|
|
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,831
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Dec 2006
Posts: 13,831 |
Quote:
Well, the biggest reason for Philly's mess is Michael Vick, and that's all on Andy Reid.
Not so sure that Vick was Reid's first choice...I read that Reid was interested in the Peyton Manning sweepstakes, which tells me Reid had his doubts about Vick.
The guy who negotiated Vicks contract was Banner, not Reid...and that happened before the big blow up between Reid and Banner, earlier this year.
FOOTBALL IS NOT BASEBALL
Home of the Free, Because of the Brave...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,970
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,970 |
Quote:
I am glad that Banner represents a side of the checks-and-balances where he won't allow the coach to hand out money and negotiate contracts.
Yeah, he's helping do the draft, negotiate contracts, everything "has to go through him" and the coach gets to make the line up.
He's going to buy all of the cars, put them in the parking lot and the coach gets to pick out which ones he drives.
Quote:
Banner? Different story. Looks like he had a much bigger role in things other than just "bean counting" in Philly.
That should make certain people more comfortable, as that dispels the idea that all he did was handle finances.
So he said that his main motivation for leaving Philly was to have a more "expanded role than he had in Philly", but you contend he already did these things in Philly? And you're wondering how others will try to spin things?
Quote:
As long as he's not making the final calls and picking the players, I'm good with what he's going to do here. The way he's setting this up, EVERYTHING is going to ride on who is selected as the Head Coach.
Everybody in the building reports to me. If I do hire a president, it won't be for the football side......... The coach and the GM will report directly to me........
And notice how "we" turned into "I"? Ego running wild it sounds like to me.......
When we hired Andy Reid in Philadelphia we did a study...........We went in looking for things like offensive philosophy, did they come from defense, did they come from college? Had they been a coordinator? We found nothing. Then we accidentally realized they were all exactly the same when we took football out of the equation
I found Andy when he was working for [former Packers GM] Ron Wolf in Green Bay.......... I got a list of candidates based on those qualities we found........ It worked out pretty well [five NFC championship games and a Super Bowl].
You can't hire an Andy Reid without knowing something about football.
So at first he admits that it was more than just him who derived the formula for hiring a HC and that he was to find someone to meet that criteria. Then he says "We hired Reed" then in the next breath says "I hired Reed"?
And as far as draft day.........
I will be one of the four or five people in that room. I'll have a voice. In some instances, it will go through me, but our goal is always to drive a consensus.
So he hopes for a concensus but in instances where there isn't a concensus? It will go through him.
Wow! The only part of the personnel decisions he won't have complete control over is who statrts on game day.
I think when you get down to that level, I think you really want to have the coach either deciding or having an overwhelming influence over it. But if you had somebody in personnel that was particularly strong and a coach was comfortable with that, you don't have to etch that in stone."
Ah, now he's backtracked to "overwhelming influence".
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521 |
Quote:
Quote:
Well, the biggest reason for Philly's mess is Michael Vick, and that's all on Andy Reid.
Not so sure that Vick was Reid's first choice...I read that Reid was interested in the Peyton Manning sweepstakes, which tells me Reid had his doubts about Vick.
The guy who negotiated Vicks contract was Banner, not Reid...and that happened before the big blow up between Reid and Banner, earlier this year.
Everybody knows that the Michael Vick redemption project has been Andy Reid's baby 100% since Vick was reinstated in 2009. Interest in Peyton Manning isn't damning
evidence of anything. I also have no doubt that Reid and Howie Roseman played a role in Vick's huge contract. We already know that Banner's negotiating power was completely usurped as early as March of this year, because it was Reid and Roseman that did the extensions for Trent Cole and Todd Herremans. We won't know for certain who had the final say unless someone comes out and tells us, but I have my suspicions. It wouldn't surprise me, actually, if the Vick deal was a catalyst in causing the rift.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 69
Rookie
|
|
Rookie
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 69 |
Complete overreaction on here as usual...
Instead of nitpicking line by line of an in interview...why not just wait to see what he actually does and how things are actually run.
What's our record now? What has it been for the last 10+ years? He's not coming to a consistent winner and looking to shake things up. He's coming from one and looking to help turn it around.
Try to think about that for a second...he's here to HELP the Browns. You all may love our mighty 2 win record...I don't.
Last edited by MFS04; 11/11/12 12:22 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,970
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,970 |
What he was saying and said is pretty clear actually. Just because some seems to wish to dismiss it doesn't change anything.
BTW- What have all of the former changes over the past "10+ years" netted us exactly?
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,877 |
Quote:
Instead of nitpicking line by line of an in interview...why not just wait to see what he actually does and how things are actually run.
I actually don't care what he said in the interview. I've had this opinion of what will happen under a Banner regime since I heard he was part of Haslam's management group.
We all may be totally wrong when we say he worries us. But to me he seems a little bit too much like he thinks he's Bill Parcells with the football knowledge of coachb.
Hope I'm wrong.
"People who drink light 'beer' don't like the taste of beer; they just like to pee a lot."
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189 |
Quote:
Now you can pretend and make stuff up to try to support Haslam's claim, that he did his due diligence, but Banner clearly announced his intension to secure a Pres/CEO type job as a member of an investment group.
...in other words, Banner was part of the deal.
Of course, I don't really know how it all went down other than what Haslam said in his introduction of Banner which sounded like Haslam is not part of an investment group and he hired Banner because "his name kept coming up" when he spoke to people about needing a CEO.
I'd always figured that Haslam buying the team and approaching Banner for the job made Banner drop the idea of becoming a member of an investment group in an effort to find a team since he'd found the position he wanted without being tied to such a group.
Is there an investment group to which Haslam and Banner both belong?
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
Everybody in the building reports to me. If I do hire a president, it won't be for the football side......... The coach and the GM will report directly to me........
------------------
Quote:
PITT:
And notice how "we" turned into "I"? Ego running wild it sounds like to me.......
What an amazing crock of crap...Banner was asked a direct question about his structure. How else can he answer it? 
Here, let me fix it for you so that it doesn't reflect an "ego running wild"
Quote:
QUESTION: Q: Who will report to YOU?
ANSWER: Everybody in the building reports to WE. If WE do hire a president, it won't be for the football side......... The coach and the GM will report directly to US........
I don't know if there's a more clear-cut definition of "spin" than that.
Banner is asked a direct question and can only answer it in first-person, but when he does you'll blast him as an ego-maniac for using the word "I" when "we" or "us" can't even be applied.
Biased much?
I'll let the doom-and-gloom crowd do their thing. There's room for debate but I'm not spending time with this noise anymore.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,151
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,151 |
my thoughts go like this...
we are so worried about who will have complete control over the roster and such...
is it impossible to believe that when we hire our next total staff, or the staff remains...that all roster decisions will be a complete collective effort? If the coach believes that the best 53 are a collection of 53, and the GM believes differently, and Banner believes even differently from that...that they wont work together to come to a consensus decision?
Do we really think that a person in the organization will say...no, were going with these guys, good luck coach...and the gm will say, sooo...i do nothing?
Thats ridiculous...it will all be a collective effort regardless. Consensus.
"It has to start somewhere
It has to start somehow
What better place than here?
What better time than now?"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,970
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 74,970 |
Yeah Toad everyone reads it, most of them all see the same thing accept for you...... If I were you I wouldn't waste my time trying to spread that noise either. People can see right through that spin cycle. 
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 816
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 816 |
Quote:
my thoughts go like this...
we are so worried about who will have complete control over the roster and such...
is it impossible to believe that when we hire our next total staff, or the staff remains...that all roster decisions will be a complete collective effort? If the coach believes that the best 53 are a collection of 53, and the GM believes differently, and Banner believes even differently from that...that they wont work together to come to a consensus decision?
Do we really think that a person in the organization will say...no, were going with these guys, good luck coach...and the gm will say, sooo...i do nothing?
Thats ridiculous...it will all be a collective effort regardless. Consensus.
That's my take. Banner is just all over the place right now. I think that's coming from the fact he's got a relatively blank slate right now and a boss who doesn't see failure as an option. He knows he's got some time till the end of the season and he plans on taking it. An old Deputy told me once "Never run to a fight, save it until it counts." He was right then and I think he would be right in this case.
I may not like the way he does things after that but it looks to me as if he's measuring twice and cutting once. What made sense in Philadelphia may not look so good with the people he's going to have in Cleveland.
"Let people think this is a dumpster fire," - Mike Pettine
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 7,189 |
Very good take and overall great advice jeep.
Over the weekend I've been tempering my negative opinion due to the fact that I know some of my thoughts are knee-jerk reactions because I hate the idea of starting over again.
I hate the train of thought that continuity is good thing but giving continuity to the wrong regime is wasting time. All we've done forever is to have wasted time changing regimes because we've never given a regime the time nor talent to succeed, to finish what they started. Deciding a regime is the wrong one after two years is what is wasting time.
Nonetheless, reality is reality and here we go again. Our new owner seems to be a guy who is excited about football and fielding a winner. He's a successful business man who did not inherit the business success the way our last owner did by having it fall into his lap from the success of his father, but rather helped his father build it by playing a major role its success through working from the ground up resulting in his having a billion freaking dollars to spend on whatever he wants.
Part of what drives him is wanting to be a respected big-shot owner in the NFL. Unlike his predecessor and our former owner Art Modell, who was satisfied in simply being a big-shot, Haslam wants to be a big-shot through winning football games. Rather than being like his predecessor Randy Lerner who didn't want to the responsibility of being a big-shot, Haslam thrives in that responsibility. Now, if he can only make good decisions and the right hires we can all be successful though winning football games.
Which brings us to his first hire, Banner. Banner brings a great resume having come from the Eagles. They've been in four NFC Championship games and made it to a Superbowl. That is some serious success. No matter what his responsibilities were in Philly it may be true that he wasn't responsible for the success but he obviously didn't hurt or get in the way of it.
If he's half the man a half-a-man is he's learned a great deal that he can take into his fresh start. He's inherited an up-and-coming, youthful team whose talent level is beginning to reach NFL standards. He doesn't have to start from scratch with an aging team of veterans at the end of their usefulness. All the parts aren't here but it's a damn good start.
Now, can he implement what he's learned he needs to change and combine it to his vast experiences that he knows is right and become better than he was before? Time will tell.
I think it's obvious that he likes to hear himself talk. That can be a good thing for us going forward. Better than getting the silent treatment. But right now he's all over the place as though he is "thinking out loud". Who knows if anything he is saying right now is the way things are going to shake out in the end.
He's the CEO. Other than the owner he is the only guy in charge of anything right now. So of course he's talking like everything will be this way and that way. But some of what he's saying is unconventional. He'll have to make many concessions as he attempts to make hires. His seemingly "my way or the highway" manner he speaks at this time will be tempered as potential hires will have their own list of "demands" and if Banner wants them and their experience he'll have to give in to plenty of them.
I've decided to not consider anything he says right now as etched in stone. He and Haslam have half-a-season to talk over possibilities before they have to implement any of their principles and policies. They'll flip-flop back-and-forth over and over during this time. What matters is that when the chips are down and they are forced by a timeline to solidify and have a plan in place that they are prepared to the extent that they have the best decisions at hand.
I'll stay tuned-in.
For me, the worst possible scenario is starting over. Since we are in fact starting over my worst possible scenario is now a reality. I cannot change it. All I can do is watch and listen and hopefully not get too upset nor too elated as I hear Banner and others talk out loud. There will be plenty of time to freak-out once the season is over and I get to see their studied plan in action.
The only thing I can say with absolute certainty is that no matter whatever you may encounter in your lifetime, there is nothing like being a Browns fan.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,936
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,936 |
[color:"white"]"Never argue with a fool, onlookers may not be able to tell the difference."
-- Mark Twain [/color]
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,151
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,151 |
I dont necessarily like the idea of starting over either...but I am more in favor of having EVERYTHING done the right way.
I love that we have a ton of experience on our coaching staff, but all of our coaching staff have lost their head coaching jobs, and Ray Rhodes is the only guy on our staff that lost his head coaching job to something other than failure (his health problems led him out the door...although he was still a struggling head coach at the time).
While theres always a chance that hiring a guy like Jeff Fisher can get your team back to relevance...the more likely person to do so is a guy who hasnt done it before. For every Pete Carroll, Jeff Fisher, Bill Belichick, etc...theres a bum whose washed out. And for every Sean Payton, Jim Harbaugh, John Harbaugh etc...theres several bums whove washed out.
Its really hard to pick a route to say its the right way...You just have to find a guy who is incredibly prepared, incredibly smart, and incredibly driven. It's not where he's come from, what he's done before that will make him successful, because success comes from everywhere. Payton was an OC, Belichick was a DC, Jimmy Johnson was a college coach, Harbaugh was a college coach, John Harbaugh was a special teams coach...theres more, everyone has their way of coming up...
If we hire someone new. We have to do our due dilligence to make sure that the guy is prepared, hard-working, and driven to get the job done.
And if we go that different route...I'm okay with that. Shurmur's staff worries me more than Shurmur does. I dont like Dick Jauron's style of defense. It baffles me that youd rely on press coverage while rushing 4...all the time. Chilly ran a bad offense in Minnesota save for Adrian Peterson...Ray Rhodes wasnt exactly successful, Gil Haskell has been a part of winning programs but didnt do as much, Holmgren wasnt good as an FO guy, and so on...and so forth. I somewhat think we've over-stocked with too much brain power...It shows that there is little consistency in his game planning/play calling...maybe theres too many voices in his ear that have that experience muddling his ideas.
IDK, i just want it done the right way.
"It has to start somewhere
It has to start somehow
What better place than here?
What better time than now?"
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
All we've done forever is to have wasted time changing regimes because we've never given a regime the time nor talent to succeed, to finish what they started. Deciding a regime is the wrong one after two years is what is wasting time.
Now that this has gone past the topic of Banner...
'Dub, my esteemed colleague, I can certainly understand where you're coming from regarding the big picture where you hate the idea of starting over. If you're one that sits in the "continuity" camp, this entire situation is tough to take. Having said that, I wanted to point out that we haven't fired regime after regime when each one has only had two years.
Paul Hilton "Butch" Davis Jr. got four years, and Romeo Crennel got four years. That is more than enough time and easily qualifies for what is considered continuity. In fact, Butch Davis got even more power. He got to call more of his shots. He couldn't have asked for it to be any other way. Both guys mustered a season with a winning record and got more time. Only after failing did they get fired. To be even more fair in terms of judgement, we can look at what each guy did after they were canned. Did Butch Davis and Romeo Crennel go on to be great and successful like Bill Belichick?
Butch Davis ended up in college and part of a huge scandal that ultimately led to him getting fired.
Romeo Crennel is now the head coach of one of the most dysfunctional teams in the NFL where he can't decide on a QB and just had to relinquish defensive coordinator duties.
I just felt the need to dispel the myth that we haven't given regimes any more than two seasons. Two separate regimes got 4 seasons to prove what they could do, and those two regimes haven't done anything since being fired.
You and I my friend won't ever be able to see eye-to-eye on this one. I think we will forever disagree on the idea that continuity should only be applied if the regime is qualified. Of course that's the trick, isn't it...deciding which guys are qualified to stay or go.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 |
The regime IMO that didn't really get a fair shake would of been Chris Palmer, but I think he was doomed from the start. Set up for failure by Policy and company, and when he wouldn't tow the company line of making the plays 3 years after expansion, he was gone.
Butch was brought in, chased off some talented FO people, and set us up for a quick woohoo, which cost us years of sucking directly following.
Which lead to Savage and Crennel, which on paper, and at home, SEEMED like a great pairing, all the right things were said. But obviously some things were said, and then other things were done. We had a woohoo year again, but it again, lead to more years of sucking.
Two years of sucking with Mangini, to be specific. I liked what he was doing, he was building the roter from the bottom up, I just think that once he got the bottom built, he didn't have any idea how to put the walls up, let alone how to put a roof on.
And then Tom came on his white horse, and while he's made some eh moves (Hardesty, Marecic) and some feel other moves were pushed on him (McCoy, Weeden) He's obviously been one of the best talent guys here, actually builds through the draft like he said (Thanks Savage) maybe even to a fault (A couple more FAs wouldn't hurt) And while we haven't seen a woohoo year out of what he's done yet, I think MOST of us can see it's coming.
And the best part is, it probably won't just be one.
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
I stumbled across this article completely by accident, as I was looking for something else. I found this insight to be quite interesting, especially considering this take is from an agent. If these guys don't know the in's and out's of the business, nobody does.
If it's a repost, sorry...
What the Browns will get with Joe Banner. By Jack Bechta, former agent who worked with Banner.
The Browns have struggled for decades and may have a savior in Joe Banner. Jack Bechta Share Print This November 07, 2012, 06:00 PM EST 122 0 Share 26 Upon the signing of my 1996 first round pick, OT Jermane Mayberry with the Eagles, I got to know Joe Banner on a few different levels. It was obvious that owner Jeffrey Lurie gave him full reign of the Birds. Joe didn’t and doesn’t come across as football guy’s guy. He appears more like the Monday morning locker room expert at the racquetball club. But don’t let his appearance fool you! When I first met Joe, he was transparent, unassuming and spoke without a filter. Over the years, I did several more deals with Joe and made it a point to visit him about once a year to keep up a solid GM-agent relationship for the current and/or next client of mine they may sign. USPRESSWIREJoe is smart, patient and calculating in every decision he makes. Many things have changed since 1996 and there are a lot more moving parts to running an NFL team. As for Joe, and many of those whose position has evolved over the last decade and a half, he learned by being on the front line in every aspect of the football business. From negotiating contracts, training camp leases, radio/media sponsorships, hiring /firing coaches and front office men, directing PR initiatives, pre game entertainment, and stadium leases to overseeing the team’s cash flow and attending league meetings, Joe has seen it all. Joe was an easy target for the venomous Philly media, envious football people who coveted his job and even players and coaches who at first saw him as an outsider to their football world. His meek CPA type appearance, coupled with his soft tone and invisibility during tough times in Philly had his named cursed and ridiculed from Broad Street to the Senior Bowl to the Combine (two places where football men drink and gossip like mean school girls). You have to understand this; football people divide the entire world into two parts: those who played the game, and those who watched the game. They secretly only respect those who have played. The only exceptions are the owners who write their checks. Joe had an uphill battle in earning the respect and trust of these football people. He eventually did. I once had a working lunch with Joe in his office. On the way in I tuned into the Howard Eskin show. A caller called in and said he saw Joe Banner on the golf course that day. The caller complained that Joe should be getting draft picks signed and taking care of some of the Eagles’ many problems. Of course, Eskin and other callers piled on Joe. However, Joe was nowhere near a golf course in 6 months and was waiting for me in his office. When I told him what I had just heard he just shrugged it off as part of the territory of the job. When I got back in my car two hours later the host and callers were still bashing Joe. It’s the Philly way and Joe was initially the media’s punching bag until things got turned around with the hiring of Coach Reid.
What exactly will the Browns get with Joe Banner?
Hiring and firing: Joe will not make a decision without calling 10 to 15 references on hiring a coach or personnel man. Joe’s biggest strength is taking his time in making decisions, doing massive amounts of research and getting everyone’s opinion. He is shrewd and calculating when it comes to big decisions. When it comes to a firing, he’s not afraid to pull the trigger. Joe is credited for hiring good football people. He was quick to pick up top football people who were fired from other positions and have them focus on whatever their strength is. Eagles GM, Howie Roseman, has continued the trend. The Fan experience: When Jeffrey Laurie took over the Eagles with Joe as his right hand man, one of the first things they did was enhance the fan experience. Jeffrey came from the entertainment business and knows how to put on a show. Joe learned a lot from Jeffrey and was involved with implementing a premium fan experience so I expect this to be a serious focus for Joe and his staff. The media: When you work in the Philly sports bubble and survive as Joe did, you earn your doctorate in media relations. Some football people may say Joe is overly sensitive to the media and is susceptible to being swayed by them. However, after his time in the slicing Philly media blender, I’m sure he will be media friendly and accessible in selling his new blue print.
Signing players: Joe’s Eagles may have had the best record of any NFL team over the last decade of getting draft picks signed on time and faster than any other team. As for resigning talent, this is one of Joe’s pioneering traits in the industry. Joe started a trend in signing young blossoming talent a year or two before their contract was up. Thus, often securing them at a huge discount to their upcoming free agent value. He may have missed on a few players but he did hit on the majority, keeping the best talent for the long term. Even if a player became unsatisfied with his contract, the Eagles still owned them. Expect to see this method implemented for the Browns’ young talent.Joe has received his share of criticism with some football people who have worked for him. Some have complained that he does consider himself too much of a football guy and an evaluator of talent. Therefore, he may at times, ignore some advice from his football staff and make a more media friendly decision. However, at the level Joe is at now with the Browns, I believe he will hire football people (or keep current Browns’ front office execs) and stay out of their way and let them do their jobs.Joe Banner will be a much needed asset to the Browns who have seemed to start rebuilding every year for the last two decades. Browns fans have had their passion for their team tested and even broken by some questionable management in the past. Joe will bring stability, a winning blue print and take his time in building a solid foundation for the franchise.
The highlighted sentences exist in stark contrast to what fear-mongerers are pedaling, and if Banner does as he's always done, which is to do his homework and get tons of opinions, it'll be the opposite of what the uber-micromanager Holmgren exhibited.
Yeah, I'm going to catch Hell for it, but I've caught Hell for all kinds of opinions over the years. I think Banner is going to do good things for us. God knows he can't do any worse.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Good to hear a counter opinion from somebody that has had dealings with Banner multiple times in the past.... It was so much easier to imagine him as the guy who was going to run the Browns like the manager of the Dollar General Store though... 
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,454
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,454 |
Tons of people speculate about the future but I only know a few things for certain. Philadelphia did well with Banner. Philadelphia ousted Banner. Philadelphia has failed since.
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 |
Quote:
Philadelphia did well with Heckert. Banner ousted Heckert. Philadelphia has failed since.
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
I don't know if it's pure coincidence or what, but as I'm looking around for news about Holmgren, I'm coming up with Banner references. One I just got through reading indicated that Banner being forced out was less about power and more about perception, specifically how Lurie was afraid the fans were becoming disenchanted with the team. So he wanted to change the face of things. That meant less Banner and more Roseman and Reid.
Here's a quote from a guy named Clint Didinger, who has written for Philly.com since 1970. (Their version of Pat Mac?)
Quote:
"The way last season ended, Jeff Lurie took a step back and said, 'Okay, what do we have to have to do here? Because as much as people in this city love the Eagles, we're losing them. So what do we need to do to try and get that back?''' said highly-respected CSN Philly.com Eagles insider Ray Didinger, who has covered the Eagles since 1970. "I think part of it was to sort of change the face of the team, which meant less of Joe, more of Howie and a kinder, gentler Andy.
"That's what the last few months have been about.''
Banner has worked in the front office since Lurie bought the Eagles in 1994.
"I think Jeff became concerned with the public perception of the team, that it had won a lot but was still not connecting with the fan base to a large degree. A large number of Eagles fans were disaffected with this team," Didinger said.
"While Joe was a very skillful front-office executive and very skilled contract negotiator, he was not very good functioning as the face of the franchise.
"When he came out and did a press conference and answered questions, there was just something about him that people found off-putting. That was something over time, especially after the way last season went down that Jeff was real concerned about how the team was perceived.''
Still, Didinger said he was surprised by the ouster.
Since reading these two articles, I've done some subsequent research. I sought the quotes by guys who so-called hated Banner in Brian Westbrook and Jeremiah Trotter. They didn't "hate" Banner at all. In fact, they were very complimentary of his business acumen. They stated quite plainly that if they were the owner, Banner would be the one they'd want on their side, mentioning that each sides job was to get the most money.
I never bought the fear-mongering that Mac and Pitt were pedaling, and the more I read the more I think Banner is going to be great for us.
But then again, fear has always been the greatest motivator...at least in the short-term.
As you've said, which I've commented on as well, if you wanna judge Joe Banner FAIRLY, you must factor in how the Eagles have done since taking him out of the equation. So how are the Eagles doing right now?
Not very damned well at all. Heads have already rolled, and more heads will roll.
Joe Banner is getting the last laugh. God bless his rat-faced little 5'5 heart
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
Philadelphia did well with Banner, Heckert, Reid, Jim Johnson, and McNabb at QB. Heckert is out, Banner is out, Jim Johnson passed away, McNabb and a number of other players got old, somebody made a mistake on Vick, their free agent dream team isn't working. Philadelphia has failed since and should have taken a step back and started a rebuild a couple years ago instead of trying to go New York Yankees on the NFL.
People need to stop acting like the Eagles success and/or failure was the result of one person/reason..
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 |
That was my point. 
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,454
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,454 |
Quote:
Quote:
Philadelphia did well with Heckert. Banner ousted Heckert. Philadelphia has failed since.
Where did you see that Banner ousted Heckert? Where did you see that Heckert was even ousted.
Toad - fear motivates everything. Hell, look at politics.
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Jan 2010
Posts: 12,065 |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Philadelphia did well with Heckert. Banner ousted Heckert. Philadelphia has failed since.
Where did you see that Banner ousted Heckert? Where did you see that Heckert was even ousted.
That was the general consensus when Banner's name first came up, and why most people thought Heckert was gone.
I didn't beleive it totally, I think it had more to do with Reid than Banner.
Hence why Reid is still there.
Last edited by OSGuy; 11/25/12 11:51 PM.
Am I the only one that pronounces hyperbole "Hyper-bowl" instead of "hy-per-bo-le"?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456 |
Quote:
I don't know if it's pure coincidence or what, but as I'm looking around for news about Holmgren, I'm coming up with Banner references. One I just got through reading indicated that Banner being forced out was less about power and more about perception,
Humm sounds alot like cleveland media and fans to me with Mike? Just saying.
If you need 3 years to be a winner you got here 2 years to early. Get it done Browns.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521 |
Quote:
Quote:
Philadelphia did well with Heckert. Banner ousted Heckert. Philadelphia has failed since.
Taking a promotion =/= getting ousted
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
I don't know about the rest of the media, but I do know Grossi had a woody for trying to take down Holmgren.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,454
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,454 |
I could see that if Banner ends up firing Heckert here. I was talking about Philly. Just wondering where he got that info.
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
That was my point.
And I was just expanding it...
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
I could see that if Banner ends up firing Heckert here. I was talking about Philly. Just wondering where he got that info.
Banner never forced Heckert out. Heckert left to gain more control over a roster. Since it's possible there could be a conflict with what he had under Holmgren and what he'd have under Banner, it's entirely possible Heckert may leave here on amicable terms.
I don't wanna lose Heckert, but if you told me the only way I could have Heckert would be to keep Lerner and Holmgren, I'd have thrown Heckert out the window before you finished the sentence. In short, losing Heckert is a small price for dumping Lerner.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,454
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,454 |
I agree although I'm ticked at you now for ruining my self-righteous vendetta to pigeon hole people who try to contort the truth to conform to their fears/beliefs.
Blue ostriches on crack float on milkshakes between the sidewalk titans of gurglefitz. --YTown
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,456 |
Quote:
Quote:
I could see that if Banner ends up firing Heckert here. I was talking about Philly. Just wondering where he got that info.
Banner never forced Heckert out. Heckert left to gain more control over a roster. Since it's possible there could be a conflict with what he had under Holmgren and what he'd have under Banner, it's entirely possible Heckert may leave here on amicable terms.
I don't wanna lose Heckert, but if you told me the only way I could have Heckert would be to keep Lerner and Holmgren, I'd have thrown Heckert out the window before you finished the sentence. In short, losing Heckert is a small price for dumping Lerner.
But wait Banner isnt about having control over the roster? I have a feeling you are going to be posting alot of the same stuff about the next staff as you post about this staff with the exception of this one was good.
If you need 3 years to be a winner you got here 2 years to early. Get it done Browns.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,024
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 17,024 |
Not only that but Toad wouldn't mind keeping Heckert after he couldn't stop telling us how little talent we had.
Come on Toadster ...
LOL - The Rish will be upset with this news as well. KS just doesn't prioritize winning...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 5,521 |
Quote:
Since it's possible there could be a conflict with what he had under Holmgren and what he'd have under Banner, it's entirely possible Heckert may leave here on amicable terms.
I think its an inevitibility. I believe Heckert has final say of the roster written into his contract. We already know that he isn't going to get that with the new powers that be, so I see no way he stays, short of renegotiating the terms of his contract, which I don't see him doing.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Quote:
I agree although I'm ticked at you now for ruining my self-righteous vendetta to pigeon hole people who try to contort the truth to conform to their fears/beliefs.
I don't know if I should be ashamed of them, you, or myself.
Rish, we're 3-8 and have more questions than answers on this team, but setting that aside, you're insinuating that I like Heckert because he's infused this team with a ton of talent. I happened to really have liked Heckert long before he got here because of his track record. Along those same lines, I didn't care for Holmgren the executive because his track record in Seattle sucked.
Besides, whether it's correct or incorrect, I still recall Holmgren retelling the conversation he had with Heckert where he basically asked Tom...and I'm paraphrasing here..."Tom, are you going to draft McCoy, or am I going to have to insist?" That one has stuck in my craw since I first read it, as that 3rd round pick wasted 2 seasons as our starter, leading us to then reach on a 29-year old rookie with our 1st round pick.
Simply stated, Heckert has a winning track record as an executive while Holmgren has a failed one.
You can't trap me on this talent thing. You've tried twice.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 5,761 |
Good article and it takes some of my fear...my biggest still persists and is re-inforced by it though....Banner wants more football say. Bechta pretty much said that Banner pissed people off by expanding his role and then goes on "speculating" that he'll hire football people with a reputation and go out of his way....those are 2 contradicting statements...and I still maintain that if we sign another Kokinis and oust Heckert it looks like he wants more football say. Why would he fire Heckert if, as Bechta speculates, he will go out of his way on football stuff? Heckert pretty much has the EXACT same philosophy when it comes to re-signing own young talent Something's fishy and doesn't make sense....weren't you the poster advocating to judge by actions over words? I'll follow your "other side of the fence"-Toad advice and wait for actions
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 40,399 |
Quote:
where he basically asked Tom...and I'm paraphrasing here..."Tom, are you going to draft McCoy, or am I going to have to insist?" That one has stuck in my craw since I first read it, as that 3rd round pick wasted 2 seasons as our starter, leading us to then reach on a 29-year old rookie with our 1st round pick
First, how do you figure we wasted 2 seasons with him as our starter? The first year he was never supposed to see the field but ended up starting because of injury and because the 2 guys in front of him were just bad. Then he got 1 year to start...
And as far as "wasted" if you examine the other options, what were we to do? Our other choices were to reach for Tebow or take Clausen... then after the first year our choices to replace him were Locker, Gabbert, Ponder or Dalton... none of which rated as highly as Weeden, their only upside was that they were younger... All in all, it's not like the drafting of McCoy in the 3rd cost us a superstar or caused us to pass on one in the draft... Odds are we would have been in about the same position reaching for RGIII and hoping for Luck.... but settling for something less than that. I suppose we could have thrown a ton of money at Matt Flynn like a lot of people wanted.. that's working out well.
yebat' Putin
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 8,015 |
Considering people widely now accept that Seneca Wallace and Colt McCoy are the same guy, we should have just went with him and used the 3rd rounder on someone else.
So what "someone else's" were out there in that 3rd round and even 4th round that we may have taken? Jimmy Graham and his pro-bowl ability, NaVorro Bowman has 100 tackles right now for the Niners, Eric Decker has 54 catches this year, Jordan Shipley was in that draft, and he had a helluva rookie year before he got hurt. Emmanual Sanders has 34 catches for 490 yards this year for the Steelers and plays special teams, Andre Roberts has 50 catches for 639 yards for the Cards, Everson Griffen has 4 sacks for the Vikings, Mike Williams has 625 receiving yards for the Bucs this year...I think you get the point.
If McCoy wasn't supposed to see the field in his first year, how is that acceptable, or how does that excuse anything? Our current 2nd, 3rd, 4th, and later-round picks all are seeing the field and contributing.
We didn't get "value" for our 3rd round investment. Trading that pick for a two-year "starter" who found his way to the bench because he isn't good enough is just a failed selection. No, there was no guarantee anyone else we took would have made it, but what we do know for sure is that McCoy didn't, and right now if anyone would ask me if I'd take a completely garbage QB from 2010 and rode him into the ground while getting a Jimmy Graham or Mike Williams or Andre Roberts, you can bet I'd take the trade.
Everyone has their own personal fantasy-plan which they'd follow if they ran their football team. My thoughts were to find just some middling veteran to man the position while we built the rest of the team. The odds of your 3rd round QB making it are precariously slim, especially one who was under-sized and under-armed. Bottom line is we didn't have to spend a 3rd rounder on a QB. There was a ton of talent which came off the board after him and right before him, and before anyone says "Well how could we draft one of those guys BEFORE McCoy?!" people need to keep in mind we were perfectly content trading up for...Montario Hardesty.
I'm also going to take this opportunity to shoot down a theory that makes it's way around the forums from time-to-time. It says that if your 3rd round shot-in-the-dark QB who fails as a starter makes it as a backup QB the pick will have been worth it.
Horsefeathers I say.
Once you give a guy a crack at being a starter and he fails, he'll NEVER remain with the team as a long-term backup. That QB is going to hit the free agency market because he'll want out and the team will want him out. No team is going to tag a backup QB who didn't make it as a starter, and no QB is going to want to stick with that team unless he has no other options. Of course if he doesn't have any other options he's not worth resigning, which means the pick was a bad one in the first place.
Now if you'd like to discuss the 2011 QB class and how they stack up to Weeden, he fell into that "developmental" category, just like guys named Ponder and Locker and Dalton...and Kaepernick.
Would we have taken one of them? Can't say we would have. Weeden doesn't look any better than those guys, and yes, you have to factor Weeden's age into the equation.
That's going down an extended road. What we know is that there are some very good players who are producing who came out of that same round as McCoy while he isn't. There are some young QB's who are much better than Weeden and who aren't going to turn 30 next year. But this isn't about Weeden. It's about McCoy.
There are many different ways to build a team, and Holmgren chose the wrong path.
***Gordon, I really didn't think you could be this stOOpid, but you exceeded my expectations. Wussy.
Manziel, see Josh Gordon. Dumbass.***
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,452
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 50,452 |
I'm not upset that we used a 3rd round pick on McCoy. At the time he looked like a good value pick at that spot.
I am kinda ticked off that Holmgren overruled Heckert on a pick. I don't feel that should have ever been his role.
Micah 6:8; He has shown you, O mortal, what is good. And what does the Lord require of you? To act justly and to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God.
John 14:19 Jesus said: Because I live, you also will live.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Banner says wins, losses won't
decide who stays and goes
|
|
and not enough 
... but at least we have a team. I think. 
