Red_One43 wrote:ATX_Skins wrote:Red_One43 wrote:ATX_Skins wrote:cowboykillerzRED wrote:http://m.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/oct/4/snyder-banks-is-in-it-for-the-long-run/?utm_source=RSS_Feed&utm_medium=RSS
Booyah in yo face nay sayers
Nobody is nay saying dude. This thread was started for the very same reason that column was published. It seems to me that I took a lot of heat for bringing this up yet the entire team noticed it too.
I would like Banks to stay back there and I hope they figure this out.
Ah back on topic, If you read the article, you will see the author gives Banks his props for what he accomplished in the first two games. he author also addresses the lack of production that you describe Banks performance. To me, anytime a team has to game plan a player, that is being productive.
Once again, you have the opportunty to discuss and you play off a valid respsonse and try to play the victim that everybody is out to get you. Everyone on this site has posted one time or another a thread in which we caught some flak. It is a part of the message boards. Are you going to discuss or whine?
Are YOU going to discuss anything or pick one or two words out of every one of my posts and try to prove another not so funny point?
This is just for you since I'm not sure you comprehend anything I write. I will do my best to break it down Barney style for you.
Banks HAD a good first two games. Since, his production has gone down. That was the ENTIRE reason for this thread starting two weeks ago. Before you look up exact dates and try to say it was not exactly 14 days ago, I am speaking of 2 games when I say weeks, good enough?
I do not feel like anyone is out to get me, nor would I even care if they were. I can hold my own here.
Thanks for pointing out that everyone has taken flak on this board at one time or another, I was completely unaware of how these message board things work.
Now, if you read (not skim) the article you will see that even Banks himself feels disappointed by his performance. I have noted many times they need to get this figured out and you cannot seem to comprehend that.
The same point I brought up was made a published article with players chiming in. The only difference is, I pointed this out a week prior.
And no, Niles Paul is not the answer. Something however needs to get figured out because this could be a real problem down the stretch. Shall we discuss a solution?
On KR I say we bring the ball out and get aggressive. Not stupid but be more aggressive. On PR, I'm not sure. Obviously we don't want to take a chance when we will be getting the ball as it is, but maybe switch out the defenders covering the gunners. Maybe run more of a punt block formation and force teams to kick early, or place more guys on the line. Thats where I would start, put more heat on the punter and don't allow the time for high directional punts.
ATX_Skins wrote:Now, if you read (not skim) the article you will see that even Banks himself feels disappointed by his performance.
Oops, I misread the article. I thought Banks has happy that he was returning kicks in the last two games as well as the first two. Thanks for pointing that out. Note you said Banks feels disappointed in his performance not disappointed in himself.I have noted many times they need to get this figured out and you cannot seem to comprehend that.
The same point I brought up was made a published article with players chiming in. The only difference is, I pointed this out a week prior.
I said on a number of occasions, that your observations were valid minus the Banks bashing (which I the article didn't do - bash banks - it matter of factly pointed out what you were pointing out initially with the Banks bashing).This is just for you since I'm not sure you comprehend anything I write. I will do my best to break it down Barney style for you.
Dang, you watch Barney? Of course you do, how else could you break it down Barney style.Banks HAD a good first two games. Since, his production has gone down. That was the ENTIRE reason for this thread starting two weeks ago. Before you look up exact dates and try to say it was not exactly 14 days ago, I am speaking of 2 games when I say weeks, good enough?
If you would have posted this just like this in the first place and then responded to the valid posts that hit the threads, we could be singing Kum - Bay - ya, instead of that Barney tune.I do not feel like anyone is out to get me, nor would I even care if they were. I can hold my own here.
I trust that you were still smiling when you wrote this post. Just checking. I am smiling.
All kidding aside what I quoted below is what I was after - a discussion about a possible solution.And no, Niles Paul is not the answer. Something however needs to get figured out because this could be a real problem down the stretch. Shall we discuss a solution?
On KR I say we bring the ball out and get aggressive. Not stupid but be more aggressive. On PR, I'm not sure. Obviously we don't want to take a chance when we will be getting the ball as it is, but maybe switch out the defenders covering the gunners. Maybe run more of a punt block formation and force teams to kick early, or place more guys on the line. Thats where I would start, put more heat on the punter and don't allow the time for high directional punts.
I can't say that I honestly believe that Paul is a solution, because if it is poor execution and better execution on the Cowboys and Rams ST then surely Paul won't do much better. I mentioned him because he is bigger and perhaps could break some tackles and get more yardage against teams who are beating our ST teams. But he will never be the threat that Banks is so no he is not the solution.
Get aggressive is vague. I assume that you mean that some of the guys that are in there aren't the kick A type of guys and if that is what you mean, I can understand this - because I was asking myself during the last two games, why are the Rams and Cowboys beating our guys' blocks. But is it lack of aggression or a lack of emphasis in practice?
Replacing the gunners is a start. Perhaps Stallworth can be a gunner. I am sure that vet would love to get on the field any chance he gets and also knock some heads.
I wouldn't emphasize punt block. Having an asset like Banks, I would find my best return coverage men even if they played offense. Not being able to use starters limits how many personnel changes can be made, so the emphasis would have to be more practice time spent on special teams. Now - I do see how the reality of that is tough. We have a offense and defense in the second years of complicated schemes - an O line that needs all the practice they can get to gell as a ZBS solid O line. Practice time is limited. No more 3 hours George Allen practices. Being that our offense is sluggish, I think that emphasizing the return game more in practice will give the O better field position and help it in the long run.
Sometimes I feel like your responses are homework I give you. Anyways, breaking something down Barney style is a term used in the Marine Corps for explaining something a 4 year old would understand (nobody said Marines were smart). I don't and wouldn't expect you to get that however I find it amusing.
By aggressive I mean running the ball out from the end zone regardless. Not every time but Banks has the potential, give it a go, especially if we will ever be sitting on a good lead.
The punt block idea didn't mean send the house. I was trying to say put more of an emphasis on rushing the punter and not giving him the time needed to place a well aimed punt. Will it work, who knows, that would be my knee jerk reaction in a game though. Maybe even give the look, then bring guys back into coverage. Either way, I think it could all start from the source, that being the punter or line, however you want to look at it.
Just responded to an e-mail and lost track of what I was talking about, till next time...