Brandon Banks

[Beemnseven]

Seeing what Banks can do, (and assuming he can keep it up) it just makes you wonder why we held on to Cartwright and Randle El for so long.

With those guys, it was always about "locker room leadership." Eff that. Put something on the field. Banks did that. And he represents more of what we need: Young, hungry guys who are desperate to prove themselves.

[Pocket$ $traight]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

Seeing what Banks can do, (and assuming he can keep it up) it just makes you wonder why we held on to Cartwright and Randle El for so long.

With those guys, it was always about "locker room leadership." Eff that. Put something on the field. Banks did that. And he represents more of what we need: Young, hungry guys who are desperate to prove themselves.

I agree. Randle-El and Campbell apologists say the exact same thing, "Well if we would just block better....blah blah blah" The fact is that neither could get it done and that is why they needed to go. I think Rock was pretty productive as a returner for a while but he had no upside and is on the downside so that move was easy too. I like the fact that they are trying some fast, young, new blood instead of over-the-hill "character" guys.

[SkinzWin]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

Seeing what Banks can do, (and assuming he can keep it up) it just makes you wonder why we held on to Cartwright and Randle El for so long.

With those guys, it was always about "locker room leadership." Eff that. Put something on the field. Banks did that. And he represents more of what we need: Young, hungry guys who are desperate to prove themselves.

Today's daily double answer. Vinny Sorryato

[Lotus]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

Seeing what Banks can do, (and assuming he can keep it up) it just makes you wonder why we held on to Cartwright and Randle El for so long.

With those guys, it was always about "locker room leadership." Eff that. Put something on the field. Banks did that. And he represents more of what we need: Young, hungry guys who are desperate to prove themselves.

If Banks starts fumbling, we'll see why. Rock and ARE (mostly) were good about not putting the ball on the ground.

[Pocket$ $traight]

Originally Posted by Lotus

If Banks starts fumbling, we'll see why. Rock and ARE (mostly) were good about not putting the ball on the ground.

If Grandma had nuts, she would be Grandpa. Both ARE and Rock were fumbling threats. Rock was consistent and ARE was garbage. I don't know which is a bigger indictment on Zorn, the "swinging gate" or the fact that Randle-El was the primary punt returner for both years.

Either way the Zorn era is dead. Thank God.

[Lotus]

^ I wasn't supporting Zorn as a coach or Rock and ARE as returners. I'm on record in these pages as supporting the replacement of all 3.

Banks' return against Buffalo was electric and, needless to say, we could use more of that. But reports from camp have it that Banks puts the ball on the ground with some frequency. Fumbled kicks are major game changers. We want a returner who can take it to the house AND not fumble.

I'm not hopping on the Banks bandwagon until I see that he keeps the ball secure. Ball security was an advantage of both Rock and (mostly) ARE.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Pocket$ $traight

If Grandma had nuts, she would be Grandpa. Both ARE and Rock were fumbling threats. Rock was consistent and ARE was garbage. I don't know which is a bigger indictment on Zorn, the "swinging gate" or the fact that Randle-El was the primary punt returner for both years.

Thinking that would be Randle El. The swinging gate was a desperation play where more than half the team had no idea the ball was snapped. Randle El returning punts was premeditated, over, and over again.