The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

With the addition of three wide receivers from this year's it seems as if Brandon Banks could be on the hot seat more than any other Redskin this offseason.. This has certainly been a hot topic of debate around Hogs Haven and among all Redskins fans.

I have to preface this by saying that I'm not a Banks fan, so this is from the perspective of him not making the team. Is Banks fun to watch? Absolutely. But for a guy that only scored a grand total of one touchdown last year, we seem to praise him a lot. I think a lot of us got caught up in the classic underdog/mighty mouse aspect of Banks' preseason.



Shanny has already laid out that he thinks Banks is solely a punt returner? So is keeping guy that can really only do one thing worth it? Especially when you drafted some other guys, like Niles Paul and Aldrick Robinson, that can do the same thing? We remember the long returns, but fail to remember Banks' fumbling troubles in the preseason. That's probably why he didn't make the team right out of the gate.

He's purely one dimensional and doesn't add much to the passing game. So if Moss comes back then how could we possible justify keeping Moss, Hankerson, Armstrong, Paul, Kelley/Robinson, and Banks? I just don't think he adds enough and, as someone said yesterday, he's purely an optical illusion.

Some may not want to let go of Banks out of fear that he'll go somewhere else and become the next Dante Hall or Devin Hester, but I don't see that. Teams had a crack at Banks more than once and the only guy that gave him a shot was Danny Smith and/or Mike Shanahan.

Banks is more a gimmick than anything, he's fun to watch but he needs to be replaced by a quality NFL player that can return and contribute to the passing game. Sorry Brandon.

by Parks Smith for Hogs Haven

Couldn't disagree more. Banks is a scoring threat, and when you have a below average offense you need those positive yards in the return game. Antwan Randel El was a starting receiver who gave us nothing in returns. Banks also had at least 1 TD called back, and several other long returns. Not so sure why people are so quick to replace him with someone they've never seen play before.

He returns kickoffs as well. The short memory of the fans never ceases to amaze.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SbG_Xx8f7YI

Gimmick? Not NFL quality? Soley a punt returner? Underdog/Mightymouse aspect? Shockingly Parks Smith didn't even mention the stabbing incident (character issues) as a reason to get rid of him in his hatchett job of Banks.

True, if Paul, Robinson or even some other unknown like Banks can do what Banks can do and more, then Banks' job might be in jeopardy. That is the only point that Smith makes that has some validity to it.

Here is some information that I believe that Smith deliberately left out. I say deliberately, because he is a Redskin fan and I am sure that he saw the games or at least followed the Redskin news closely.


Banks had a 90+ TD KO return called back against the Lions. That would have given him two for the game and may have broken the backs of the Lions and won us the game. Also, he had a potential game winning PR TD return called back against the Vikings. Who could forget that one? Against TB, he had a long return called back. I bet he was the league leader in return yards wiped out.


Once the season got rolling along, when Banks did play WR, he looked good. Sure, in pre-season, he dropped a few and ran some poor routes, but don't most rookies? I don't remember him dropping any balls in the regular season. He also played the runner in the wildcat. Though he didn't produce much in the wildcat, it showed that Shanny was growing in confidence in using him more. Banks caught 107 passes at the Division I collegiate level in the Big Twelve featuring teams such as Texas, Oklahoma, Nebraska and other top teams during the 2008-9 seasons. We have yet to see what Banks can do as a pro at the wide receiver position.

Fumbling, in the pre-season is one thing, but I only remember Banks losing the ball once during the regular season and that was fumbled out of bounds (Checked NFL stats - two fumbles - no turnovers). The argument that no one wanted him but us is a joke. Banks was cut before he had done much at all and hadn't proven that his pre-season fumbling was cured. No way somebody doesn't sign him if he had been cut after he had his big returns and hadn't fumbled. Of course, we wouldn't and didn't cut him after he found success.

Finally,Banks also showed his toughness in bouncing back from knee surgery in 13 days.

Smith brings up a good topic for discussion, but a very poor argument to support his position.

(1) Brandon Banks averaged 11.5 yards per punt return to Randel El's 6.9 average in his time with the Skins.

(2) Banks nearly doubled the total yards on punt returns (431) of Randel El's average with the Skins (227).

(3) Banks's KR average (25.1 per return) is in the same ballpark as Rock Cartwright's best seasons (25.8 and 25.6) and is slightly better than Cartwright's average for the four years he was the primary returner (24.5). I consider Rock to have been an above-average to solid kick returner. The kind that you are glad to have on your team.

For those three reasons, I see Banks's place on this team as secure for this year. His role replaced what was taking two roster spots before, so that justifies his place on the squad as a 5th or 6th WR.

He was 3rd in the NFL in punt return yards and 10th in kick return yards. On punt returns, he was tied for 3rd in 20+ yd returns. On kick returns, he was 6th in the league in 20+ yd returns and tied for 7th in the league in 40+ yd returns.

Does that sound like a gimmick to anyone but this guy? It sounds to me like solid performances, even if there is room for improvement.

But here's another thought: as best I can remember, Banks had two major returns for TDs called back, both calls on blocks that were nonessential to his breaking free. This is one area where stats, unfortunately, cannot tell the whole story.

(And why in the world would you discount what Banks's showed in preseason and college? The guy was a rookie last year. You look for potential in rookies. If after two more seasons Banks never shows the same flair he showed last August, then it's time to start asking what he's done for us lately.)

Red_One43 wrote:Gimmick? Not NFL quality? Soley a punt returner? Underdog/Mightymouse aspect? Shockingly Parks Smith didn't even mention the stabbing incident (character issues) as a reason to get rid of him in his hatchett job of Banks.

He did state he was not a Banks fan, maybe he thought leaving out the stabbing incident would hide the fact that he didn't mention he's a Banks hater.

Red_One43 wrote:True, if Paul, Robinson or even some other unknown like Banks can do what Banks can do and more, then Banks' job might be in jeopardy. That is the only point that Smith makes that has some validity to it.

They drafted 3 WRs so pretty much all the WRs on the roster should feel that their job is in jeopardy. They also drafted two RBs and at least one returns kicks.

Red_One43 wrote:Here is some information that I believe that Smith deliberately left out. I say deliberately, because he is a Redskin fan and I am sure that he saw the games or at least followed the Redskin news closely.


Banks had a 90+ TD KO return called back against the Lions. That would have given him two for the game and may have broken the backs of the Lions and won us the game.

Luckily we had Perry Riley get called for an illegal block on that play. If not there wouldn't have been a McNabb benching, Rex the starter at the end of the season, wristband-gate, Beck for President, and might have drafted a QB in April

Red_One43 wrote: Also, he had a potential game winning PR TD return called back against the Vikings. Who could forget that one? Against TB, he had a long return called back. I bet he was the league leader in return yards wiped out.

I understand what you are saying but those runs are equal to a QB missing a wide open WR for a 40 or 50 yard TD, or hitting him in the hands and the receiver, drops it.

Red_One43 wrote: Once the season got rolling along, when Banks did play WR, he looked good. Sure, in pre-season, he dropped a few and ran some poor routes, but don't most rookies? I don't remember him dropping any balls in the regular season. He also played the runner in the wildcat. Though he didn't produce much in the wildcat, it showed that Shanny was growing in confidence in using him more. Banks caught 107 passes at the Division I collegiate level in the Big Twelve featuring teams such as Texas, Oklahoma, Nebraska and other top teams during the 2008-9 seasons. We have yet to see what Banks can do as a pro at the wide receiver position.

Fumbling, in the pre-season is one thing, but I only remember Banks losing the ball once during the regular season and that was fumbled out of bounds. The argument that no one wanted him but us is a joke. Banks was cut before he had done much at all and hadn't proven that his pre-season fumbling was cured. No way somebody doesn't sign him if he had been cut after he had his big returns and hadn't fumbled. Of course, we wouldn't and didn't cut him after he found success.

Shanny cut him because he knew no one would pick him up, based on what he had showed. He did the same thing with his boy Ryan Torain, it worked out both times. Once Banks was signed to the active roster I can remember Banks having trouble holding onto the ball.

I don't think Shanny drafted Banks replacement, but he drafted players that can make the roster if one of them can replace the need for Banks as a return man

1niksder wrote:

Red_One43 wrote:Gimmick? Not NFL quality? Soley a punt returner? Underdog/Mightymouse aspect? Shockingly Parks Smith didn't even mention the stabbing incident (character issues) as a reason to get rid of him in his hatchett job of Banks.

He did state he was not a Banks fan, maybe he thought leaving out the stabbing incident would hide the fact that he didn't mention he's a Banks hater.

Red_One43 wrote:True, if Paul, Robinson or even some other unknown like Banks can do what Banks can do and more, then Banks' job might be in jeopardy. That is the only point that Smith makes that has some validity to it.

They drafted 3 WRs so pretty much all the WRs on the roster should feel that their job is in jeopardy. They also drafted two RBs and at least one returns kicks.

Red_One43 wrote:Here is some information that I believe that Smith deliberately left out. I say deliberately, because he is a Redskin fan and I am sure that he saw the games or at least followed the Redskin news closely.


Banks had a 90+ TD KO return called back against the Lions. That would have given him two for the game and may have broken the backs of the Lions and won us the game.

Luckily we had Perry Riley get called for an illegal block on that play. If not there wouldn't have been a McNabb benching, Rex the starter at the end of the season, wristband-gate, Beck for President, and might have drafted a QB in April

Red_One43 wrote: Also, he had a potential game winning PR TD return called back against the Vikings. Who could forget that one? Against TB, he had a long return called back. I bet he was the league leader in return yards wiped out.

I understand what you are saying but those runs are equal to a QB missing a wide open WR for a 40 or 50 yard TD, or hitting him in the hands and the receiver, drops it.

Red_One43 wrote: Once the season got rolling along, when Banks did play WR, he looked good. Sure, in pre-season, he dropped a few and ran some poor routes, but don't most rookies? I don't remember him dropping any balls in the regular season. He also played the runner in the wildcat. Though he didn't produce much in the wildcat, it showed that Shanny was growing in confidence in using him more. Banks caught 107 passes at the Division I collegiate level in the Big Twelve featuring teams such as Texas, Oklahoma, Nebraska and other top teams during the 2008-9 seasons. We have yet to see what Banks can do as a pro at the wide receiver position.

Fumbling, in the pre-season is one thing, but I only remember Banks losing the ball once during the regular season and that was fumbled out of bounds. The argument that no one wanted him but us is a joke. Banks was cut before he had done much at all and hadn't proven that his pre-season fumbling was cured. No way somebody doesn't sign him if he had been cut after he had his big returns and hadn't fumbled. Of course, we wouldn't and didn't cut him after he found success.

Shanny cut him because he knew no one would pick him up, based on what he had showed. He did the same thing with his boy Ryan Torain, it worked out both times. Once Banks was signed to the active roster I can remember Banks having trouble holding onto the ball.

I don't think Shanny drafted Banks replacement, but he drafted players that can make the roster if one of them can replace the need for Banks as a return man

What in the world do you mean by comparing missed passes and drops to Banks having two of his two TD's called back because of illegal blocks? Do you think Banks made the illegal blocks and/or his runbacks should somehow be discredited because QB's miss passes and receivers drop balls? Logic, my friend. Take a look a Bank's stats and you'll see he was a top returner in the NFL last season and would have ranked even higher if his teammates hadn't made pointless errors.

1niksder wrote:

Red_One43 wrote: Also, he had a potential game winning PR TD return called back against the Vikings. Who could forget that one? Against TB, he had a long return called back. I bet he was the league leader in return yards wiped out.

I understand what you are saying but those runs are equal to a QB missing a wide open WR for a 40 or 50 yard TD, or hitting him in the hands and the receiver, drops it.

Can't agree with you on this one 1nik. True, if we were talking about woulda/coulda/shoulda won the game - yes that applies. If we were just talking about stats - yes, that applies, but we are talking about evaluating a kick returner. I can bet Shanny isn't looking at stats and saying Banks only scored only one TD when he evaluates him. Even if you said, "A QB getting a TD called back" I would point to my points above. You also have to consider the number of opportunities. A QB has plenty of opportunities to get it right. A returner only gets a few a game - so even the called back ones count bigger for him for evaluation purposes.

For a QB who consistently misses the long bomb (Does Jason bring up memories here?), he doesn't get evaluated very well. That is a negative on the QB.

If a QB consistently hits receivers in the hands and they drop it, questions arise that the QB may need to take some steam off the ball. If receivers occasionally drop a ball, then it is a knock on the receiver. The receiver gets a good grade for his accuracy.

If a return man has several run backs called back, no one points the finger at the return man, you are causing your players to hit people in the back.

In short:

1. Banks competes for his job.

2. Banks wins his job; and

3. Banks returns next season.

The past season was good for him in Special Teams but that alone would not win him his position back. He has to earn it again and he is seating at the driver's seat in that competition right now. Go Brandon!!!

Oh! ... and I almost stopped reading when this idiot siad he was not a Banks fan. Is he not a REDSKINS fan? Is he Pukes fan?

Red_One43 wrote:

1niksder wrote:

Red_One43 wrote: Also, he had a potential game winning PR TD return called back against the Vikings. Who could forget that one? Against TB, he had a long return called back. I bet he was the league leader in return yards wiped out.

I understand what you are saying but those runs are equal to a QB missing a wide open WR for a 40 or 50 yard TD, or hitting him in the hands and the receiver, drops it.

Can't agree with you on this one 1nik. True, if we were talking about woulda/coulda/shoulda won the game - yes that applies. If we were just talking about stats - yes, that applies, but we are talking about evaluating a kick returner. I can bet Shanny isn't looking at stats and saying Banks only scored only one TD when he evaluates him. Even if you said, "A QB getting a TD called back" I would point to my points above. You also have to consider the number of opportunities. A QB has plenty of opportunities to get it right. A returner only gets a few a game - so even the called back ones count bigger for him for evaluation purposes.

For a QB who consistently misses the long bomb (Does Jason bring up memories here?), he doesn't get evaluated very well. That is a negative on the QB.

If a QB consistently hits receivers in the hands and they drop it, questions arise that the QB may need to take some steam off the ball. If receivers occasionally drop a ball, then it is a knock on the receiver. The receiver gets a good grade for his accuracy.

If a return man has several run backs called back, no one points the finger at the return man, you are causing your players to hit people in the back.

I never said the QB consistently missed nor did I say the WR consistantly dropped passes.
I said it's the same meaning the same outcome. a dropped pass on a scoring play does just as much for a team as a kick being called back. It does nothing to help the team.

1niksder wrote:

Red_One43 wrote:

1niksder wrote: I understand what you are saying but those runs are equal to a QB missing a wide open WR for a 40 or 50 yard TD, or hitting him in the hands and the receiver, drops it.

Can't agree with you on this one 1nik. True, if we were talking about woulda/coulda/shoulda won the game - yes that applies. If we were just talking about stats - yes, that applies, but we are talking about evaluating a kick returner. I can bet Shanny isn't looking at stats and saying Banks only scored only one TD when he evaluates him. Even if you said, "A QB getting a TD called back" I would point to my points above. You also have to consider the number of opportunities. A QB has plenty of opportunities to get it right. A returner only gets a few a game - so even the called back ones count bigger for him for evaluation purposes.

For a QB who consistently misses the long bomb (Does Jason bring up memories here?), he doesn't get evaluated very well. That is a negative on the QB.

If a QB consistently hits receivers in the hands and they drop it, questions arise that the QB may need to take some steam off the ball. If receivers occasionally drop a ball, then it is a knock on the receiver. The receiver gets a good grade for his accuracy.

If a return man has several run backs called back, no one points the finger at the return man, you are causing your players to hit people in the back.

I never said the QB consistently missed nor did I say the WR consistantly dropped passes.
I said it's the same meaning the same outcome. a dropped pass on a scoring play does just as much for a team as a kick being called back. It does nothing to help the team.

OK, I get what you were saying. You were talking team, but I didn't bring that up to mean team. I agree with your point when it comes to the team and also stats (my inclusion). I brought it up to make a point that Brandon showed that he can score in the clutch. Some players fold in the clutch. The fact that the TD was taken away takes nothing away from his evaluation. That was my point. I thought you were making a comparison to my point. I stand corrected.

I really don't get the logic of the original post other than to beat down Brandon Banks. He is the first returner the Redskins have had since Brian Mitchell. Why beat up on Banks other than to just post something?

aswas71788 wrote:I really don't get the logic of the original post other than to beat down Brandon Banks. He is the first returner the Redskins have had since Brian Mitchell. Why beat up on Banks other than to just post something?

+1
Lockout ignorane. Banks did more than most returners, and had a lot of productivity negated by penalties that would not have even impacted his return. Even after being cut and missing games, he still was near the top of the league at his position. Only people who think his stabbing was his own fault are looking for reasons to hate him.

He'll be here, you can take it to the bank...I mean you can bank on it....er...

Let me try this one more time...

I mean...it's money in the bank...

hahahah all nicely said kazoo. Special teams could then score us some points. What if we saw Mr. Bank lined up in a wildcat formation.

redskins14ru wrote: What if we saw Mr. Bank lined up in a wildcat formation.

6 yards rushing is what we saw against the Vikings when we saw Mr. Banks in the wildcat formation. To put a positive spin on it. That was a nice opening drive for a TD. Perhaps, Mr. Banks in the wildcat set some things up for that drive.

He is a pretty athletic guy who out-runs defenses; I love the way other team's kick off and punt units look silly out there during his returns..
The QB play will set the tone for our offense this season, as noted though banks will, if he is on the team be a pest to the other team. Sure will be a fun season!!!

Banks has said that he rushed back from his knee injury because he didn't want to lose his job. I think that he knows better than anyone that it is not a given that he is on this team next year.

The fact that he is attending the players only workouts, at what he calls 90%, speaks volumes for him about wanting to be on this team next year. I take it during these workouts, he is getting a lot of reps at WR so that can do nothing but help him show that he is ready to take on more as a wideout.

Link for how he would like to improve

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/dcspor ... in_11.html

Link for how much the knee was bothering him last season

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redski ... s-pro.html

Link Banks saying why he felt he needed to get back on the field after the injury

http://www.tbd.com/blogs/tbd-skins/2010 ... -6387.html

Banks will either be on the Redskins... or on another teams roster making people wonder "what the heck were the Redskins thinking?"...

Countertrey wrote:Banks will either be on the Redskins... or on another teams roster making people wonder "what the heck were the Redskins thinking?"...

Yeah, that's never happened before, we'd hate for it to happen now...

It would be idiotic for them to let Banks go. Just downright dumb. And whoever wrote that article is a "ratard".

redskins14ru wrote:He is a pretty athletic guy who out-runs defenses; I love the way other team's kick off and punt units look silly out there during his returns..
The QB play will set the tone for our offense this season, as noted though banks will, if he is on the team be a pest to the other team. Sure will be a fun season!!!

a fun season watching brandon maybe.....not sure about the rest of the team...

I like Banks. I want him on this team. I hope he is on the team whenever this season starts. We need as many positives as possible. Banks was one of the few bright spots last year so we have to keep him.