Banner = Trade - DawgTalkers.net

If Banner had no hand in Philly, then we are run by noobs and failed retreads. It was YOU that said you feel more comfy to KNOW Banner had say in personnel, not me, remember? You rode that one for weeks and now it doesn't matter? There goes your twisting

Trading down is probably the best option for us if Jordan and Milliner aren't there. And it might still be the best option if those guys are there.

There isn't much difference between the talent in the early first round than there is in the mid to late first round. I would much rather have a mid to late first round pick and a second round pick than Jarvis Jones or Ansah at six.

Quote:

Yeah, Lombardi is running this draft... ....Lombardi is just getting spreadsheets ready and probably just providing coffee and donuts in the draft war room

That's my take as well, Memphis. Aside from the actual draft, I will be very interested to see after our selection, whether or not Lombardi will be on stage along with Banner, Chud...

What stage?

Quote:

What stage?

I'm guessing he is referring the to the press conference that usually takes place with the first rounder(s).

Quote:

If Banner had no hand in Philly, then we are run by noobs and failed retreads. It was YOU that said you feel more comfy to KNOW Banner had say in personnel, not me, remember?

And I do believe he had say in personnel. The difference is that in your post you want to give him blame for the failures without ever giving him credit for successes, while handing Reid all the credit for successes.

Until you or anyone else know the entire story, neither you nor anyone else can give FULL blame or FULL credit, which is what you tried to do.

You cannot point the finger at Banner supporters for playing games if you're going to play those same games as a critic.

As for me, all I've ever said is I believe he had more say in personnel than people were willing to give him credit for, so he should receive some of the credit for the successes they had in Philly. Nowhere did I ever say he should receive no blame for the failures.

That's the difference between you and I. You refuse to consider the possibility that he had a positive influence on personnel while being very quick to stick him with the failures. That's what you just accused other people of doing.

As you say, you can't argue it both ways.

Here's your quote:

Quote:

we either have a noob running the ship or a failed retread

Translation: "We either have a noob running the ship" meaning he never had say in personnel which gives all the credit to Reid, "or a failed retread" meaning Banner was the cause of all the failures.

Summarized: Reid gets all the credit and Banner gets all the failure.

So flat-out here's a question for you to answer: Is it fair to saddle him with the failures if he doesn't get credit for the successes?

Wouldn't it be more telling about what Mike Lombardi would do?

Most of those trades involved Tom Heckert as the GM of the Eggles.

It continued with him as the GM in Cleveland too.

Find me a quote where I give Reid credit for their success? There isn't any...my point is that the last we know about the Eagles is that they sucked and the NFL is a what have you done for me lately business

We also know that Banner is a cap guru. So, let's assume he had say in personnel. Since the past years the cap isn't as significant anymore I see a correlation between the two events...

Quote:

Find me a quote where I give Reid credit for their success?

SOMEONE has to get the credit for the successes. You're clearly laying all the blame at Banner's feet, so the only person left to get the credit for the successes is Reid. Your words, not mine.

Quote:

my point is that the last we know about the Eagles is that they sucked and the NFL is a what have you done for me lately business

Horsecrap.

When JUDGING the history of a regime it's not about "what have you done for me lately." You judge an entire body of work.

Quote:

We also know that Banner is a cap guru. So, let's assume he had say in personnel. Since the past years the cap isn't as significant anymore I see a correlation between the two events...

Nice try. Yet another way to try and devalue Banner.

Answer the question: Is it fair to assign blame to Banner on the personnel side if you cannot give him credit on the personnel side?

Quote:

Trading down is probably the best option for us if Jordan and Milliner aren't there. And it might still be the best option if those guys are there.

There isn't much difference between the talent in the early first round than there is in the mid to late first round. I would much rather have a mid to late first round pick and a second round pick than Jarvis Jones or Ansah at six.

And when there isn't much difference between the talent in the early first round than there is in the mid to late first round it is much more difficult to find someone willing to pay a fair price to move up.

I agree. But because we pick in front of the Cardinals, who desperately need a left tackle, I think if either Fisher or Joeckel is available we will be able to find a trade partner. Teams might even be willing to trade in front of the Cardinals to get Johnson.

Quote:

Quote:

Would love a trade down, and a 2nd round pick!

I just have a hard time believing someone wants to move up to 6.

NRTU so much as I am just asking a question

What would you like to see.

I mean, what's fair. How far down in the first round would you go to get a second round pick?

Forget value charts for a second,, what would make you feel as if Banner made a good move?

I know that in the end, it's not the number of the pick that matters nearly as much as the player you take with it, but just off the top,, what would make you feel good.

I'm not GM or anything, but as a fan, I would feel comfortable staying in the teens. If we're trading back past 20, there better be another 1st round pick involved, and I don't really think any team is going to want to move from the 20's down to 6 and give up an extra 1 plus other picks. Not in this draft.

I think there are lots of good players that are going to go right between 10-20. There are 2 tight ends that would both be good fits, there are OL, there are still pass rushers, etc... That seems ideal for us.

I kinda hope there is still one of the higher rated QB's on the board when we're up and someone gets antsy...

Quote:

Answer the question: Is it fair to assign blame to Banner on the personnel side if you cannot give him credit on the personnel side?

Now I don't want to enter a debate, or presume to know anything about Banner's role in Philadelphia, it is just that this question has me laughing inside. Here is why.
The cynical part of me has to retort that it could be fair to blame someone for failure without giving credit for success, if for no other reason than if they just got in the way of others trying to succeed with everything they do.
Then this image comes to mind.
In the 90's in south america a boxer's mother got in the ring and hit her son's opponent with either a shoe or a handbag/purse.
Now would it be fair to say she had some blame in her son's failure, if he failed, without giveing her credit for his success if he succeeded. Well Ya, and it's got me cracking up inside. ( suppose she had been in the ring the whole fight)

I apologize for interfering with your argument, as I haven't even read both sides.

Quote:

It was always Andy Reid, Reid, Reid was the guy calling the shots on draft day. Now we are to believe its been Banner ???

Maybe it was Reid picking the player and Banner finding a way to get that player. :shrug:

Quote:

Banner + Trade Partner = Trade

Fixed it.

Quote:

Quote:

It was always Andy Reid, Reid, Reid was the guy calling the shots on draft day. Now we are to believe its been Banner ???

Maybe it was Reid picking the player and Banner finding a way to get that player. :shrug:

The thing is, Banner seems to claim he had some say in personnel matters. Nobody wants to give the details as to how much or how little.

It's like reading a resume' with a lot of blank spaces in it. The article says and Banner claims he was more involved in trade downs, but the evidence clearly indicates it was far more trade ups than trade downs.

It's like nobody wishes to give anybody a straight answer and we're all just supposed to buy into everything on faith.

While your scenario would be the best possible outcome, there's no way of knowing how much or how little of input he had in botching up these picks.

I would say odds are that we have already worked out parameters with a couple teams like the Phins and Chargers who will look to jump the Cards and Bills for a LT. Then you have a couple teams on the back end that may believe they are 1 player away like the 49ers and Broncos.

I dont think finding a trade partner will be that hard. Hell we could trade down more than once in this draft. Drop down to 11 or 12 then you get teams antsy about getting a receiver or one of the pass rushers that has fallen.

Gonna be interesting, to bad I will be working that night lol.

Man I hope your right and we can trade back at least once for more picks and even more times would be great. Personally I don't wanna drop out of top 25 but if got some real outstanding offers maybe. Yet would love to pick up a 2nd and possibly couple of 3's - 5's. With more picks would give our F.O. Chance for more picks and for us as fans to get a better feel how this new leadership group will pick and evaluate players leading us into a new regime and really stamp out how the next 3-5 years play out.

jc

at this point, if Milliner isn't there I kind of hope they do trade it and get us into the second round and whatever else...

Was The Absence Of Joe Banner The Reason For The Improved Eagles Draft?

Thursday, December 27th, 2012

According to a person close to the Eagles, there’s a big difference between the Eagles brain trust which orchestrated the Birds 2012 draft, as compared to the group which navigated the 2010 and 2011 draft. Yes, Andy Reid was the Eagles head coach during all of those drafts and he had final say on the picks. Yes, Howie Roseman was the guy evaluating the players prior to those three drafts, but there was still a major difference.

The difference was the presence of current Brown President Joe Banner. The life long friend of Eagles owner Jeffrey Lurie was the team’s President, and he was there for the 2010 and 2011 drafts. He wasn’t around for the 2012 draft and I’m told it made a big difference. Banner pressed the decision makers about getting position players who would meet their needs.

I’m told that the Eagles feel they will continue to draft better if they focus on getting the best player available rather than drafting to meet position needs. They believe teams who try to get the best player rather than trying to meet needs tend to be more consistent in the selection process.

Let’s take a quick look back at the last three Eagles drafts.

In the 2010 draft with Banner driving the idea to draft for needs, the Eagles struggled in the early rounds. I don’t know that you say that is the reason they chose Brandon Graham over Jason Pierre Paul, but drafting Daniel Te’o Nesheim in the third round could have been done as a way to address position needs.

1. DE Brandon Graham

2. S Nate Allen

3. DE Daniel Te’o Nesheim

4. CB Trevard Lindley

LB Keenan Clayton

QB Mike Kafka

5. DE Ricky Sapp

WR Riley Cooper

6. RB Charles Scott

LB Jamar Chaney

7. DT Jeff Owens

S Kurt Coleman

Amazingly the Eagles did better at the end of the draft than they did at the start of it. Fifth round pick Riley Cooper, sixth round pick Jamar Chaney and seventh round pick Kurt Coleman have contributed more than the players in the first, second, third and fourth rounds. This could be attributed to stressing meeting needs in the top rounds and trying to get the best player available in the latter rounds.

In the 2011 draft

1. G Danny Watkins

2. S Jaiquawn Jarrett

3. CB Curtis Marsh

4. LB Casey Matthews

K Alex Henery

5. RB Dion Lewis

G Julian Vandervelde

6. C Jason Kelce

7. LB Greg Lloyd

FB Stanley Havili

Look at the production of the first four rounds in the 2011 draft and it could make you throw up. Watkins, Jarrett, Marsh and Matthews are all either sitting the bench or not on a roster in the NFL. It looks like the Eagles missed on their first five picks of the 2011 draft.

The Birds decision to draft a player in the first round who would be 27 in his rookie year was a major mistake and I don’t think they can blame all of it on over-emphasizing addressing team needs. Watkins has been benched in favor of Jake Scott, who was sitting at home a month ago.

The most disturbing thing I’ve heard about Watkins is that he doesn’t love playing football. Amazingly this guy may want to be a fireman more than a NFL player.

Jarrett was definitely a reach because he played the safety position. He wasn’t fast enough to play safety in the NFL. Here you have a second round pick who is available, but no other teams have touched him since the Eagles released him.

Marsh has the size and speed needed to play, but he hasn’t shown the quickness or ball skills needed to play the corner in this league. He continues to be an Oak Ridge Boy (bench warmer).

Matthews started at the beginning of his career a year ago, but wasn’t able to keep his starting position. It was the best of situations to be middle linebacker in the “Wide Nine” during your rookie year in the NFL. He lost his starting job and hasn’t been able to regain it.

The Eagles second pick in the fourth round has been very good. I’m talking about kicker Alex Henery, who will probably be the Eagles MVP. He’s had a very good year and may have been the best pick in the 2011 draft.

Their first pick in the fifth round, Pittsburgh running back Dion Lewis was supposed to be backing up LeSean McCoy, but he was beaten out by this year’s seventh round pick, Bryce Brown. Lewis hasn’t done much since he was drafted.

The Eagles second pick in the fifth round was guard , Julian Vandervelde, who has done absolutely nothing for the Birds during his short career. They’ve cut him a couple of times and brought him back, but they’ve never really considered starting him.

In the sixth round the Birds selected Cincinnati center Jason Kelce, who is probably their best pick on the 2011 draft. Prior to sustaining a season-ending knee-injury earlier this season, he was on his way to being one of the best centers in the NFL.

In the seventh round, they selected linebacker Greg Lloyd. He didn’t have NFL talent.

Their final seventh round pick was USC fullback Stanley Havili and he’s been a pleasant surprise. After spending a year on injured reserve, Havili has been the starter at fullback this year, but hasn’t been asked to do much.

It’s still early, but it looks like the Eagles have done a much better job in the 2012 draft, than they did in 2010 and 2011.

1. DT Fletcher Cox

2. LB Mychal Kendricks

DE Vinny Curry

3. QB Nick Foles

4. CB Brandon Boykin

5. OT Dennis Kelly

6. WR Marvin McNutt

OG Brandon Washington

7. RB Bryce Brown

Clearly the Eagles did a much better job at the top of the 2012 draft than they did in 2010 and 2011. Was the absence of Eagles President Joe Banner and his emphasis on meeting position needs the reason for the improvement? I can’t say but something made a difference.

Cox looks like he’s headed to being one of the best defensive tackles in the NFL. We knew he had the size, quickness and speed, but he plays hard and has the ability to take over a game.

Kendricks started out strong, but ran into the rookie wall. He was moved to his true position, WILL linebacker, where speed, quickness and instincts are a priority. They turned him loose on a couple of blitzes and looks like he belong there and may be an impact player.

Curry has showed some fire when he got the chance to play. but he’s got a lot to prove.

Foles has shown us that he has the smarts, size and demeanor to be a starting quarterback in the NFL. Can he be a franchise quarterback? I don’t kno He showed he can take the hits and handle the pressure. The young man has a lot more to prove, but I think he has shown potential.

Boykin has showed us his potential at the nickel back position, in what has been an up and down year. His small size could limit his ability to be a starting cornerback.

Kelly has shown that he can be a starter at the right tackle position. The youngster struggled early on, but he has recovered and is playing better.

McNutt got very little playing time, so nobody knows whether he can do anything on the professional level.

Washington was released.

Brown showed us he has the ability to be a star running back. He had tremendous games in his first two starts, but he’s got to learn to avoid fumbles.

web page

Quote:

SOMEONE has to get the credit for the successes. You're clearly laying all the blame at Banner's feet, so the only person left to get the credit for the successes is Reid. Your words, not mine.

I think you're forgetting their GM by the name of Tom Heckert...strange correlation that THEIR best drafts came with him on board and their crappy one's without him, same with success and decline. In Cleveland the best drafts since rebirth were with Tom Heckert too....makes you go hmm, doesn't it? Just another forgotten wrinkle to the "who had the power in Philly" saga

Quote:

Answer the question: Is it fair to assign blame to Banner on the personnel side if you cannot give him credit on the personnel side?

We've finally arrived, thanks for proving my point. I was arguing both ways exactly to show what you did and you're right, it's NOT fair...but that's what YOU did in the first place. Without any strong evidence you assume that Banner was the trigger man or somehow "involved" and thus feeling more comfy for the Browns, but you actually did what you accuse ME of doing just 180: you leave out the bad and say "look, he was involved and they were good once". If the best you can say is "he was good and bad"...well, if overall mediocre and pretty bad lately is good enough for you, more power too ya, it isn't for me.
Look there are 2 ways to look at this and the best possible is yours and it's the a) "good and bad" one. The other is: b) he wasn't involved = we're run by an overconfident noob...so, flipping a coin between a "mediocre" retread and "noob" does not look like a good bet to me

Quote:

It's funny, the same people that defend Banner by saying "it was all Reid" are the ones that claim that Banner WAS in fact involved in the draft/FA evaluations process to calm down those who are critical of Banner running the show for us...what is it now? You can't argue both ways...

LOL.......I was thinking the same exact thing, but the other way around. I see all you guys saying that the Eagles were only good because Reid made all the picks and then blame their demise and the "dream team" on Banner.

These are the types of threads that drive me nuts. Posts like these drive me nuts. It's all about who's right, who's wrong. It's all about personal feelings and agendas. No real football talk, just childish exchanges that are non-productive at best and downright ugly at worst.

Of course, these are the types of posts that most seem to want to engage in. I get aggravated w/myself for being drawn into these mindless and juvenile exchanges. I only do because of BS comments like the one I quoted from you.

Are we having fun yet? Learning anything? Using our time wisely?

Yeah, that is what I thought.

To the real thread topic:

Not sure if it matters if he traded up or down in the past or even if he was the one calling the shots. We have a brand new team [Banner, Lombardi, Chud, Farmer] in place and they are approaching their first draft. Each draft is unique in it's own right. Last year was the perfect year to trade down. Unfortunately, we blew that opportunity.

This year? I would love to draft Dee Milliner. If he isn't available, then I would prefer a trade down. The obvious problem is that how do you know this in advance? Maybe it's just me, but the article that started this thread was not very accurate and wasn't useful knowledge. The circumstances for this upcoming draft are completely different from anything Banner faced in the past.

So again, I guess the only reason for so many replies is so people can force their own beliefs down the throats of other posters, like we don't already know how you feel.

Quote:

... I would love to draft Dee Milliner. If he isn't available, then I would prefer a trade down.

Agreed, and from what I've been reading here, a lot of others think similarly. What with the "stock" of many of the expected top picks rising, falling, then rising again, it's very difficult to say where we're going...

Ah, the bully with the glass chin is back, talk football much in your post? While I didn't, I at least talk about logic and the way arguments are being constructed...meanwhile you do the elephant in the china bone shop act. Guess that's "talking football"

The "Banner-dilemma" doesn't go away. We don't know how much a hand he had in Philly but we do know the results and from an argumentative standpoint it comes down to what I said in my last post: either "mediocre, good/bad" or "noob".

Anyway, here's a reminder of what a former Eagles player had to say about all this, suggesting that Banner took over the past years in Philly...and we all know the results of it and the outcome (Lurie firing his long time friend):

http://articles.philly.com/2013-01-05/sports/36151018_1_howie-roseman-eagles-gm-tom-heckert

McNabb: Banner took power from Reid, groomed Roseman
By Peter Mucha, Philly.com Staff Writer
Posted: January 05, 2013

The idea that Andy Reid always had final say is a bit of a myth, according to former Eagles quarterback Donovan McNabb.

Before being ousted in June, team president Joe Banner sometimes exercised more authority than Reid, who was fired Monday, McNabb said Thursday on Comcast SportsNet's Daily News Live.

As reported earlier today, McNabb also said on the show that the Eagles should hire a defensive-minded coach, not offensively innovative University of Oregon coach Chip Kelly. McNabb also dismissed rumors about a return to the playing field, perhaps with Reid, reportedly on the verge of closing a deal to the next head coach of the Kansas City Chiefs.

The Banner remarks came in response to a question from host Michael Barkann: "As far as you know, when you were with the team, the 'final-say' provision, who had it? Was it Andy? Was it Joe?"

Although McNabb initially said, "You know, we had no clue," he elaborated with an air of being knowledgeable.

"It seems like when Andy went through his issues with the family and his sons early on, that was a time for Joe to step in and try to make every decision," McNabb said. "That's when you kind of felt like Andy lost his power. And every decision that was made, it was going through Joe."

A common public perception was that Eagles general managers had clout in the organization, but McNabb painted a different picture.

"It didn't matter who the GM was at that time, because when Tom Heckert was here, it seemed like Joe made every decision," McNabb said. "And it was so easy for him to just kind of push Heckert out, you know. Heckert was up for the Atlanta job, and he told him to go and interview for it."

Heckert, who became Eagles GM in January 2006, left four years later to assume the same title with Cleveland Browns. But on Monday, a few months after Banner was named Browns CEO, Heckert was fired.

When Heckert left the Eagles, Howie Roseman took over as GM, but at first he seemed to be doing Banner's bidding, according to McNabb.

Banner "was already grooming Howie" to take Heckert's position, "so basically he could make every decision and just have Howie there with the title. And that's the way things were the last couple years, of Howie just being there, you know, suggesting a lot of things, but with Joe making the decision," McNabb said.

That seems to fit remarks made Monday by owner Jeffrey Lurie, who gave Roseman credit for the 2012 draft, but took him off the hook for previous ones.

"The mistakes that were made in the 2011 draft have little or nothing to do with Howie's evaluations," Lurie said.

McNabb seemed to confirm rumors of power struggles: "Now Andy came back and regained some of the power, but Joe was the one that was holding all of the power, I felt, and everyone in the locker room knew that."

In the last couple of days, rumors have suggested that Heckert might join Reid in Kansas City as general manager. However, recent reports say Packers director of football operations John Dorsey had emerged as the front runner. Today, Scott Pioli, who held the general manager post in Kansas City for the last four seasons, resigned.

I hate articles like this one ..... because they don't take reality into account.

In 2010, the Eagles got over 30 sacks from their defensive line. Graham had 3 of them. He then got hurt late ion his rookie year, and then only played 3 games in 2011, due to injury. He had microfracture surgery on his right knee.

He then returned to a under-performing Eagles defense, and in 2012 recordrd 38 tackles and 5.5 sacks. This may not seem like a lot, but he did tie for the team lead, along with the aforementioned Cox, and Justin Babin. (both of whom fell off in production badly from the year before, when they combined for 29 sacks)

I am not going to claim that his picks were great.However, I would bet that a coach like Andy Reid had major input into the picks at the top of the draft, I bet that he had close to final say on the top couple of rounds.

In the end ...... who knows? The Eagles managed to have 8 double digit win seasons since 1999 ..... while we've had what .... 1?

(and another 9 win season) I would certainly take that.

thanks Mac...sort of answers my ??? if the article was true.

I sort of find it funny the premise of the article. Banner was the REASON...lol

Lets see. The article stated Reid "had final say".

Lets see. The article stated Roseman "did the evaluating"

hmmmm so Banner jacked up the Eagles draft by: "PRESSED THE DECISION MAKERS ABOUT GETTING POSITION PLAYERS WHO WOULD MEET THEIR NEEDS"

I am leery n question Banner but some of you Salem With Hunt dawgs - Come on now.

Lets see Banner who is the Cap Specialist - is looking ahead at aging Vets (we'll get to McNabb's bitterness a bit later) who will not be able to justify the contracts they would be looking for...so he is preparing the team in getting players at positions they can GROOM n be ready for a seamless transition...YOU KNOW HOW DYNASTIES DO IT!

But wait lets take that logical good sense out of the equation...so lets go by the BIASED TAINT of this article to Bash Banner all is true. So he pushed the War Room to highly consider certain POSITIONAL NEEDS. I'm sure he didn't do it with 15 minutes left on the clock but months, weeks, days in advance.

So the article is true...Banner stated they need a DE early in 2010 according to the article this is his TRANSGRESSION but we are to Blame Banner for the CHOICE of Graham.

When clearly it was Roseman EVALUATING n Reid FINAL SAY in the who

Huh?

Outside of the fact that 2012 was probably one of the most talented in depth DRAFT CLASSES in like AGES!!! Nah that cannot be the reason for better picks in 2012...lol

BOZOISM...to its finest degree. Some dawgs will no break things down to see if it makes sense or not. Just take the OPINION as fact cause he uses some Statistics that are true...but MEAN JUST WHAT??? Just cause Statistics are correct it doesn't mean the premise of opinion is therefore correct.

As for McNabb...I have not seen a more BITTER BIASED analyst on NFL Network.

Jealous of ROMO n his Contract. Bitter about Banner cause he was one of those Vet who were not going to justify a next big contract. Among several other things - But lets take HIS WORD FOR IT...someone with a Personal Grudge against Banner - otay.

Look if he is scum I wish to know it. I am testing him out but I don't want BS BOZO stuff to sway me. as in

Oh wow...I mean - if I was a teenager doing Bong hits...I can see the correlation. as in a Cheech n Chong movie.

But My mind is still open - I am skeptical maybe for the first time with a new Regime - not cause I hate Banner or Love the ousted guys...just taken too much for granted in the past.

But the more "FACT" I learn - Not Editorials - The more I like Banner.

JMHO

Quote:

I sort of find it funny the premise of the article. Banner was the REASON...lol

Lets see. The article stated Reid "had final say".

Lets see. The article stated Roseman "did the evaluating"

hmmmm so Banner jacked up the Eagles draft by: "PRESSED THE DECISION MAKERS ABOUT GETTING POSITION PLAYERS WHO WOULD MEET THEIR NEEDS"

Yeah, I'm going to believe that Reid would allow Banner to push him into selecting the people Joe wanted to get.

That's some off-the-wall rhetoric right there.

However, it does speak to the FACT that Banner had say in personnel during his LOOOONG tenure in Philly.

If he can take heat for how his last draft went down, then he deserves credit for the success in personnel.

No one guy is perfect and I'd never expect any guy to be, but I'm more comfortable knowing that Banner DID have a say in personnel during his time in Philly. Will that translate into good things here? I've no idea, but at least the truth has come out that Banner did more than just count the beans.

Dj, it doesn't matter how you wanna say it, you did nothing but blame banner. He either came here with NO experience, or he was the REASON the Eagles failed. Your words, not mine. That makes it 100% clear that you have no objectivity and therefore any agenda your pushing carries about as much weight as the dirt Versie is angrily chewing for allowing his bi-polar, Dawg-talkers alter-ego persona to simultaneously hate other people for doing the things he himself does.

Vers, roll with it. You're always going to be drawn TO it, not drawn INTO it.

Quote:

Dj, it doesn't matter how you wanna say it, you did nothing but blame banner. He either came here with NO experience, or he was the REASON the Eagles failed.

Sure I did, I think he has no clue when it comes to personnel. There's no clear resume. You know, there's a reason his boyhood buddy that owns an NFL team hired him as an accountant for decades and NOT for personnel. There are strong indications that Banner muscled his way to more power towards the end of his tenure in Philly, which led to them declining and hiy buddy firing him. It's not only the McNabb interview, also stuff Reid and Lurie himself hinted at, most famously him keeping note who wanted who on draft day. He all but said that the last drafts were all on Reid and/or Banner, absolving Roseman from any of it...then you read McNabb saying Banner was "grooming" Roseman and it's easy to see what very probably was going down on draft day in Philly. Add to that Banner wanting to get rid of Heckert in Philly and it's even more apparent

I don't know how anyone can think it's "business as usual" to fire a longtime friend after decades of personal and work relationship, so by deduction it's not far fetched to say that some crap hit the wall in Philly which led to his "departure"...you choose to believe that Banner carries equal fame and blame for personnel in Philly, cool...that's still a shady and clouded resume at best. Another chapter of "lowered expectations" in Browns camp.

My opinion? It's right here and completely plausible:

The moment Banner lied to us straight in our faces about the "strong" personnel guy coming via HC or GM told everything about him: he thinks HE is that strong personnel guy and he brought along another buddy of his with the same inferiority complex as they chuckled together for years behind the scenes of how smart they were when they hit on a player they would have drafted over another bust. He hates on Roseman to Lombardi, who, the "lightning rod" that he is, can't shut his yap and runs to his buddy LaCanfora acting all pumpous about being a GM again and saying that Roseman is the power hungry, back-stabbing monster (after all, he "groomed" him to be his caddy) Banner probably portraied him to be. Lurie in Philly is furious and accuses Banner publicly to be a snake. Banner issues an official statement vie the Browns homepage (!) for this personal pissing match and has only nice things to say about Lurie to make friends again....shortly after, Banner head slaps Lombardi in front of the media for being a "lighning rod" and keeping him in the kennel the day the present their two big new aquisition...making PERFECTLY clear to his yapping friend and the hole world that HE is the man in charge in Cleveland. He simply didn't want to share the "fame" with a tool like Lombardi, whom he probably just hired to have a scapegoat to fire when things go south (Mangini-Kokinis).

Yes, I believe we're run by a power hungry, very smart man with an inferiority complex who hired one of the stooges, because he was the only one to "agree" to the power structure in place. Another indication for this was Heckert's reaction to Banner's involvment in the investment group, he knew he was out that exact moment as he had the pleasure to "work" with Banner before

Of course, you can also believe that there is a "consensus" but don't expect me to think you're smart by actually believing that

You been around long enough to know how goes,any personnel man that comes to the Browns was responsible for every good thing his previous team did and had no say what so ever in that team's failures.
Just like players,when they're here they're good,when they're cut they sucked.
There's really no sense in calling someone out on it,everybody does it to some degree.

I didnt want either guy here but they continue to make moves that I would have made, so it is very hard for me to complain. Hopefully they have learned from their mistakes and so far looks like they might have.

Quote:

This is a pretty crappy list of deals imho, especially the picks. Nothing here did up my confidence in Joe as a talent evaluator...the best might be the small uptrade to get Maclin, but that doesn't count as it involved Mangini

Did he really trade down from 19 to 43 for only a 4th rounder (109) in 2008? There has to be a future pick involved, right?

The Eagles also got a 2009 first round pick in that deal. Kind of an important oversight by the author of the article.

That is the type of deal I would take (almost) every time, from the Eagles perspective of course.

Quote:

These are the types of threads that drive me nuts. Posts like these drive me nuts. It's all about who's right, who's wrong. It's all about personal feelings and agendas. No real football talk, just childish exchanges that are non-productive at best and downright ugly at worst.

Of course, these are the types of posts that most seem to want to engage in. I get aggravated w/myself for being drawn into these mindless and juvenile exchanges. I only do because of BS comments like the one I quoted from you.

Are we having fun yet? Learning anything? Using our time wisely?

Dude. It IS hilarious. Buncha wannabees.

BUT. You continue to contribute to it.

THINK about that man.

Who gives a flyin' what Mangini did.

Who gives a flyin' what H&H did.

Who gives a flyin' what Banner did.

Who gives a flyin' what Lombo did.

It's NOW. Let's look at NOW.

And so far it's pretty damn good. Both in acquisitions and NON-ACQUISITIONS.

History, especially current history, is what got us to the place we are now. It's valid discussion and even in context.

There is a NOW and that must discussed as well. But it will have to be discussed within the context of journey to better the team because human beings are doing the discussion.

This is not a group of robots who had their hard drive erased when Haslam bought the team. There will be constant comparisons to current history in attempt to guage/predict the fortunes of the team going forward.

You can' discuss, "Is this going better than before?", without considering "before".

You can look at the history if you know the history. All we know is who was picked. We don't know who had what input towards making those picks, and that is the focus of many of the posts, so most are simply speculation by various posters.

I believe what we have been told. This is a collaborative effort. If this is a 3 headed monster, Lombardi and his scouts are largely responsible for setting the board. Chud and his coaches are largely responsible for determining team needs. Banner manages the cap and is more or less the conduit between the the GM and coaches. I seriously doubt if the GM and coaches feel good with a player, Banner isn't going to be the guy who says no

When it comes down to making the picks or moving here or there I honestly believe there will be agreement between the forces. At least for the first 3-4 picks. You start getting deeper there may be some disagreement on what is needed or which player might be better, but at that point it is mostly a crap shoot anyway.

Here is the bottom line. The future will determine if this bunch is good or not or if some member is on some power trip. Not the past.

Quote:

A common public perception was that Eagles general managers had clout in the organization, but McNabb painted a different picture.

"It didn't matter who the GM was at that time, because when Tom Heckert was here, it seemed like Joe made every decision," McNabb said. "And it was so easy for him to just kind of push Heckert out, you know. Heckert was up for the Atlanta job, and he told him to go and interview for it."

DJ...Now that Banner is in Cleveland and in full control of the draft, there will be none of this...it was Lombardi's choice to draft so and so...OR it was Chud's choice to draft so and so.

There will be "no, passing the buck" here in Cleveland because no football moves are made in Cleveland, without Joe Banner's approval.

There will be none of this, "it was the consensus of the group", either. Haslam made it clear when he hired Banner, that Banner has final say on "all things" on the football side and Banner accepted the job on those terms.

The Browns are 3 years into this rebuild, with a solid foundation being established by Heckert. All that remains for Banner to do is to fill in the holes using his method..whatever method that is...for need or best player available.

I don't want to hear any excuses for the decisions Banner makes. Hopefully he will make sound choices.

As much as I'm skeptic and critical of Banner, I don't think he'll pull a Mangini on us. I think he can draft AVG...then again, even one of us or a monkey can do that and AVG is not what I'll take on draft day

Quote:

DJ...Now that Banner is in Cleveland and in full control of the draft, there will be none of this...it was Lombardi's choice to draft so and so...OR it was Chud's choice to draft so and so.

There will be "no, passing the buck" here in Cleveland because no football moves are made in Cleveland, without Joe Banner's approval.

There will be none of this, "it was the consensus of the group", either. Haslam made it clear when he hired Banner, that Banner has final say on "all things" on the football side and Banner accepted the job on those terms.

The Browns are 3 years into this rebuild, with a solid foundation being established by Heckert. All that remains for Banner to do is to fill in the holes using his method..whatever method that is...for need or best player available.

I don't want to hear any excuses for the decisions Banner makes. Hopefully he will make sound choices.

This really can't be argued. well, I guess anything on here can be argued.

But it was made very clear that the buck stops with Banner. He does hold the final decision card according to Haslam.

I don't really see why people admit they really have no clue as to what Banners real role was in Philly, yet seem so confident in upholding him? Wouldn't they want to know what real qualifications he had coming into this?

Which brings to question....... We know that Lombardi's draft record sucks canal water...... but then again we have many who wish to make excuses it was others who were in fact in charge of that and that Lombardi didn't have final say.

Now, we will have those that if things go south here, will wish to blame Lombardi when it was made clear that Banner has the final say. It's a three ring circus with everyone looking to be ready for their posturing no matter what happens here.

Only one side of this debate is actually willing to commit to the opinion when looking at resume's or the lack there of. According to some, we don't even know Banners resume and Lombardis is awful!

How is that a good thing again?

I don't know what power Banner had in Philly. I don't know if there was a time when he made the final decisions.. I'm not sure we'll ever know.

So to me, I can only base my feelings on him on what he does here.

Quote:

Which brings to question....... We know that Lombardi's draft record sucks canal water...... but then again we have many who wish to make excuses it was others who were in fact in charge of that and that Lombardi didn't have final say.

Yes,, If he was the guy that made the final call, then HIS picks sucked by and large.

But when he was with the Browns, I'm not sure he made those decisions by himself. As for other places he's been.. Can't say one way or the other.

Quote:

I don't really see why people admit they really have no clue as to what Banners real role was in Philly, yet seem so confident in upholding him?

Quote:

We know that Lombardi's draft record sucks canal water...... but then again we have many who wish to make excuses it was others who were in fact in charge of that and that Lombardi didn't have final say.

Quoted for irony.

So it's wrong for people to form an opinion on Banner without knowing all the facts, but it's more than fair to indict Lombardi without also knowing all the facts.

Uh-huh.

J/C

I think it's unfair to project all of these draft choices on Banner. And I don't think Banner had all the power when it came to the draft but did have some influence on picks. Maybe because Laurie was in the draft room and sided with Banner occasionally? He lost the power struggle but got a taste of personnel decisions and wants more control here now. That's why he is here. That's why he has the title CEO!!! Not "President".

I really don't care about trading up too much or trading down not enough. If you really like a guy, do what you need to and go get him. And like Heckert said...."Don't get cute".....which leads me to my thought process that Reid made a lot of those decisions in the article above...those decisions to trade up.

Heckert learned from Reid. Heckert traded up a few time to get his guys he liked....Phil Taylor, TJ Ward, Montario Hardesty, Richardson. Maybe these trade ups are a result of the Reid approach that taught Heckert.

Either way, it's been documented several times by journalists that Banner was a thorn in a side of the personnel department and had leverage in certain draft picks. Due mostly to probably getting the final on Banner's guy from Laurie in the draft room. Which ones? We don't know them all outside of reported Winston Justice pick. There are just too many articles out there and sources of Banner on this Philly draft stuff for this not to be true. Where there is smoke, there is fire. And in the end, Laurie sided with the personnel dept. over Banner's past record. Not wild to assume this happened.

The question is how did Banner fair overall and how much he really knows?....because folks, whether you want to admit it to yourselves or not, these upcoming Cleveland drafts will have his fingerprints ALL OVER THEM. For our sake, let's hope he really knows what he is doing.

Turnover of this roster will continue and it will be these next drafts that will make the most impact, obviously.

Pretty sure he has the power of final say here.

I am not sure one way or another if he will Micro Manage that power n muck it up or he will trust his hires of Lombardi n Chud to give their reports on individual players n their opinion on them helping the team???

Will just Banner get fired or both Lombardi n Chud along with Banner if failure is achieved after 3 years???

Who knows, quite frankly I don't wish to put bad vibes on FAILURE...and just look forward to SUCCESS

What I feel a little funny is how those who dislike Banner presumed that he was responsible for the downfall of the EAGLES which happened after they lost McNabb. Give him absolutely no Credit for the LONG TIME SUCCESS of the Eagles...only the last 3 seasons one of which had nothing to do with him.

Especially when the DAMMING article presenting this synopsis...Clearly states Reid had FINAL Decision n Roseman power of Evaluating Prospects. But it was Banner's plan of Position of Needs which quite frankly only effects Top 1-15 prospects of the first round. Then Player RANKINGS of skill set are vastly numbered where you can concentrate of Position of NEED and BPA at the same time. AMAZING biased analysis in this article.

But even in the worst case scenario on the facts presented by that article...it makes sense. A team has success now keep it LONG TERM...Banner's knowledge of the Cap n who will be going, who will be staying, who will get long term contracts who will not...but those decisions by teams who wish Dynasties will draft one two years in advance to have the prospect ready to take over! As in an ACTUAL PLAN - which I know is foreign to us Brown's fans as we never built a winner in the first place!

JMHO - Again I have no clue what to expect. All I got is this FA n I do like what I see. All the we could have this guy n that guy as if we are building a stacked Madden team don't get the thought process of FA building n Draft building. Long Term Building n Band-Aid Building which always follows with Dis banning.

jc

A trade down is fine, as long as they get good value. Just don't trade down for some washed up vets. And don't miss on the picks they get in return.... no Veikunes.

I'll judge these guys on what they do here. Lets see how they draft, see how the team plays come September....

Quote:

I would say odds are that we have already worked out parameters with a couple teams like the Phins and Chargers who will look to jump the Cards and Bills for a LT.

Quite possible. Of course even that depends on who's there, (Milliner for example,) and if we really have eyes for Geno, (assuming he's there and Milliner is gone.) But you're right, it will be interesting.

Quote:

Quote:

I would say odds are that we have already worked out parameters with a couple teams like the Phins and Chargers who will look to jump the Cards and Bills for a LT.

Quite possible. Of course even that depends on who's there, (Milliner for example,) and if we really have eyes for Geno, (assuming he's there and Milliner is gone.) But you're right, it will be interesting.

Unlikely the Bills as they do not need a LT. Cordy Glenn, from all accounts, played well last season. Guards on the other hand, are a need as they lost Levitre to the Titans...

Quote:

Will just Banner get fired or both Lombardi n Chud along with Banner if failure is achieved after 3 years???

Speaking for myself, I do not want Banner fired in 3 yrs, because it would likely mean the Browns are still not winning.

Even with the change in ownership and management, I have hope that this team is on track for a turn around as the young players gain experience and these coaches continue to teach the game, developing the young talent into hungry football players determined to win.

I hope that Banner sticks to the things he does well and that he trusts and follows the advice of those who have the job of judging the "draft talent". Same goes for new hires Lombardi and Farmer, trust the scouting department.

Some may not realize it, but the scouting department that was built by Holmgren and Heckert, for the most part, remains in tact. Many want to give all the credit to Heckert, but the scouting department did play a major role in the evaluations that lead to the players drafted by Heckert.

If we begin to see scouts leaving the team after the draft, it could be the first indication that the working relationship between Banner/Lombardi and the scouting department are less than ideal.

Some of scouts followed Heckert from Philly to the Browns...some came from the Seahawks, following Holmgren...some were holdovers from the scouting department Heckert inherited.

Keeping the scouting department intact might turn out to be one of the best moves Banner made...let's hope so.

Quote:

...If we begin to see scouts leaving the team after the draft

Vers: Would you share your thoughts on the relationship/responsibilities between the scouts and the FO re: the draft selections. Do the scouts recommend players or merely make skill evaluations? Thanks...

Quote:

Keeping the scouting department intact might turn out to be one of the best moves Banner made...let's hope so.

I think it was a smart move too, but also, an obvious one. That staff had been working all year for the Browns preparing for April. When Banner was officially hired late in 2012, it would have been kind of dumb letting all those guys go while trying to pull other scouts away DURING the NFL and collegiate seasons.. much less have them possibly coming from different teams organizing thoughts and process with the draft a few months out. That would have been chaos IMO. At least there is continuity in lining up prospect evaluations rather than starting from scratch. It just makes sense to have kept them...at least for now.

It will be interesting to see what will happen post draft and in those months prior to TC when nothing is going in the NFL. Maybe some will get pulled away. Maybe some fired. Who knows? Heckert isn't a GM anywhere so it's not like he will be trying to steal anyone from Cleveland.....yet.

Quote:

Quote:

I don't really see why people admit they really have no clue as to what Banners real role was in Philly, yet seem so confident in upholding him?

Quote:

We know that Lombardi's draft record sucks canal water...... but then again we have many who wish to make excuses it was others who were in fact in charge of that and that Lombardi didn't have final say.

Quoted for irony.

So it's wrong for people to form an opinion on Banner without knowing all the facts, but it's more than fair to indict Lombardi without also knowing all the facts.

Uh-huh.

It's pretty simple Toad. Since none of us can say for sure what either of these guys actual input was in the final say, we don't know what we do or don't have. I don't mind people upholding or questioning Banner and Lombardi.

I do question things that are very unclear. You can look at Lombardi's draft record. Now it might be far easier to accept that Lombardi "didn't have final say everywhere". But the odds simply aren't in favor of him "not having the final say anywhere".

So you can throw stones at everyone questioning this FO if you like. But legitimate questions are there. And since it seems nobody can quite clear up what they did and didn't have control over, there aren't any clear answer to those questions no matter how you try to play your cards.

Look on the upside.... in three weeks we'll know whether or not we get to hate both of them for their drafting ineptitude

Quote:

Look on the upside.... in three weeks we'll know whether or not we get to hate both of them for their drafting ineptitude

We know as a general rule it takes three years before you can properly evaluate a draft. However, by the end of April 27, there are going to be "lines drawn in the sand", some with grimaces on their faces, some with grins...

Quote:

Quote:

Look on the upside.... in three weeks we'll know whether or not we get to hate both of them for their drafting ineptitude

We know as a general rule it takes three years before you can properly evaluate a draft. However, by the end of April 27, there are going to be "lines drawn in the sand", some with grimaces on their faces, some with grins...

There is only one correct answer:

j/c
I bring this thread back up only to bring my question above to Vers' attention...

Scouting departments obviously answer to the GM. There is a scouting director and then several scouts are typically assigned a region, for example---a guy who covers the SE. Another who is assigned to the midwest. There are other scouts that have a wider range, such as east of the Mississippi.

The job of the scout is to gather as much information as possible about the player. Strengths, weaknesses, character, etc. They assign them grades.

The typical team that puts together the draft board does not include regional scouts. The head of the scouting department would be on that team. They do bring scouts in and ask for clarification on a multitude of issues. Then, the draft team assigns grades, rating players both vertically and horizontally. The vertical rating is easier. You take a position, such as corner back and rate the players from the best corner, next best, etc.

Horizontal stacking is harder. You grade players across positions, so you might have an inside linebacker w/the same grade as a free safety. Horizontal stacking is where need comes into play. It also gives you the flexibility to have another player ready just in case the guy or guys you have targeted are already off the board.

Trades come into play when your draft team has one guy rated very high and he is on the board longer than you thought he would be, yet you don't think there is any way that he will drop to you. Everyone knows about trading up for a guy like RGIII, but the vertical and horizontal rating really comes into play at the bottom of the first round and through rounds 2-4. You typically see more movement in those rounds.

Did that make sense? Was I clear?

Perfect, and thanks. This process, particularly the horizontal stacking, would make a great conversation sometime...

Nice layout of the process. Thanks.

I would also think things like position scarcity play a factor in the horizontal rankings.

Quote:

Did that make sense? Was I clear?

I made a ton of sense and was abundantly clear.

Thanks that that explanation. I had no idea how the process worked.

and this is the Vers that people learn from and the one we all like to have around the board.

thank you taking the time to write that up for everyone to understand and do a great job explaining it.

Thanks guys. I would like to have more football discussions. Really. I just ask that people keep things fair.

OK to be fair Both Lombardi and Banner have sucked more than Linda Lovelace when it comes to the draft. I LOVE the coaching hires but the ones above them really scare the crap out of me.

Thanks, Vers. Educational and enlightening as usual. Very helpful.

Cleveland and Oakland may be eying trading down:

http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000...eye-trades-down

Be sure to tune in next week when there'll be an article stating that we may be eyeing a trade up!

I love the silly season

The article

Oakland Raiders, Cleveland Browns eye trades down?

By Chris Wesseling
Around the League Writer
Published: April 15, 2013 at 08:26 a.m. Updated: April 15, 2013 at 09:00 a.m.

All eight of NFL.com's draft analysts project Florida defensive tackle Sharrif Floyd to the Oakland Raiders with the No. 3 overall pick in the 2013 NFL Draft.

If Raiders general manager Reggie McKenzie gets his way, though, he won't be picking in the top five. The Raiders want to trade down to recoup the second-round pick that was sent to the Cincinnati Bengals in the Carson Palmer trade, SI.com's Peter King reported in his "Monday Morning Quarterback."

The Raiders aren't alone. King also writes that the Cleveland Browns "badly" want to trade out of the sixth spot, perhaps with designs on landing West Virginia quarterback Geno Smith a few picks later. The Browns might end up being a "wild card" in the Smith hunt, according to NFL.com's Albert Breer.

It's tough to see the Raiders finding a taker for the third pick in a draft that is so light at the top. The Browns might have better luck if a team such as the Miami Dolphins or San Diego Chargers decides they have to get in front of the Arizona Cardinals to grab one of the triumvirate of elite left tackles: Luke Joeckel, Eric Fisher or Lane Johnson.

Follow Chris Wesseling on Twitter @ChrisWesseling.

It's the offseason and close to draft time. That entails most articles are 80% bs, 10% extreme bs, and 10% is accurate lolol!!

Don't gag with all the smoke screens!

I predict at least 2 Trade downs for the Browns. The first will likely be with the Phins and there are a lot of teams that will start wanting to jump up into that 12 to 15 areas as guys they have valued as top guys start to fall. I think it will be Phins and the 49ers, Phins trade up for an OT and 49ers tradeup for either a falling star or the DT from Missouri. Browns will have picks 31, 34, 42, 68, 74, 93 and 104 in the first 4 rounds. i believe that 2nd round area is where the Browns see the most value for their desires.

I think the Jets will end up being the team to take Geno. Rex may want this and Rex may want that but you have a new GM with his job on the line and you are asking him to put his fate into the hands of Sanchez? Not going to happen. I will be surprised if another QB goes in the first but the Browns will take one in the 2nd or 3rd.

I believe Geno is the best QB in this draft class but I dont believe he will be the best in three years from now. That's what makes QB this year so tricky. I dont know if he will be top 5 from this class in 5 years from now.

Just clicking

Why is Value such a measuring tool? I'd prefer impact over value.

Just as an example (please,, it's an EXAMPLE)

Geno Smith might not be a value at 6, but he could be an impact player. So which is more important?

I was just wondering..

Quote:

Just clicking

Why is Value such a measuring tool? I'd prefer impact over value.

Just as an example (please,, it's an EXAMPLE)

Geno Smith might not be a value at 6, but he could be an impact player. So which is more important?

I was just wondering..

In the end, all that stuff is garbage. It's all about the player. If you like a guy, and think he fits, but maybe the general consensus is that he should be drafted 10 spots back. If you don't think you can make a move to get a few spots back, why not just take him?

If the Browns feel Geno Smith is an impact player, and at that position, that means franchise QB, then take him!

Is Pittsburgh kicking themselves because maybe they thought they could have traded back some spots and still gotten Roethlisburger?

I'm not saying Geno Smith is a franchise guy, I'm just saying if the Browns' people feel he is, they shouldn't care where he's slotted, you go and draft him.

Quote:

In the end, all that stuff is garbage. It's all about the player. If you like a guy, and think he fits, but maybe the general consensus is that he should be drafted 10 spots back. If you don't think you can make a move to get a few spots back, why not just take him?

Couldn't agree more.