Brandon Banks - The Wide Receiver

by **SkinsJock** » Tue Dec 18, 2012 9:03 am

let it go, please

by **1niksder** » Tue Dec 18, 2012 9:08 am

SkinsJock wrote::shock: let it go, please

That's what he's been saying... "let him go" he didn't say please though.

He bumps the tread but doesn't add anything to it, that not like ATX but then I figured it out... he's doing to this thread what he says Banks does for the Redskins.

by **riggofan** » Tue Dec 18, 2012 10:48 am

DarthMonk wrote:
skinsfan#33 wrote:I haven't been able to find ANY stats that show that the KO is a statistically higher injury rate. Not saying you pulled that out of the air (or under your seat), but I haven't been able to find any.

Me neither. I'm trying to remember a guy getting concussed on a KO.

Hey sorry guys I missed your posts asking where I got those stats. Here is the link from nfl.com:

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap100000 ... l-kickoffs

Schiano's idea wasn't one that came off the top of his head. He researched it during his tenure at Rutgers. He was coaching the Scarlet Knights when one of his players, Eric LeGrand, suffered a severe spinal injury on a kickoff in 2010.

"One of the things that when I was researching, I think it was like, in the old kickoff rules, 17 percent of the catastrophic injuries happened on kickoffs, yet it's only about 6 percent of the plays in the game," Schiano said. "Well, that is disproportionate. Things like that are the reasons that led me there, but obviously it's a personal thing with me because of Eric LeGrand."

by **ATX_Skins** » Tue Dec 18, 2012 4:16 pm

1niksder wrote:
SkinsJock wrote::shock: let it go, please

That's what he's been saying... "let him go" he didn't say please though.

He bumps the tread but doesn't add anything to it, that not like ATX but then I figured it out... he's doing to this thread what he says Banks does for the Redskins.

Fine...

The absence of Brandon Banks IMO has drastically helped the team. Crawford and Paul are doing just fine back there. Our special teams is playing great on both sides. Danny Smith WAS NOT the issue, Brandon Banks was. Considering I was probably the most outspoken board member in regards to getting rid of Banks, I feel as though it was appropriate to bring it up again, and again. Call it gloating because I am as well :wink:

by **skinsfan#33** » Tue Dec 18, 2012 8:12 pm

ATX_Skins wrote:
1niksder wrote:
SkinsJock wrote::shock: let it go, please

That's what he's been saying... "let him go" he didn't say please though.

He bumps the tread but doesn't add anything to it, that not like ATX but then I figured it out... he's doing to this thread what he says Banks does for the Redskins.

Fine...

The absence of Brandon Banks IMO has drastically helped the team. Crawford and Paul are doing just fine back there. Our special teams is playing great on both sides. Danny Smith WAS NOT the issue, Brandon Banks was. Considering I was probably the most outspoken board member in regards to getting rid of Banks, I feel as though it was appropriate to bring it up again, and again. Call it gloating because I am as well

other than that one return that was blocked outstanding, I see nothing different. What do you consider "drastically"?

by **DarthMonk** » Tue Dec 18, 2012 8:55 pm

skinsfan#33 wrote:
ATX_Skins wrote:
1niksder wrote:
SkinsJock wrote::shock: let it go, please

That's what he's been saying... "let him go" he didn't say please though.

He bumps the tread but doesn't add anything to it, that not like ATX but then I figured it out... he's doing to this thread what he says Banks does for the Redskins.

Fine...

The absence of Brandon Banks IMO has drastically helped the team. Crawford and Paul are doing just fine back there. Our special teams is playing great on both sides. Danny Smith WAS NOT the issue, Brandon Banks was. Considering I was probably the most outspoken board member in regards to getting rid of Banks, I feel as though it was appropriate to bring it up again, and again. Call it gloating because I am as well

other than that one return that was blocked outstanding, I see nothing different. What do you consider "drastically"?

Maybe this:

BB in 2012:

26 PRs, 6.7 avg.

Last 2 Weeks:

5 PRs, 23.6 avg.

Subtract the TD and it's 4 PRs for a 13.6 avg.

There is also the obvious decision making on KR.

by **rskin72** » Tue Dec 18, 2012 9:09 pm

While I am not a bb hater......i have just never seen his value displayed in meaningful games in the past two seasons. He is speedy, but he does not appear to me to be a playmaker for us. Crawford on pr's, so far, has been better than bb this season. Paul we could argue about, but paul can play te and make an impact whereas bb does not make an impact at wr.

Think bb will be gone next season.....

by **Deadskins** » Tue Dec 18, 2012 10:38 pm

rskin72 wrote:but paul can play te

Really? When's he gonna start showing it? :twisted:

by **SkinsJock** » Wed Dec 19, 2012 9:13 am

Deadskins wrote:
rskin72 wrote:"but paul can play te"

Really? When's he gonna start showing it?

sometimes ... you crack me up :lol:

by **DaSkinz Baby** » Wed Dec 19, 2012 9:45 am

Deadskins wrote:
rskin72 wrote:but paul can play te

Really? When's he gonna start showing it?

Exactly Paul drops WAY TOO MANY BALLS and he was a receiver?? Whenever the ball is thrown to him I have a reasonable expectation he drops it. Sometimes I don't think Niles Paul could catch a cold........... :oops:

by **Deadskins** » Wed Dec 19, 2012 10:13 am

SkinsJock wrote:
Deadskins wrote:
rskin72 wrote:"but paul can play te"

Really? When's he gonna start showing it?

sometimes ... you crack me up

I aims to please.

by **DarthMonk** » Wed Dec 19, 2012 10:20 am

.. and Hank always almost drops it. He be the juggler. Likes to stumble too. Wuddup?