks. They don't. It's clear that Banks was 9th in PR Average and 12th in KOR Average despite having 46 returns and other players having in the 20's.

No other WR who was that productive in KR an PR caught ANY passes. What player do you know of who produces as a WR, KR, & PR to the level you expect??? We'll wait.

None of that was relevant I never said we needed anyone to produce as a WR, KR, and PR on any level and anyone comprehending what I wrote would have known that. I say Banks isn't great than I have a low opinion of his because that was the propose of the stats that I used. Other stats were thrown out there just to make us think he knew what he was looking at.

Through out this thread I've been asked the same question over and over by one person

What do you mean "contribute" in other ways?

But I need to get a clue

I get this

It's better to be thought a fool, than to open your mouth and remove all doubt.

and this

I'm sure you will come up with some rude retort without accepting the egg on your face.

from the same genius that wrote

The facts are the same, if you are using averages, you have to know what an average is. Returning one kick for 60 yards doesn't mean you "average" 60 yards per kick.

Saying that you have a negative view of his chances helps me to get what you are saying. I was reading you this way. I am not a hater but here is why I hate him. I no longer see it that way.

Here is why I think that your argument about his chances is weak. You have offered nothing to say that Paul or anyone of the draftees that might return kicks is a dangerous returner. We already know that Austin is a good returner and had success at the D I level. I doubt that Paul is much better than Austin a returner. I have seen nothing to say that Paul is a retrurner with anything near the kind of vision and speed Banks has. As far as a receiver, we all know Austin has potential as a good wideout. We know that Paul also has good potential, but Shanny has proven that he will keep Banks over a good potential receiver and who is a good returner. Robinson is a good receiver, but he will have to learn to be a returner - maybe he will prove to be a very good returner, but there is nothing out there that leads us to believe that he already is. The running backs as returners? Helu with his speed might rival Banks, but does he have the vision. Again, we have seen nothing that says that he has it on returns. Your view that Banks chances are not good are based on what? That they are bigger than Banks? Your stats that you provided are weak especially when you try to say that Banks was the 27th ranked KO returner in league when you know that most of the guys ahead of him don't qualify. You say that he couldn't get on the field as a wide receiver based on his stats but you neglected to account for his knee injury and that most ace return men don't see the field much in for their scrimmage position. Hogster pointed this out with his stats. Hogster also pointed out that Banks was top ranked in both PR and KOR where you focused on KOR ranking.

So your view is based on what?

Remember Banks is a sophomore and has a leg up on the rookies that you say might replace him.

I am sure everybody on this site agrees that IF a guy who is a good STer, KORer and/or PRer and can play his scrimmage position well is on par with Banks, he will beat Banks out. That is a no brainer.

BUT returners with Banks' vision and speed are very rare, so the chances are good that he will be back on the team.

You have decided on your own that he can't play WR without considering how Shanny wanted to play the guy and again, lets not forget how other coaches use their ace returners and that Banks was palying right after knee surgery that will only help his chances.

Banks' only weakness last year was dropping the ball in pre-season - to me, if this problem resurfaces, that is the only way Banks fails to make this team.

In my opinion, you have offered nothing of substance to suppport your view other than your gut.

With all that being said, I no longer see you as negative on Banks just a difference on opinion.

[KazooSkinsFan]

Hogster, when you get frustrated what's your issue exactly with taking them to smack instead of insulting them here? Is it because they can't fight back here? Our great leader, Boss Hog, in his infinite wisdom gave us smack for just that reason...

[1niksder]

In my opinion, you have offered nothing of substance to suppport your view other than your gut.

With all that being said, I no longer see you as negative on Banks just a difference on opinion.

No one here has any proof of how Shanny will decide to keep and who will be let go. No one knows how the rookies will perform or if Banks will be back to full speed (he had a collapsed lung and is reportedly not 100% yet).

You say I offer nothing but my gut

My first post ended with:

Here's my best guess

Free Agent signing
Moss, Santana
Armstrong, Anthony
Hankerson, Leonard
Price, Maurice
Paul, Niles
Johnson, Taurus (if they keep 7)
Robinson, Aldrick (PS)


What's your's

My best guess = my gut feeling...

I didn't say there was something that would happen I said it could happen IF...

It wasn't about what Banks did last year or what he would do this year, it was about who might out perform who in a fight for a spot on the roster.
I think I was pretty clear that Banks replacement had to do more than be a better return man than Banks. Yet I'm still ask to show proof he won't make the team. If I had proof that he would be cut then it wouldn't be a guess

This site has many members with many different opinions, that's why most of us post here. Some can deal with other not having the same opinion has they do and others done have a clue. Then there's some that will never have a opinion, just that everyone else's is wrong.

We'll see when the final roster comes

[The Hogster]

Since you don't seem to understand what you said and implied, versus what I am responding to, I will show you one last time. Quotes are in chronological order.

1niksder Wrote:

Banks is undersized and one dimensional, on top of the changes to the rules for kickoff the team drafted at less 3 players that maybe as fast as Banks and are able to play on the cover team (Banks is too small). The details of his stabbing doesn't help in a battle for a roster spot. I'm not saying it will be a factor, just that it won't help.

This short quote from you gives 5 reasons why you think Banks probably won't make the team. 1) size, 2) one-dimension, 3) rule changes, 4)3 rookies "maybe" as fast as Banks and 5) he got stabbed. You are building your argument AGAINST Banks.

You go further to mention Banks lack of production at WR as a reason he might not make the roster.

1niksder Wrote:

Banks was the least productive WR on a team that had Joey Galloway...
Banks was active before Austin but when Shanny needed one of them to line up at WR Banks wasn't chosen over Austin nor did he out preform him.

YOU are mentioning that productivity at WR is one thing Banks might need to do in addition to Returning Kicks & Punts. I disagreed that he needs to produce at WR. I called that unreasonable because NONE of the good return men who return BOTH Kicks and Punts caught a single pass. One even made the Pro Bowl. That is why the stats of other great return men are relevant. Because you are expecting Banks to do something that no other player does, regardless of size, etc.

1niksder Wrote:

Size will be a issue when you have two/three guys that give you the same thing in the kicking game but some can play kick coverage and run a corner fade in the red zone, and one can't do either.

This is more of your biased talk. You are assuming something that the stats prove is not realistic. You are assuming that a very good return man who is a WR should play kick coverage or be able to produce/score TDs on offense. Both are factually wrong. I gave you stats on the other WRs who return Kicks & Punts. They aren't required to produce anything on Offense. Marc Mariani and Stefan Logan are the ONLY other players who return kicks & punts at the TOP 10 Level. Neither of them caught a pass or scored an offensive TD.

Then your argument against Banks continues. Here is where you used knowingly false stats to bolster your case against him.

1niksder Wrote:

Banks was ranked 27th in the NFL (not even top 10 if you remove anyone with less than 10 returns) in average yards per KO return in 2010

Now you obviously know that ranking him 27th in AVERAGE yards per return is misleading. Why? Because you went to NFL.COM and ranked him using a list that accounts for every player that returned any kick. So, you have guys like Dan Connolly, who returned one suib kick for 50+ yards, being ranked ahead of Banks because their "average" per return is over 50. You even realized that was a bogus way to rank, and you say, that "not even top 10 if you remove anyone with less than 10 returns." He's 12th when ranked by average per return against other RETURNERS. If you know he's not 27th, why keep referring to that?? To support your argument against Banks. Duh.

Then you just flat out lied.

and barely makes the top 20 of punt returners for 2010

Really?? Based on what?? Still ranking averages with all players, or are you actually using your brain this time. The fact is, ESPN.COM offers a Qualified and Non Qualified list of players to track stats. Banks is 12th in KOR Average when you take out the players who aren't kickoff returners but who returned a kick for one reason or another. (it got blocked, an onside kick, a muffed punt, etc) Put simply, it doesn't put Dan Connolly (a lineman who returned 1 kick) as the leading Kick Returner. That's like listing Ladanian Tomlinson as the highest rated QB because he went 1 for 1 with 1 TD. You know this, but you ignore it. Why 1niksder?

You even said it again later in the thread when trying to refute me pointing out that BS.

1niksder Wrote:
Where did you get your stats that you call facts. NFL.com has the stats for 2010 that show your 9th ranked punt returner ranked 19th in punt returns and that 12th ranked kickoff returner is tied for 27th in kickoff returns.

Again, you already admitted that you can't rank players by averages when some players on the non-qualified list only had 1 or 2 returns. That's just common sense. If Devin Thomas took the opening kickoff back for 100 yards and a score, he would be listed by NFL.com as having a 100 yard AVG per return. He would be #1 all year even without returning another kick. You HAVE to eliminate those in order to rank by AVERAGES. Either that or you have to go by Total Yards to account for the difference.

By this point you're just frustrated and stubborn.

1niksder Wrote: Are there two separate links to look up Kickoff returns and Punt returns when you check stats on NFL.com?

Didn't think so.

Actually there are 2 links. But, I let you slide on that error.

You continue going on your anti-Banks rant. Now you're saying Kickoff and Punt returns are the same thing. Really??

1niksder Wrote:
The ball leaves the foot... that's a kick, the formations is different and the punter and kicker may be different but in both cases Banks is the return man, that's the one thing he does. It's a kick from the opposing team that he catches and runs with, it doesn't matter if it's on kickoff or a punt the ball is kicked.

It doesn't matter? Really? So why doesn't the same player just do both? Only a handfull of teams have a guy that returns kicks AND punts. Only a couple of teams have a guy that does BOTH very very well. Banks is one of those guys. Where were you when Randel El returned punts and Rock Cartwright returned kicks?? If you were the GM, we could've saved a roster spot and just had Randel El do all of it. Genius.

You are clearly going out of your way to minimize what Banks does. The rest of us realize that your bias is clouding your ability to reason logically. You don't want to know what other great returners "contribute" aside from the return game because it doesn't prove you right. You seem to believe that a bigger WR, who didnt get stabbed, is going to come in here and outperform Banks on Kicks and Punts and get on the field and catch passes. Good luck.

[KazooSkinsFan]

The rest of us realize that your bias is clouding your ability to reason logically

Yes Hogster, simply everyone is on your side. Thank you for representing us so well and putting that illogical nik in his place for us. We all realize that he's illogical and were rooting for you all along to drive that home for us. When you started insulting him then that really drove home that your argument was well founded on pure reason and he was the one getting emotional.

Actually your argument and his were both a combination of logic and opinion. There's nothing wrong with that, nik admitted it. But your view you destroyed him with logic is...reality challenged. I thought you actually both made reasonable cases. I personally don't know if Banks has much of a future with us or not. I think he showed promise, but didn't prove anything yet. I think everything you both brought up are going to be what the coaches are going to be evaluating. But you hoot, my friend. Keep it up.

[1niksder]

Since you don't seem to understand what you said and implied, versus what I am responding to, I will show you one last time. Quotes are in chronological order.

1niksder Wrote:

Banks is undersized and one dimensional, on top of the changes to the rules for kickoff the team drafted at less 3 players that maybe as fast as Banks and are able to play on the cover team (Banks is too small). The details of his stabbing doesn't help in a battle for a roster spot. I'm not saying it will be a factor, just that it won't help.

This short quote from you gives 5 reasons why you think Banks probably won't make the team. 1) size, 2) one-dimension, 3) rule changes, 4)3 rookies "maybe" as fast as Banks and 5) he got stabbed. You are building your argument AGAINST Banks.

My statement said he wouldn't make the roster if someone else
got the return duties, so of course I would give reasons as to why I think he won't make the team, If he isn't the return man all this things will be considered when deciding weather or not he makes the roster

You go further to mention Banks lack of production at WR as a reason he might not make the roster.

1niksder Wrote:

Banks was the least productive WR on a team that had Joey Galloway...
Banks was active before Austin but when Shanny needed one of them to line up at WR Banks wasn't chosen over Austin nor did he out preform him.

YOU are mentioning that productivity at WR is one thing Banks might need to do in addition to Returning Kicks & Punts. I disagreed that he needs to produce at WR. I called that unreasonable because NONE of the good return men who return BOTH Kicks and Punts caught a single pass. One even made the Pro Bowl. That is why the stats of other great return men are relevant. Because you are expecting Banks to do something that no other player does, regardless of size, etc.

1niksder Wrote:

Size will be a issue when you have two/three guys that give you the same thing in the kicking game but some can play kick coverage and run a corner fade in the red zone, and one can't do either.

This is more of your biased talk. You are assuming something that the stats prove is not realistic. You are assuming that a very good return man who is a WR should play kick coverage or be able to produce/score TDs on offense. Both are factually wrong. I gave you stats on the other WRs who return Kicks & Punts. They aren't required to produce anything on Offense. Marc Mariani and Stefan Logan are the ONLY other players who return kicks & punts at the TOP 10 Level. Neither of them caught a pass or scored an offensive TD.

Again as I said who knows how many times, IF he's beaten out as a returner he'll have to win a spot as a WR. You want to argue what the top returners around the league do other than return kicks, while I'm saying what he has to do if his NOT returning kicks.

Then your argument against Banks continues. Here is where you used knowingly false stats to bolster your case against him.

1niksder Wrote:

Banks was ranked 27th in the NFL (not even top 10 if you remove anyone with less than 10 returns) in average yards per KO return in 2010

Now you obviously know that ranking him 27th in AVERAGE yards per return is misleading. Why? Because you went to NFL.COM and ranked him using a list that accounts for every player that returned any kick. So, you have guys like Dan Connolly, who returned one suib kick for 50+ yards, being ranked ahead of Banks because their "average" per return is over 50. You even realized that was a bogus way to rank, and you say, that "not even top 10 if you remove anyone with less than 10 returns." He's 12th when ranked by average per return against other RETURNERS. If you know he's not 27th, why keep referring to that?? To support your argument against Banks. Duh.

How are NFL.com's stats false? He was ranked 27th that's what you'll see if you look at the stats, removing everyone with less than 10 returns was my doing. It not like it was point out and then I made adjustments. You used ESPN stats that didn't include everyone that returned a kick but my number are called false

Then you just flat out lied.

and barely makes the top 20 of punt returners for 2010

Really?? Based on what?? Still ranking averages with all players, or are you actually using your brain this time. The fact is, ESPN.COM offers a Qualified and Non Qualified list of players to track stats. Banks is 12th in KOR Average when you take out the players who aren't kickoff returners but who returned a kick for one reason or another. (it got blocked, an onside kick, a muffed punt, etc) Put simply, it doesn't put Dan Connolly (a lineman who returned 1 kick) as the leading Kick Returner. That's like listing Ladanian Tomlinson as the highest rated QB because he went 1 for 1 with 1 TD. You know this, but you ignore it. Why 1niksder?

You call me a liar because NFL.com's stats don't fit your view of who gets to be called a kick returner

You even said it again later in the thread when trying to refute me pointing out that BS.

1niksder Wrote:
Where did you get your stats that you call facts. NFL.com has the stats for 2010 that show your 9th ranked punt returner ranked 19th in punt returns and that 12th ranked kickoff returner is tied for 27th in kickoff returns.

Again, you already admitted that you can't rank players by averages when some players on the non-qualified list only had 1 or 2 returns. That's just common sense. If Devin Thomas took the opening kickoff back for 100 yards and a score, he would be listed by NFL.com as having a 100 yard AVG per return. He would be #1 all year even without returning another kick. You HAVE to eliminate those in order to rank by AVERAGES. Either that or you have to go by Total Yards to account for the difference.

There you go putting words in my mouth again. Why would I say I can't do something after I already had done it. I used the average, and all the players that NFL.com listed as returning kicks but want to use total yards and not all of the player that actually returned kicks so that makes me a liar?

By this point you're just frustrated and stubborn.

1niksder Wrote: Are there two separate links to look up Kickoff returns and Punt returns when you check stats on NFL.com?

Didn't think so.

Actually there are 2 links. But, I let you slide on that error.

I don't get frustrated talking Redskins football, I get frustrated watching Redskins football. I can be stubborn.
It's one link... sorting a page will produce a new link but to look up the stats a player you have the both set of stats on the same page. Which by the way is pre sorted by average yards per kick, not yards.

You continue going on your anti-Banks rant. Now you're saying Kickoff and Punt returns are the same thing. Really??

1niksder Wrote:
The ball leaves the foot... that's a kick, the formations is different and the punter and kicker may be different but in both cases Banks is the return man, that's the one thing he does. It's a kick from the opposing team that he catches and runs with, it doesn't matter if it's on kickoff or a punt the ball is kicked.

It doesn't matter? Really? So why doesn't the same player just do both? Only a handfull of teams have a guy that returns kicks AND punts. Only a couple of teams have a guy that does BOTH very very well. Banks is one of those guys. Where were you when Randel El returned punts and Rock Cartwright returned kicks?? If you were the GM, we could've saved a roster spot and just had Randel El do all of it. Genius.

Banks is our return man weather it's a kick or a punt was my point and you know it yet you come back with this BS and wonder why your comprehension was questioned. Thanks for erasing any doubt.

You are clearly going out of your way to minimize what Banks does. The rest of us realize that your bias is clouding your ability to reason logically.

The hold discussion was based on Banks making team team if he had to do something other than return kicks but all you talk about is him returning kicks

You don't want to know what other great returners "contribute" aside from the return game because it doesn't prove you right.

What does other returners have to do with a conversation about Banks contributing while not being the return man?

You seem to believe that a bigger WR, who didnt get stabbed, is going to come in here and outperform Banks on Kicks and Punts and get on the field and catch passes. Good luck.

You have no clue as to what I believe but Banks getting stabbed wasn't jab at Banks, he's the one that said he'a not 100% because he got stab, not being 100% can be a hinder him in staying on a roster that has a log jam at WR

[The Hogster]

I'll let this thread speak for itself. Just like your Adam Archuletta debacle a few years back.

I now understand where all of this baseless banter is coming from. After reading this confusing post by my Hogs.Net stalker, I realized that I was "called out" in a Smack thread. A thread that doesn't have my name in it, and a thread that the stalker didn't let me know was about me.

The Stalker Wrote:

Hogster, when you get frustrated what's your issue exactly with taking them to smack instead of insulting them here? Is it because they can't fight back here?
For the last few months, this stalker has been following me around the boards, you know, the stuff stalkers do. All the while "calling me out" in a thread I wasn't even reading. Real macho stuff going on here.

1niksder and Kazoo, you should take this show on the road. Holler at me when you want to talk football instead of whine and complain at everything that I say. Sorry that I hurt your feelings or whatever. Actually, I'm not.

[KazooSkinsFan]

I'll let this thread speak for itself. Just like your Adam Archuletta debacle a few years back.

I now understand where all of this baseless banter is coming from. After reading this confusing post by my Hogs.Net stalker, I realized that I was "called out" in a Smack thread. A thread that doesn't have my name in it, and a thread that the stalker didn't let me know was about me.

The Stalker Wrote:

Hogster, when you get frustrated what's your issue exactly with taking them to smack instead of insulting them here? Is it because they can't fight back here?
For the last few months, this stalker has been following me around the boards, you know, the stuff stalkers do. All the while "calling me out" in a thread I wasn't even reading. Real macho stuff going on here.

1niksder and Kazoo, you should take this show on the road. Holler at me when you want to talk football instead of whine and complain at everything that I say. Sorry that I hurt your feelings or whatever. Actually, I'm not.

Nice deflection there, doesn't address the issue at all. Hence the term deflection. BTW, I don't think nik said anything about your insulting him, I believe that was me. I take responsibility for what I say. Unfortunately not everyone does.

As for caring that you insulted me, I wasn't planning to but I'll give it a go.

Nope, sorry, it's not working. BTW, do you notice that while you talk about hurting people's feelings, only one of us has actually referred to anyone's feelings?

[1niksder]

I'll let this thread speak for itself. Just like your Adam Archuletta debacle a few years back.

I now understand where all of this baseless banter is coming from. After reading this confusing post by my Hogs.Net stalker, I realized that I was "called out" in a Smack thread. A thread that doesn't have my name in it, and a thread that the stalker didn't let me know was about me.

The Stalker Wrote:

Hogster, when you get frustrated what's your issue exactly with taking them to smack instead of insulting them here? Is it because they can't fight back here?
For the last few months, this stalker has been following me around the boards, you know, the stuff stalkers do. All the while "calling me out" in a thread I wasn't even reading. Real macho stuff going on here.

1niksder and Kazoo, you should take this show on the road. Holler at me when you want to talk football instead of whine and complain at everything that I say. Sorry that I hurt your feelings or whatever. Actually, I'm not.

Nice deflection there, doesn't address the issue at all. Hence the term deflection. BTW, I don't think nik said anything about your insulting him, I believe that was me. I take responsibility for what I say. Unfortunately not everyone does.

As for caring that you insulted me, I wasn't planning to but I'll give it a go.

Nope, sorry, it's not working. BTW, do you notice that while you talk about hurting people's feelings, only one of us has actually referred to anyone's feelings?

All BS a side. This isn't the place for that, I won't address it here and the two of you know you shouldn't be going off topic. We've been members of this board long enough to know how to handle this. So if that's what yall want to do then do it there. I know sometimes one or the other is invited and the other doesn't show. But to keep on topic, that's the best TH.n can offer. If yall keep it up one of those mod type dudes might say something and I ain't messing with them

Kaz I don't know how you got linked to me in this but then again I'm the one that needs to get a clue, right.

[Red_One43]

In my opinion, you have offered nothing of substance to suppport your view other than your gut.

With all that being said, I no longer see you as negative on Banks just a difference on opinion.

No one here has any proof of how Shanny will decide to keep and who will be let go. No one knows how the rookies will perform or if Banks will be back to full speed (he had a collapsed lung and is reportedly not 100% yet).

You say I offer nothing but my gut

My first post ended with:

Here's my best guess

Free Agent signing
Moss, Santana
Armstrong, Anthony
Hankerson, Leonard
Price, Maurice
Paul, Niles
Johnson, Taurus (if they keep 7)
Robinson, Aldrick (PS)


What's your's

My best guess = my gut feeling...

I didn't say there was something that would happen I said it could happen IF...

It wasn't about what Banks did last year or what he would do this year, it was about who might out perform who in a fight for a spot on the roster.
I think I was pretty clear that Banks replacement had to do more than be a better return man than Banks. Yet I'm still ask to show proof he won't make the team. If I had proof that he would be cut then it wouldn't be a guess

This site has many members with many different opinions, that's why most of us post here. Some can deal with other not having the same opinion has they do and others done have a clue. Then there's some that will never have a opinion, just that everyone else's is wrong.

We'll see when the final roster comes

No one here has any proof of how Shanny will decide to keep and who will be let go. No one knows how the rookies will perform or if Banks will be back to full speed (he had a collapsed lung and is reportedly not 100% yet).

Of course no one has any proof of what Shanny will do, but we can look at past practices of Shanny and use that to support our opinions. We can look at college performances like scouts, GMs and coaches do and use that info to support how we think a player will do. Opinions can be based on known facts.

I think I was pretty clear that Banks replacement had to do more than be a better return man than Banks. Yet I'm still ask to show proof he won't make the team. If I had proof that he would be cut then it wouldn't be a guess

I never asked you to prove why he won't make the team. You stated that you think there is a negative chance that he will make the team. I asked what do you base that on?

You say I offer nothing but my gut

You claim or allude that Banks can't play wideout. There is nothing that Shanny said or did that you can reasonably base that one. You cited least productive, but I cited the injury. You defined "can't" as unable. I cited that he was able. He played wideout in the last three games though limited, which Shanny said was because of the injury. You take what Shanny says with a grain of salt. Well look what Shanny did, he kept the guy on the opening day roster and finished the season on the roster. Hogster explained to you that ace returners seldom participate from scrimmage. Where is your support that Banks can't play wideout? You produced nothing and the probability is that he can or Shanny wouldn't have kept him over Austin on the opening day roster especially since our receiving corps was weak.
That action fits Shanny's words. Action does speak louder than words but when the words fit the action, the probability is much higher concerning the reality.

NFL.com stats rankings are the official stats of every player and team in the NFL. I get that, but only qualified players are in contention for player awards for each category. I can't understand why you keep insisting that Banks is ranked 27th in punt returns, but yes, if you want to say that isn't about gut, go ahead. In my opinion it is misleading and then trying to jusify it by saying, I pointed out he ranked 12th among qualified returners? Huh? what was the point in mentioning the 27th ranking? - that is similar to the magician - don't pay attention to what's behind that curtain. I do understand you posted those stats to challenge CH1's "great" label for Banks. That usuage, in my opinion makes it all the more misleading since it seems that you were trying to dispel CH1's usage of "great." A returner that is in the top 12 of both Kick off returns and punt returns can make a case to have had a great season and if it was a great season maybe he shouldn't (opinion word)be labeled great, but I don't see how using unqualified stats makes your case.

I didn't say there was something that would happen I said it could happen IF...

We all know things could happen and could happen with any player on the team, not just Banks. We all know that is way too early to really know much at all. We don't know if there is an undrafted WR free agent find or two that Shanny is going to bring in like he did with Banks. We don't know if he will bring in a veteran free agent at the wideout.

This site has many members with many different opinions, that's why most of us post here. Some can deal with other not having the same opinion has they do and others done have a clue. Then there's some that will never have a opinion, just that everyone else's is wrong.

I am not saying your opinion is wrong. In my opinion, you haven't come up with one solid evidence to back up your opinion. Your opinion isn't being attacked your supporting data which I claim is weak is being attacked.

You claim that Banks has a negative chance of making this team. I disagree but I am not attacking that opinion. If you would have left it at that, I would have no argument with you, but once you chose to post your reasons, I felt that the debate is on. You used the word "debate" on this thread. Do you not want to debate?

We'll see when the final roster comes

The fun is finding out who is right when the final roster is comes, but the thread will undoubtedly include several different players by then.

[1niksder]

Of course no one has any proof of what Shanny will do, but we can look at past practices of Shanny and use that to support our opinions. We can look at college performances like scouts, GMs and coaches do and use that info to support how we think a player will do. Opinions can be based on known facts.

Shanny has only been here one year just like Banks. That's it, there is no past practices. There is no track record, Shanny went with what he had.

I never asked you to prove why he won't make the team. You stated that you think there is a negative chance that he will make the team. I asked what do you base that on?

You grouped your points with that other guy and he wanted proof of my opinion and I didn't have time to explain the meaning of opinion to him.

I stated Banks would have a hard time making the roster IF he's replaced as the Redskins primary return man. For some reason almost everyone missed this and defended what he did last year as enough to give him a job this year although everyone knows past performance does nothing for Shanny.

You claim or allude that Banks can't play wideout. There is nothing that Shanny said or did that you can reasonably base that one. You cited least productive, but I cited the injury. You defined "can't" as unable. I cited that he was able, he played wideout in the last three games though limited which Shanny said was because of the injury. You take what Sahnny says with a grain of salt. Well look what Shanny did, he kept the guy on the opening day roster and finished the season on the roster. Hogster explained to you that ace returners seldom participate from scrimmage. Where is your support to that Banks can't play wideout. You don't know and the probability is that he can or Shanny wouldn't have kept him over Austin on the opening day roster.

See you're grouping your debate with that other guy again, but whatever.
Banks got playing time at receiver once the season was lost and Grossman was leading a team that was basically being evaluated across the board. If Banks was secure at his spot he wouldn't have needed to be evaluated considering he was too important during the season to linne up at WR. So what he made the opening day roster so did Larry Johnson, and Johnson was still on the roster after the second week. Banks wasn't.

We all know things could happen and could happen with any player on the team, not just Banks. We all know that is way too early to really know much at all. We don't know if there is an undrafted WR free agent find or two that Shanny is going to bring in like he did with Banks. We don't know if he will bring in a veteran free agent at the wideout.

That's why I laid it out up front... Banks had to be replaced as the return man and then battle for a WR spot. I stated he'd have a tough time because he won't be able to play coverage teams or contribute in any other way.

No one disputed this but said Banks is a great return man and it won't happen.

Even now you want to talk about Banks the returner and why he shouldn't have to play WR and the whole time I've been talking about Banks not being the #1 return man and his chances of making the team at WR.

I am not saying your opinion is wrong. In my opinion, you haven't come up with one solid evidence to back up your opinion. Your opinion isn't being attacked your supporting data which I claim is weak is being attacked.

I'm still not sure you understand what I'm trying to say, but at least you're civil.

You claim that Banks has a negative chance of making this team. I disagree but I am not attacking that opinion. If you would have left it at that, I would have no argument with you, but once you chose to post your reasons, I felt that the debate is on.

I claim Banks has a negative chance of making the team if he isn't the primary kick returner, that's very different than saying Banks has a negative chance of making this team.

You used the word "debate" on this thread. Do you not want to debate?

Yeah, there is nothing wrong with a good debate but we need to be debating the same thing

[Red_One43]

Of course no one has any proof of what Shanny will do, but we can look at past practices of Shanny and use that to support our opinions. We can look at college performances like scouts, GMs and coaches do and use that info to support how we think a player will do. Opinions can be based on known facts.

Shanny has only been here one year just like Banks. That's it, there is no past practices. There is no track record, Shanny went with what he had.

I never asked you to prove why he won't make the team. You stated that you think there is a negative chance that he will make the team. I asked what do you base that on?

You grouped your points with that other guy and he wanted proof of my opinion and I didn't have time to explain the meaning of opinion to him.

I stated Banks would have a hard time making the roster IF he's replaced as the Redskins primary return man. For some reason almost everyone missed this and defended what he did last year as enough to give him a job this year although everyone knows past performance does nothing for Shanny.

You claim or allude that Banks can't play wideout. There is nothing that Shanny said or did that you can reasonably base that one. You cited least productive, but I cited the injury. You defined "can't" as unable. I cited that he was able, he played wideout in the last three games though limited which Shanny said was because of the injury. You take what Sahnny says with a grain of salt. Well look what Shanny did, he kept the guy on the opening day roster and finished the season on the roster. Hogster explained to you that ace returners seldom participate from scrimmage. Where is your support to that Banks can't play wideout. You don't know and the probability is that he can or Shanny wouldn't have kept him over Austin on the opening day roster.

See you're grouping your debate with that other guy again, but whatever.
Banks got playing time at receiver once the season was lost and Grossman was leading a team that was basically being evaluated across the board. If Banks was secure at his spot he wouldn't have needed to be evaluated considering he was too important during the season to linne up at WR. So what he made the opening day roster so did Larry Johnson, and Johnson was still on the roster after the second week. Banks wasn't.

We all know things could happen and could happen with any player on the team, not just Banks. We all know that is way too early to really know much at all. We don't know if there is an undrafted WR free agent find or two that Shanny is going to bring in like he did with Banks. We don't know if he will bring in a veteran free agent at the wideout.

That's why I laid it out up front... Banks had to be replaced as the return man and then battle for a WR spot. I stated he'd have a tough time because he won't be able to play coverage teams or contribute in any other way.

No one disputed this but said Banks is a great return man and it won't happen.

Even now you want to talk about Banks the returner and why he shouldn't have to play WR and the whole time I've been talking about Banks not being the #1 return man and his chances of making the team at WR.

I am not saying your opinion is wrong. In my opinion, you haven't come up with one solid evidence to back up your opinion. Your opinion isn't being attacked your supporting data which I claim is weak is being attacked.

I'm still not sure you understand what I'm trying to say, but at least you're civil.

You claim that Banks has a negative chance of making this team. I disagree but I am not attacking that opinion. If you would have left it at that, I would have no argument with you, but once you chose to post your reasons, I felt that the debate is on.

I claim Banks has a negative chance of making the team if he isn't the primary kick returner, that's very different than saying Banks has a negative chance of making this team.

You used the word "debate" on this thread. Do you not want to debate?

Yeah, there is nothing wrong with a good debate but we need to be debating the same thing

If Banks was secure at his spot he wouldn't have needed to be evaluated considering he was too important during the season to linne up at WR. So what he made the opening day roster so did Larry Johnson, and Johnson was still on the roster after the second week. Banks wasn't.

You are changing wording to "secure". I never said "secure" at his spot and I never said you said "secure," so let's agree not to imply either of us mean secure.

Banks was on the final roster and actually made a difference in games why do you want to compare him with Larry Johnson who may have made the opening day roster but never contributed or was on the final roster. My point is Shanny liked Banks then, so he just might like Banks just as much especially after the season he had. You obviously don't see that point as revelant, but I don't see what Larry Johnson who wasn't on the final rsoter and didn't contribute has to do with that.


When we get to your point on your original post, you left Banks off of your six. Later in the thread, I posted my six and it included Banks.

We clearly differ and you are right that we have no debate because WE (notice I say, we) are not debating the same thing. That happens and more so online. Look forward to when we get the new WR names on a thread like this and of course, the lockout ends.

Like I said I enjoy your posts. I am glad that you recognize that I am trying to be civil. That is more important than being right especially when none of us have all the facts and really not much of anything but opinions to go on.


Of course this thread is not done, I will move on to discuss other receivers.

[yupchagee]

Among qualifiers, he was T9 in PR & T11 in KR. That's while playing through an injury. I think most teams would consider him worth keeping. If we cut him, he won't be out of a job for long.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/stats/bycat ... ame=ToDate

[1niksder]

If Banks was secure at his spot he wouldn't have needed to be evaluated considering he was too important during the season to linne up at WR. So what he made the opening day roster so did Larry Johnson, and Johnson was still on the roster after the second week. Banks wasn't.

You are changing wording to "secure". I never said "secure" at his spot and I never said you said "secure," so let's agree not to imply either of us mean secure.

We both know my words have been changed enough in this thread so let's forget I ever said secure. Let's go with...

If Banks was looked at as a sure thing for the 2011 roster in the eyes of of coach Mike and wasn't getting on the field because he was so valued as a return man (note: this includes kick off returns and punt returns), and couldn't be risked at the WR spot (you know coming off a injuury and all), why did Shanny put him in in "evaluations" games.

So you saying while the Skins were in the hunt late in the season, they held back this great talent to prevent a possible set back in his rehab (from a surgery that he recovered from within a week) while he returned kicks but once the season was lost he was put into meaningless games?

I can read like the Hogster too if I drink a lot of Goose and close one I

We are talking about the same "evaluation" games that Austin (the guy you say MAY HAVE BEEN by passed for Banks), but maybe we should leave Austin out of this considering he caught twice as many passes as Banks in those same games.

Banks was on the final roster and actually made a difference in games why do you want to compare him with Larry Johnson who may have made the opening day roster but never contributed or was on the final roster. My point is Shanny liked Banks then, so he just might like Banks just as much especially after the season he had. You obviously don't see that point as revelant, but I don't see what Larry Johnson who wasn't on the final rsoter and didn't contribute has to do with that.

You kept pointing out Banks made the opening day roster and I never said a thing about it. The only thing that making the opening day roster means is the player is going to get paid for 16 weeks weather he finishes the season with that team or not. I pointed out he was cut two weeks later and now you don't get it. You say Johnson didn't produce yet Banks got released and a while LJ was averaging (momma there goes that word again) around negative four yards a carry kept his job. I don't get what making the day one roster has to do with anything when, within a month he was unemployed then on the practice squad with the same guy that you say he was picked over and they BOTH were on the final roster.

When we get to your point on your original post, you left Banks off of your six. Later in the thread, I posted my six and it included Banks.

We clearly differ and you are right that we have no debate because WE (notice I say, we) are not debating the same thing. That happens and more so online.

I was trying to take a look at the receiver corp without Banks locked into one spot as the return man and was accused of damn near wanting the man dead.

You say he'll make the team based on his return skills... I never said he couldn't = nothing to debate

+

I said he won't make the team if he is not the return man... you say he'll make the team based on his return skills = nothing to debate

=

I'm wrong

Look forward to when we get the new WR names on a thread like this and of course, the lockout ends.

Considering who's on the current list do you really look forward to the end result? Without most we have no leadership, slot receiver and no Kowboi Killer, AA might improve in year two Hank should step right in and the roll call ends right there. I can't say I'm looking forward to the final list unless Tana is on it. And wouldn't be mad if @speedybanks16 is also on it.

Like I said I enjoy your posts. I am glad that you recognize that I am trying to be civil. That is more important than being right especially when none of us have all the facts and really not much of anything but opinions to go on.

Some don't have opinion but a million reason way yours is wrong or won't work, nor do they know what a fact is let alone how to determine average yards per kick for unless you have more than one

Of course this thread is not done, I will move on to discuss other receivers.

Now you just want to confuse people

[Red_One43]

Among qualifiers, he was T9 in PR & T11 in KR. That's while playing through an injury. I think most teams would consider him worth keeping. If we cut him, he won't be out of a job for long.

http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/stats/bycat ... ame=ToDate

+ 1