text:
Thanks for redeeming.{{else}}
Success! Thanks for repurchasing.{{/if}} {{else}} {{#if Expired}}
Increase my visibility!{{else}} {{#if IsMultiPack}}
{{#if HasMultiPack}} You have {{MultiPackCount}} top spot(s) left. Now loading you into the search listings... {{else}} You have used all top spots. Now loading you into the search listings... {{/if}}{{else}}
We are loading you into the search listing pages...{{/if}} {{/if}} {{/if}} {{/if}}
{{Current}} just saw you!{{/if}} {{#if LastTopSpotPurchaseIsMulti }} {{#if HasAnyTopSpot}}
{{#if HasFreeTopSpot }} {{ UnclaimedTopSpotFree }} Free {{/if}} {{#if HasPaidTopSpot }} {{#if HasFreeTopSpot }} & {{/if}} {{ MultiPackCount }} {{/if}} Top Spot{{#if Plural}}s{{/if}} Left{{else}}
0 Top Spot{{#if Plural}}s{{/if}} Left{{/if}} {{else}} {{#if HasFreeTopSpot }}
{{ UnclaimedTopSpotFree }} Top Spot{{#if Plural}}s{{/if}} Left{{/if}} {{/if}} {{else}} {{#if HasResults}}
{{Current}} see you now!{{else}} {{/if}} {{/if}}
You can now invite anyone to meet at your favorite Starbucks.
Limited-time feature
34 year old woman | Lakewood, OH, USA | Seeking men 30-45 within 30 miles of Cleveland, OH
Nervous as hell.....but here goes
The world is filled with literally billions of people, so with those kind of odds in mind, it shouldn't be hard to meet someone.....right??? I'm not one for wasting anyone's time, or having mine wasted so my pic is posted. No alterations, no lies, no embellishes, just me! About me (in my humble opinion LOL): *sigh*.....sometimes it's hard to find words when describing oneself. At least for me it is. What I write, is what I believe myself to be. People who know me tend to agree with these assessments so perhaps I'm not jaded. Personality wise, I'm a very down to earth, laid back female. I love to laugh, at times (more often that not) my sense of humor may run on the dry, sarcastic side. Typically I'm quiet, but once I get comfortable, I tend to be silly. Not in an immature sort of way, but I love to laugh. I'm a homebody, and love to watch horror movies. Horror fanatic would probably be more accurate of a description. I have my "weird" moments, I have my "spacey" moments, but overall I'm a very intelligent female. I'm gainfully employed, have my own place, and am in no means looking for someone to take care of me. I do not smoke, prefer not to be around those who do (just a preference). An occasional drinker I am, and never have I been in a situation where I was wasted, puking, and waking up in unknown areas or situations!!! Never been married, and have no children, though I have a niece and nephew that I adore as if they were my own. One day I think I'd like to be a mom, but at this point it's not a make or break situation. I'm a bit wary of those who say "attraction isn't important"....of course it is. It's all part of the dance, and we like what we like. Me personally, I'm tall...5 ft 10 to be exact and I'd much rather have to look up than physically have to look down to meet a guys eyes. Having a sense of humor is a must. How can one go through life without one??? I'm not looking to be anyone's mother, dominatrix, or "sugar mama"!! I read through some of these ads before deciding to post mine and almost fell out from reading what some people were looking for. But hell, I dont judge...if that's what you want, hope you find it! Just dont look for that from me. Typically, I'm an interracial dater, that's my preference but love has no color. And I'll leave it at that. I have much respect for anyone who is brave enough to post on here and be genuine in what it is you are looking for. It's scary to put yourself out there and hope that you meet someone who may be someone who ends up being meaningful to your life. Perhaps I am having one of my "starry eyed" moments, but I hope to find that, whether it be here...who knows!
Coffee and conversation , Cooking , Dining out , Movies/Videos , Playing cards , Video games , Wine tasting
ITT Technical Institute, Strongsville, OH
Fav shows: Elementary, Supernatural, The Walking Dead, Person of Interest, The Big Bang Theory, NCIS, NCIS: LA, and Criminal Minds. Fav authors: Laurell K Hamilton, Kim Harrison, Terry Goodkind
Read, watch tv, write, surf the net, walking, sight seeing, or just taking moments to "enjoy the silence".
Latest Anita Blake novel
Z{{Cta}} {{#if HasMoreInfo}} ?{{CtaSecondary}} {{/if}}
|What she is looking for
|5'10" (177cms)
|5'10" (177cms) to 8'11" (271cms)
|Body type:
|No preference
|No preference
|No preference
|No Way
|No Way
|No preference
|I'll tell you later
|No preference
|$35,001 to $50,000
|No preference
|Never Married
|No preference
|Have kids:
|No preference
|Wants kids:
|No preference
|Black / African descent
|Latino / Hispanic, White / Caucasian
|I'll tell you later
|No preference
|Some college
|No preference
Currently attending ITT Technical Institute


text:
Looking for your ticket?Log in to view your ticket
Problems with ordering?Here you'll find what you need
Ticket related question?Find our customer service here
Paylogic for your event?
The systems of Paylogic can be used for every kind of event. In every segment of the event business our customers have organized well visited events; from ice scating to horse riding, from expositions to dance festivals and from museums to theaters and concerts.
Our business model is transparent so any costs are known on before hand and no start up fees are being charged.
Contact marketing
If you have any questions that are press or marketing related you can contact the marketing department of Paylogic via the contact information below:
E-mail address: email@example.com
Call or fill in the form.
We gladly inform you about everything Paylogic has to offer!
Sales Amsterdam The Netherlands [javascript protected email address] LinkedIn
Sales Antwerp Belgium [javascript protected email address] LinkedIn
Nieuwe Boteringestraat 28
Postbus 1231
Sales support
Call me back

subset: commoncrawl


text:
I had put a hair item in the basket ... instead of a price it read 0.00 ... oh, quick to see if that would fly through, no way
So I removed it to see if it would repeat but no, it now reads the proper price ... but in the meantime when there was 'nothing' in the shopping basket, I noticed a price showing ... so here's one for the record.
[n.b. nothing needs to be done; it did fix itself up to read properly when next the shopping cart was used]


text:
Louisa County Schools
Louisa dedicates new Thomas Jefferson Elementary three years after East Coast earthquake
Virginia earthquake 2011: Two years later, scars and memories linger
It was two years ago Friday that a magnitude-5.8 earthquake struck the Mid-Atlantic, and from the District to Louisa County, the rebuilding, memories and resilience continue to this day.
Louisa schools still adjusting to 2011 earthquake damageComment
The 5.8 magnitude quake hit during school. There were no injuries, but the high school was condemned. And this year's freshmen could spend their entire high school career in trailers.
RecommendedRecent Facebook Activity
Only On 7
Watch ABC7 News at 4!ABC7 gives you MORE news in your afternoons with an extra hour, an hour earlier! Watch to see what's trending in your community and world every weekday afternoon at 4pm right after back to back "Hot Bench" shows at 3pm on ABC7.


text:
220 comments
With the 2014 NFL Draft now roughly one month away, there seems to be one player that the Pittsburgh Steelers could potentially draft with the 15th overall selection that causes such a split in opinion as far as the fan base goes and that player is Florida State wide receiver Kelvin Benjamin.
If you follow me on Twitter, you probably know that dating back to the second half of last season I have been infatuated with Benjamin. Did he have his share of drops? Yes. Does he lack elite speed? Yes. Does he catch touchdowns? Yes.
The last question and answer of those three listed above is what really endears me to Benjamin and it is why I really think the Steelers should strongly consider him at 15th overall even though most of the major media draftniks view him more as a late first-round selection.
Over the course of the last three seasons, Steelers quarterback Ben Roethlisberger has thrown 38 touchdown passes from 10 yards and in and 23 of those went to players that are no longer on the roster. So who is left heading into 2014 that has registered a touchdown reception from that area of the field? Tight end Heath Miller (8), wide receiver Antonio Brown (4), fullback Will Johnson (2) and wide receiver Derek Moye (1). Miller, by the way, had just one last season and in case you forgot, it was a shovel pass.
So what about the prospects of second-year wide receiver Markus Wheaton? If you look back his college career, he only had three touchdown catches that came inside the 10 and a total of nine inside the red zone as a whole. Let's face it, he only has six catches to his credit so far with the Steelers, so there's quite a bit that we still don't know about him.
The Steelers have also added wide receivers Lance Moore and Darrius Heyward-Bey this offseason to replace Emmanuel Sanders and Jerricho Cotchery, but combined, those two players have 20 touchdown catches from 10 yards and in in 173 regular-season games played. How confident are you that either one of those two players will be able to offset the loss of both Sanders and Cotchery deep inside the territory of the opponent?
I've referenced this several times already, but it's worth doing it once again. Of the seven passes that Benjamin caught last season inside the red zone, all seven were good for touchdowns. His other eight touchdowns came outside of the red zone, so he's not just a one-trick touchdown pony.
While nothing is guaranteed, I think most of you believe that the Steelers will have no shot at drafting Texas A&M wide receiver Mike Evans at 15th overall. If that indeed winds up being the case, Benjamin really deserves serious consideration with that pick.
There are some good arguments to be made for the Steelers selecting one of the top two or three cornerbacks if given the chance, but in all honesty, do you really see any of those players contributing as rookies? I am high on Alabama linebacker C.J. Mosley in addition to Benjamin, but even he would likely struggle to see the field much as a rookie with the Steelers.
The Steelers defense is still going through a transition from old to young and one first-round player is unlikely to make a huge difference in 2014. An offensive player, however, can make a difference and that's really what the Steelers need right now. I think Benjamin can be that player and I can't help but think how much he would help production inside the red zone by him being on the field.
Former NFL Scouts Debate Wide Receivers Mike Evans, Kelvin Benjamin
Steelers CB Ike Taylor Believes FSU WR Kelvin Benjamin Is A "Game Changer"
Red Zone Abilities Of FSU WR Kelvin Benjamin Can't Be Ignored By Steelers
Steelers Had Monday Meeting With FSU Draft Prospects WR Kelvin Benjamin And RB Devonta Freeman
2014 NFL Draft Player Profiles – Florida State WR Kelvin Benjamin
Key Spilt Stats Of The Top 10 Rated Wide Receivers In The 2014 NFL Draft
Is Benjamin too heavy at 240? Heard Charles Davis mention that NFL teams are wary of big wide outs. For the life of me I don't know why Benjamin being 10 pounds heavier than Evans would matter
I'd be perfectly fine if the Steelers selected him at 15. It might seem a bit high if you think he's more worthy for the bottom of rd 1 or even farther down, but in a couple years it won't matter. All that will matter is if he's a bust or not. If the Steelers think he's their guy then I'm all in.
Yes, yes, and yes. I couldn't agree more. He's definitely on their radar.
The thing that is most impressive about his 7 redzone TD's last year is that almost all of them involve him leaving his feet, going up and using his size to get the ball. Some of those are VERY athletic catches. Actually, the only redzone TD I don't see him going up and getting is a flag route where he makes an underrated adjustment to get it.
The kid is not afraid to leave his feet- In fact it looks like he likes to do it a little too much when he doesn't have to(coach-able). Just look at the touch down against, I believe Clemson, where he jumps, extends, spins and catches it, all while the CB can't even reach up to his shoulder pads. I mean, it's like there is 3 feet between the football and and the CB's finger tips. I can't find any footage of Evans doing that. I keep coming back to this pick as my favorite.
I heard Kiper say he could use another year in school. I didn't get that. He is 23 already. If he played another year in college, he would be playing the prime of his career on his rookie deal. Bad for him, good for the team that drafts him
I've been on board with this guy for three months. I doubt he gets past the Ravens, even with the Steve Smith signing.
Here's three subjective criteria to evaluate your first round draft pick:
1) Immediate impact player
2) Best in the draft at his position
3) Cornerstone around which you can build for a decade
"With the 15th pick in the 2014 NFL Draft, the Pittsburgh Steeler select Eric Ebron." Anyone else fit those parameters?
Ebron can't block and would be a liability on the end of the line. Not a good fit for a Steelers TE. First time he misses a block and gets Ben killed he would be benched for the next 6 weeks. So he tech. fails your number 1 and 3 requirements. Not the right choice for us.
I think the Ravens will take Lewan if available or the best safety
I believe you possibly misjudge his current ability as a blocker and definitely his potential as a blocker. There are such things as pass catching TEs in this league and I trust that Todd Haley could make use of his talents.
Just don't see it happening at 15. A #3 tier 2 at a position pick That high? He is big like Evens, but he ain't Evens. OLB Barr would be more likely.
We don't need tightends that block, we need players that catch touchdowns. Ebron shouldn't be asked to block in line just like benjamin or evans or watkins. If ebron develops into a blocker 3 years down the road, then so be it, but we need him for the mismatches he creates.
I get a lot of tomatoes thrown at me, but Heath sort of limits the offense. Most offenses have a dimension with a Todd heap, tyler eifert and Gresham, and Jordan Camron to create mismatches. Teams with a mismatch tightend like vernon davis bring in a tackle to block and let vernon split wide.
Heath was the last well rounded tightend to get drafted high in the draft, name another? There is a reason for that! Do you want me to name first round mismatch nightmares that can't block in line coming out of college? The game changes, and right now a rounded tightend has given way to a mismatch tightend. Exactly what we need.
Ebron at 15 if we are lucky.
I would love that pick.
I am hoping Ebron is gone before the Steelers pick at 15. That could leave Evens, a CB or another player available at 15. Ebron bothers me as almost as much as Benjamin at 15.
I honestly believe he will end up in Buffalo making all this a mute point anyways… but as with all things in life time will tell.
Nice to see everyone finally coming around. I've had Kelvin Benjamin at 1.15 in both of my previous mock drafts and he will remain there in my 3rd and final mock that I'll be posting soon.
Actually you make a very good point.. I have a feeling the Bucs will go WR, they have no one besides V.Jackson right now.. Cleveland taking Watkins and Tampa taking Evans is a strong possibility.
Dennard, Benjamin, Barr, Tuitt, Mosley and Lewan are the most likely selections, barring a trade back
You have to look logically at what the Steelers are doing. They always tip their hand if you watch. They took Bey as an alternative to having to take a WR in first round. They will not go WR in first round (but if they find Evans available he may be the wild card because he is a monster). They really need an impact player. They want Dennard and that's who they will go for…maybe even trade up. If all of the obvious suspects are gone they may go with Ebron.
I beat this conversation to a pulp with my cousin driving from pittsburgh this weekend. Tampa, Buffalo and NYG hold our cards. You'd have to believe that Tampa is targeting a receiver after trading Williams away. Buffalo got williams but I am not certian of their TE situation. The giants could use Donald, Lewan or Ebron.
As you said, time will tell.
They will not trade up for Dennard. At least I really hope they don't
Buffalo has Chandler after that not much to even look at. I don't consider Chandler that impressive. I can see them trying to add multiple weapons to see if Manuel is the future at QB or not.
Why do you think Evans is better for us than Ebron?
Receivers to fill in holes are easily obtained. We already have a number one. What Evans offers us is the same thing as Ebron, a mismatch in the red zone. We have young talent at receiver, but none at TE. Do you think that Evans is a bigger threat in the redzone than Ebron? I kinda think its a wash
Do you think Ebron will be off the board or that we shouldn't consider him?
Bey is a safety net, not an alternative. This team will need five receivers on the 53 and Moye is not No. 5.
He will probably be there when they pick (I hope), but they know they need a real impact player who can start next year or they won't be able to keep up with the Broncos or the cheaters… I mean the Pats.
Look at this set: Brown, Wheaton out wide, Ebron in the slot, Heath at TE, Bell at RB……… and Ben at the helm. Think of the variety out of just that one set. A DC's nightmare. Immediate impact.
Hm, I don't know that your criteria are actually possible to be honest.
QB's and Olineman are often drafted high and don't even start in year one. Also, if it's the best in the draft at his position, you'd only have 22 first round picks.
That said, I get your point and don't believe Benjamin fits that.
I like barr, but man he looks like Bruce davis. Appearance wise, not on the field lol. Might be the school thing.
Yes but don't forget Wheaton will hopefully step it up taking Sanders place and Moore will take Cotchery's spot.
I think I would take Mosley at 15. LB depth is very thin inside and what happens if Timmons gets hurt? I would take a WR in the 2nd or 3rd round as there are plenty of good ones to be had.
Im thinking BUF or NYG will take Ebron, but I'd be ok with an Ebron selection
There's no way they take Benjamin at 15. You try not to take busts that high up in the draft.
Dave, nice point with regards to the Red Zone needs. You make a good case.
I'm not infatuated with KB and think there are 2-3 TE's that could also be used in the same way that we could get in rounds 2-3.
We are in agreement on Mosley, btw.
If they truly feel that is the case they would be much better off adding somebody in free agency next offseason rather than trading up for a player who is good but not Polamalu good and trading away our 2nd round pick. Remember… we don't have a 3rd round pick to trade. Too many holes to trade up for a player that isn't guaranteed be "special."
I have a feeling the QB's are not going to get picked as quickly as the mocks show. Hopefully that gives us a real chance to trade back – I'm hoping Cleveland gives us back our 3rd to trade up from 26 for Manziel.
In that scenario, I'm starting to wonder who would be the top 2-3 picks for the Steelers. Perhaps Tuitt is still there, love Shazier, Fuller..
Neither of them is a redzone threat. A game changing redzone target, possibly season changing, WR at 1.15 adds much greater value than Moore. Moore will have his place but it won't be in the redzone.
I can't imagine they truly took Bey as a potential #2 WR. Shouldn't change anything with regards to WR picks anymore than McCain changes the need for CBs.
If Evans falls to Pittsburgh at 15, I'd rather see them trade down and pick up another choice around rd 3. Ideal situation to me.
Tuitt and Fuller would have to the front runners IMO and Shazier and Nix
I wouldn't be angry with picking Kelvin Benjamin, but I wouldn't take him over either corner and obviously not over Mike Evans.
Looking at the Steelers pre-draft visits, I get the feeling they're testing both draft strategies: 1) Taking a CB in the first, and 2) Taking a receiver in the first.
While you can't predict with certainty who will fall to you in later rounds, it may give them some idea of the overall value of their potential picks.
Steelers need to wait and see who falls into their hands, and take the best player available. Right now they are weighing their possibilities for who may be available at #15.
Two points made above really stick with me. Impact rookie year and a potential fix for our redzone woes. Given the depth of the draft at cb, they could still easily find two guys with one being ready for full time action after a year under his belt. It seems far less likely that we'd find the same sort of first year contribution and td production from any other WR picked in later rounds. Of course, the draft is deep at WR too. I don't think I would complain about Evans, Benjamin, one of the cbs, or Ebron…
Benjamin is 6-5 and there is no way that 240 lbs is too much at his height.
the redzone argument alone is a great point.
Benjamin would not be a terrible 1st round pick for the Steelers. I would hope though, that they do their due diligence and see if trading back a few spots is possible without loosing him to another team. Trading back may not be possible though with teams like Baltimore right behind us needing WR help badly.
Ya know, that logic sounds good at first – impact rookie year – but doesn't play out well.
Since we don't usually get much help in FA, the draft is where we need to live in building the team. The needs on defense are many and those holes are not going to fill themselves otherwise.
Plus, some of the better players from big programs could see time on defense this year while getting ready to start in 2015. Otherwise, we could take 'impact' players (in theory cuz who knows) and still have the same needs in 2015.
At the combine, Benjamin measured at 4% body fat. He may be big, but he's also very lean and strong. In the season before last, Joe Flacco made a living throwing long balls up for grabs and having Boldin out-muscle defenders for the ball. That's what Benjamin could bring to the table for the Steelers One question is whether there is less difference between the top 2 corners and a corner in the second round than there is between Benjamin and a second round receiver. The Steelers' assessment and draft board rankings don't have to match the grades set by others. Another question is where you would fit Benjamin in with this group of receivers. Do you want to spend a first round pick on a guy who may not be one of the top two receivers?
If your argument against taking a CB in the first round is that he won't contribute much as a rookie in the first year, wouldn't this be the reason why we constantly lack elite skill at this position? The Steelers are rarely in position to draft someone with the skill set of let's say Patrick Peterson-but if we constantly wait until the 3rd, 4th, and 5th rounds to take a corner, we will struggle to improve at this position. Dennard is my pick all day. Just my opinion.
They have had success drafting CB's in the middle rounds.
Agreed. Although I feel like Evans and Benjamin's styles can translate to the NFL game almost immediately. The others will probably need a lot more work.
The touchdown argument is a statistical game. Last year cotch got a lot of touchdowns because heath and Wheaton were injured most of the year. Before you factor in the injuries for next year we have elite players at WR and TE and pretty good depth at both positions. I agree we would be in trouble with ANY injuries but the holes we have elsewhere are much more significant.
Some say Moye at 6'5″ 210 pds. needs to pack on some weight.
You like the idea that he had to use all of his athletic ability to make a catch in college?
I think that might be more of a red flag.
?? I like the idea that he is athletic enough to make the catches he did. He's athletic with freakish size. If he has to use his athletic ability to make a catch there will not be one single person on the field that could cover that… so YES I do like the idea that he used his athletic ability in the red zone to make the tough catch.
My point is that the NFL is much harder than college. If he had to use all of his athletic ability to make 7 touchdown catches in college he might not have enough to make any in the NFL.
Most of the defenders he faced in college aren't good enough for a practice squad. He shouldn't have had to use all of his ability on those guys. It makes me wonder if he will have a hard time getting open.
I agree and I have said it before Benjamin will go #15 to Pittsburgh …If Pittsburgh starts shopping for receivers in the 2nd and 3rd round they will end up with a guy who can step up a year or two down the road…The Steelers are drafting for impact now after two 8-8 seasons…at #15 there will be no better player around to make an immediate impact like Benjamin
One success in C. Allen and quite a few failures in T. Hawthorn, C. Brown, C. Butler, J. Burnett, all taken in the mid rds.(rds. 3-5) Hardly my idea of success. If we expect a CB to pan out maybe it's time to select one higher in the draft.
We have taken a CB number 1 how many times?…yet how many times have we had the #1 Defense and #1 Pass Defense?…we don't need a number 1 CB to get the results we want
Okay, I see your point with having a hard time getting open. With his speed, or lack there of, he might have a harder time but keep in mind the 7 catches were in the red zone. Always harder to get open. His other 8 TD's came by him being open- sometimes wide open.
My point was the QB wasn't always on his mark and was able to throw the ball in Benjamin's vicinity and he was able to make the tough catch. These weren't slant routes, and some were crossing routes in which he was open, but most were throw and leap passes and in double coverage.
As good an argument as any I've seen. I wouldn't be upset if this is the pick. This is Roethlisberger's prime…Outside of running back, all the other picks to the defense.
how many times has the Steelers D been rated #1 without a number 1 CB on the roster?…we don't need one to be successful we need D backs who play our scheme
I'd very much welcome this pick at #15… Give Ben his big WR!
plus a solid pass rush
It's hard for me to see the Steelers picking a wr with their first pick. Wr's tend to be prima donnas and come second contract, we won't be able to afford him. I see us going defense in the first w/ BPA and approaching wr in the second. Bryant, Moncrief, Adams, etc.
You are correct, they have, but Kennan Lewis and Cortez Allen are very solid #2 CB's, not #1 CB's.
I saw somewhere that some teams wanted him down to 225. We need WR's with larger wing spans. Look at some of the over throws to 5'10" WR's that could have been caught by someone who's 6'5″. I'm pretty sure the team is tired of putting up 3 in the red zone instead of throwing up jump balls to a tall guy. I'm all for Benjamin in the first of Bryant in the 2 or 3.
yes Benjamin, who has better hands and better upside
Also have had success drafting WRs in later rounds and not so in 1st
As someone else here stated, Benjamin has bust potential. Is he a huge target that would create matchup problems? Yes. Can the Steelers afford a 1st round bust at this point in time? Absolutely not.
The #15 pick must be a safe pick and must also be a game changing talent. I realize that's more difficult to find than it sounds. However, if we assume the top 2 CBs, Evans and Mosely are off the board, I think Marqise Lee is a far better WR pick at #15 than Benjamin. It's a slight reach, but he's a solid, safe pick with star potential. Benjamin, IMO, would be a much bigger reach. Lee's impact would also extend beyond just a few plays in the redzone as well. For the redzone plays, don't sleep on Heath, Moye and/or Brown to fill that role. We have big receivers, admittedly not as big as Benjamin, but we need a starting, well-rounded receiver, not another one-trick pony (with bust potential) at #15 overall.
Fair enough. I don't know enough about him to say getting open will be a problem but that is what makes me less confident about projection.
A great pass rush tends to make average CBs great.
Lee is not a better receiver than Benjamin
Maybe the Steelers should draft a QB just in case Ben gets hurt. You don't draft because of "what ifs"
The Steelers have a ILBs are they household names? No. I believe the Steelers are comfortable with the ILB situation.
The Steelers struggled last year because the offense lacked a playmaker on offense early on in the season. Ebron, Evans ( who I don't like) and Benjamin give the Steelers a player who threatens the defense.
With all that said I still want Darqueze Dennard!
Burress and Holmes were fine additions to this team
Agree not sold on Barr. I guess that was my point. Barr reminds me of last years pick Jones. Just a faster version with different question marks.
The guy reminds me of Boldin or Fitzgerald. I am a FSU fan, so I am partial, but I'd get a little chub if they took him.
Well Kiper's a Ravens fan so take it for what it's worth.
It is too high for him and the Steelers aren't in a position to reach for players.
We don't bench our lineman for getting Ben killed every week. Not every TE has to be Mark Bruener. Ebron is a willing blocker just not great at it but his playmaking ability makes him a huge weapon.
I'm only talking about if we're wanting a CB to pan out then maybe it's time to select one earlier than rd. 3. But none the less if Dennard is still there I don't see them passing on him.
Every pick has bust potential.
Think about what defenses would be forced to do with Benjamin, Brown, Wheaton or Moore, Miller, and Bell on the field. Even in a dime defense you are going to get someone covered by a linebacker. If you wanna go 6 DBs then we will just pound the ball down your throat with the nearly 500 lbs of beef we have at running back now. The mismatches created by adding Benjamin are exciting.
We are on the cusp of having an elite offense and this is the final piece.
If Evans and Watkins are off the board….if Dennard and Gilbert are off the board….if 3 QBs…..the 3 OTs are all off the board….if Mack and Clowney are off the board…you are into the next group of guys. I have a hard time arguing that player X is better than player Y once you hit that point. Mosley, Fuller, Benjamin, Hageman, keep going. It is almost impossible to prove to me that one is better than the other from the value perspective. This is a tricky draft.
Watch Game Changers tonight on NFL network. When you see that Benjamin is 3 inches taller and 30 lbs heavier than Michael Irvin that is all you need to know.
But how doesn't it play out well in your mind?
I hear you on defensive holes. I also think that it is easier to find solid defensive value outside of the first round than offensive value (of course, in terms of Steelers needs, considering this years draft…not a generalization).
That's idiotic. If the Steelers don't view him as a top 15 player in this draft, they won't take him. And they shouldn't, because he isn't a top 15 player.
Well if they don't have Landry Jones ready to play just in case…then that pick last year might be one of the biggest wastes of all time.
Could you imagine if Cotchery's production was closer to his normal last year (2-5 total tds)? The redzone and TD production issue would be at the top of the charts right now.
Good point on QB accuracy on those catches (or lack thereof). I watched some of those and wondered if it was the same Jameis Winston. He obviously had a lot of trust in Benjamin to get the ball. Looked like almost every one of em was a prayer.
I guess the other point about better competition in the NFL will also hold true to the CB position. So…is it a good argument to even have?
I am 95% for this…
The only thing that gives me pause is the seemingly non-existent depth at CB outside of the top 3. We'd be really rolling the dice to pass on one of those guys if they were there knowing how deep the WR class is.
All that said. The win now appeal of the Benjamin pick weighs out for me. We can always draft 2 corners later and hope one pans out as Ike's replacement.
Benjamin is going to either be a lethal weapon or a what were we thinking moment. I dunno which. stumped.
I have a feeling the FO is looking at it as top of the charts… especially with uncertainty of if Miller can be a red zone threat again. There's little doubt in my mind that Benjamin will be there with the 1.15 so unless Evans falls we'll find out in a month how the Steelers truly feel about their 2014 red zone production will be. IMO Benjamin is the most dangerous RZ threat in this draft.
Same could be said for Ike in his prime.
Our scheme is not corner heavy. Would a Revis help, yes. Is such a talent needed in this scheme to be successful, no.
fully agree. Our defense has always been only as good as our front 7.
Unless ebron is htere.
That's why he is a top 15 pick. He's 6'5″ and 240 lbs and ran a 4.59. If he was 5'10" 200 lbs and ran a 4.59 then he'd be a 5th rounder.
I don't think a 1st rd receiver is needed for other reasons. We alreadfy have a number one WR. And we have young talent at hte position. What we lack is a mismatch in the redzone. I think if Ebron is there, it would make a lot of sense.
I don't buy into these theories that kiper and company spread. It was way too high for Tyson Aleau and Bruce Irwin.
Some notable post-1st round DB selections…C.Allen(4), K.Lewis(3), W.Gay(5), Ike(4), C. Hope(3), D.Townsend(4), L.Flowers(5) Myron Bell(5), W.Williams(6), D. Perry(8), C.Lake(2), D.Woodruff(6), M.Blount(3).
Our only 1st round DB selections since '69…J.T.Thomas('73), Dave Brown('75), Ron Johnson ('78), Rod Woodson ('87), Deon Figures('93), Chad Scott('97), Troy ('03),
A very persuasive case, Dave, but I'm not yet persuaded. But, then, I haven't been persuaded about anyone in this draft yet. That's not a bad thing, just a recognition that this draft is deep and, from the perspective of trying to figure out what a team with the 15th overall pick is going to do, complicated. As I'm sure it's complicated for the front office as well.
The fact is, once you get past the elite tier of 8-10 players (maybe?), it seems impossible to rank the next 10 or 20 or even 30 with any measure of confidence. My hope, I suppose, is that we have another DeCastro situation, where an elite player, from the team's perspective (and also generally) drops for whatever reason (just not character or injury problems) and ends up the must-take pick. Maybe that's one of the top WRs or CBs. But if not, honestly, it seems like we'll just have to roll the dice with one of about 5-10 different options and hope that it works out. Could be Benjamin, sure. Could also be Ebron or Mosley or Lee or…
I will say, though, those GIFs of Benjamin's TDs you put up recently have really stuck with me, and the thought of moving forward with Antonio and Benjamin as our starters, with major upside in Wheaton and solid depth in Moore and maybe DHB is pretty exciting, not just for 2014 but beyond as well. Add a healthy Heath for one or two more years and our offence, assuming the O-line continues to get better and remains healthy, could be as formidable as anything we've seen in the Black and Gold for a long time.
One thing I want to add is this: I'm not saying you, Dave, but a lot of us are focusing on what's going to happen in the first round. And that's fine — that's where we're most likely to pick up an immediate starter, if not a true franchise player. But I think what we do in the first round will be determined not just by who's available based on the top of our draft board but who we think we can get in the middle to later rounds. If Colbert et al. are confident that they can land a solid CB or two later one, then maybe Gilbert and Dennard slide down our board. Similarly, if we have a few solid WRs targeted for later on, maybe there isn't the urgency to draft a Benjamin or a Lee after the the top two guys are gone. And if both of those are the case, maybe they go with Mosley or Ebron. I don't know. Who does? I just know that our recent history shows that do have the ability to identify outstanding value at WR and CB later on in the draft. Maybe that plays out next month as well.
A 6'5″ wr is not a mismatch in the red zone?
Sorry… very long comment!
Don't need a blocking TE…we have Adams! nyuck, nyuck, nyuck
Good points.
Every day of hte week and twice on sundays.
I was trying to say that we are in more of a need at TE rather than at WR. A first round receiver is suppose to be a franchise receiver by being a number one in an offense. We don't need that.
If he gets past Ravens he probably wont make it past the Jets.
Benjamin is a difference maker — it is that simple. He is very close to a Plax-clone, except Benjamin actually seems to be better at catching the ball at its apex than Plax ever was. KB is a red zone threat every play his team is in the red zone. The Steelers already have two smaller, quick receivers in Brown and Wheaton, plus the wily veteran in Moore, and the 4th or 5th veteran WR in DHB. If they hit on Benjamin, it would change everything about how coverage needs to be played in the red zone by other teams. For those that wonder if KB can get open, the answer is he is ALWAYS open simply because you can loft the ball up. That is what Flacco did with Boldin and Pitta. It did not matter if someone was standing right next to them. Watch the Florida St. film. When the Heisman trophy winner was in trouble, he would often just lob one in Benjamin's direction. It may be five years before we see another like him so it is worth it to pick him at 15 even if he might project as more of a 25-30 value all things being equal. As to Lee, he drops the ball. In terms of other WRs, they may have skill or speed but do not fit as well with what we need. Regarding other position players, perhaps there is someone else worthy of the pick at 15 but if they take a rotation DL, or a finesse LB, or a raw corner, than it does almost nothing for them this year. So why do it?
Benjamin: 6'5", 240 lbs, 4.6sec-40
Ebron: 6'4", 250 lbs, 4.6sec-40
Both are dynamic playmakers.
Both create matchup nightmares.
Both have their fair share of drops.
Both are good-but-not-great blockers.
Both will likely line up in the slot.
Question: Who has more value?
Answer: Meh…
Question: Would either be a wise choice for the Steelers at #15?
Answer: Meh…
I think that more important to minimize the risk of "bust" in the first, rather than to to focus on "boom" potential. I would rather take someone who is a guaranteed starter and solid long-term contributor in stead of someone who may or may not be a future HOF. I think you make a safe choice in the 1st, and you roll the dice in later rounds.
I just mean that you can't only draft players who we believe can make an impact this upcoming season. If we use that logic, you pass on defensive talent because most players can't start for the Steelers on D their first year.
But since that's where the biggest holes are, and more than one, and we mostly build thru the draft . . .
A guy like Mosley, coming out of the biggest NCAA program, he could see time next year, but wouldn't make much of an impact unless he somehow became a starter. But then in 2015, we have our ILB's set.
Understood and I agree with you there. But you also can't draft on where your biggest holes are. Definitely need a fine balance of need, talent, production. I do think the need to remedy the TD/redzoneTD lack of production is critical. I don't be mad with any of the guys that are on most people's watchlist on these boards though.
No. He drops way to many passes, and his route running is raw. If the Steelers choose him at 15, which they won't, I'd pull my hair out.
You haven't seen Mike Evans do that? Have you watched any of his tape? Mike Evans does that exact thing 3-5 times a game. LOL
Yea, he's the final piece…until he drops a ball on his numbers to win a game. Height is overrated with WRs. Talent, GREAT HANDS and vertical jump can create just as much of a mismatch in the redzone as height. Having two great receivers can also create a mismatch in and of itself because one takes pressure off of the other.
Sorry man, you can't take someone with the dropsies at #15.
Trade back with the 49ers, and get extra 2nd (56). At 30, select Kyle Fuller. At 46, select Stephon Tuitt. At 56, select Allen Robinson. Allen Robinson has Steelers written all over him. He is 6-3 210 lbs and from Penn State. Makes too much sense.
Benjamin has some of the worst hands in this year's draft
Really? He was the best receiver in college football the year before last when he was fully healthy. Still pretty good last year too. Lee is 100x more talented and polished right now. Benjamin has more upside due entirely to his size. In mid 1st round, I'll take the better receiver over the upside all day long. You take a chance on upside later, not with your first pick.
Kelvin Benjamin's hands are not that good. He dropped over TEN % of the passes thrown his way.
You forget Crezdon Butler, Bryant McFadden, and Joe Burnett huh?
Me personally. If I'm own the ten yard line, I'd prefer to run the ball. Shove it down your opponents throat. We used to do that. We'd run the ball, the other team knew it was coming and they still couldn't stop us.
Imagine the steelers getting back to the way we used to run the ball
I know, just a joke….We are fine for a blocking TE. If they go with Ebron, he can spend a couple years working with Munchak to get better there. I doubt he would take over the point of attack role for run plays in the first year or two anyways. I do like his big play skills. that isn't something you teach. Besides…we picked up Paulson and I doubt there is anyone in all of college ball that can't block better than him.
yeah really…I just watched his game film from 2012 against Syracuse,Arizona and Notre Dame and nothing stood out as remarkable about Lee…he has talent just not game changing talent
his hands are better than Ebrons
haha…I said 'some' and 'notable'. They drafted plenty of other DB's since '69 after round one…plenty are forgettable too.
Do you think there is much of a difference in 'prima donna' affect between WR's and CB's these days? I get your point and agree with you, but when i look at that it is more of a reason to go with a guy like Ebron.
'Ebron is a mismatch at TE in the redzone and a sensible pick'…does not equal…'6'5″ WR is not a mismatch in the redzone'
Watched as much tape on him as I could find. He's got good speed, great at coming back to the ball and back shoulder fades but I can't find a single touchdown where he high points the ball over a defender. Also can't find his stats on red zone TD's.
Height is overrated huh? Megatron, Dez, AJ Green, Julio Jones, Vincent Jackson, Brandon Marshall, Alshon Jeffrey, Josh Gordon, Jordy Nelson. Everyone of those guys are at least 6'2″ or taller. Minus Antonio Brown that's the fricking pro bowl roster.
Small guys like AB and Victor Cruz becoming stars are more the exception than the rule.
Yes he's not Steve Largent. We know that. Will he drop balls…probably. He will also be unstoppable inside the 5 yard line. If he drops the 1st one throw him another one cause its going to be a touchdown.
I have no issue with taking Benjamin at 15. I'd find it hard to bypass Gilbert or Dennard at 15. I feel Dennard & Kyle Fuller could start day one. The issue is the coaches not playing them not the player
It's funny because other cb drafted in the early or mid first rd start on other teams.
At this point watkins is peter warrick and julio jones. Benjamin is Plaxico and limas sweed.
I know its a month away from the draft but I'm starting to think Fuller isn't going to happen b/c Tomlin or Colbert(or anyone else in significance) wasn't at his pro day and I yet to see that they are bringing him in for a pre-draft visit.
Don't have to go back that far, trade with San Diego gives a second rd pick
My problem is that, well Benjamin if get drafted probably will have small PT, as much as Antonio Brown did in rookie year. The Blount signing indicates we are going to pound it to ground with Bell… at least that's the indication and if so.. why do we draft a 3rd down specialist? Redzone maybe but first year? Naw.
Plus he'd be 28 going 29 by end of his rookie contract. Going after Brandon Coleman in 3rd makes much more sense. I do get why you love him though. I just.. hope not, I'm sure I'm in the minority.
Its no question he will get open, its my questioning about his consistency catching ability. CJ81 get massive targets in comparison and drop over 50% of those passes… its no wonder Lions are constantly bad from year to year. I do get that we need a flanker but… Benjamin is A 2nd round talent. Not 1st, he doesn't get off the line quick enough nor run good route tree. So I'm with you man.
That's what tight ends are for.
I just said that because the 9ers are looking to trade up, and not really. Last year the 49ers traded from 31 to 18 and only gave up a 3rd.
That's not saying much
He is not worth the 15th pick. Period.
I agree. Red Zone is important. I think we should draft a TE for that and believe Heeeeeath will be back this year to his old self again and offering a red zone target again. I think Cotchery mostly excelled last year because Heath wasn't quite back yet.
Why does it have to be a TD? Are you saying that a great catch where he highpoints the ball over a defender at the 50 yard line can't be done by him in the end zone? I've seen him do that every time I watch his tape, and just because it doesn't happen to be in the end zone doesn't mean he can't do it in the end zone.
I will graciously accept your apology when he tears it up next year.
I will accept yours when he is Limas Sweed 2.0
Love it im one of those people who thought o line was the biggest need, then thought cb but eventually said kelvin benjamin needs to be our first pick, fact is any defensive player wouldnt see much playing time in their rookie season for us and any defensive player we pick would get out jumped, out muscled, and would look like a boy trying to defend a man vs benjamin, and the best arguement is we either throw to him or defend him and thats where benjamin would excel the mismatch he makes is unfair and for those complaining about his drops, let me remind you one pass he didnt drop was the game winner in the national championship game
yes except that they are both widely considered top tier 1st round picks
He is just not worth the 15th Pick.
Not Benjamin. Right now, most analysts and scouts have him being taken late 1st early 2nd
no…you just think he's not worth it
And 90% of scouts agree with me
Oh BS who where?
Most scouts and analysts have him going anywhere from 25-35. That is NOT a top 15 Pick
he is rated in the top 5 universally and with
his particular size and redzone ability a dead match for what the Steelers need
Not to mention he drops 10% of his passes and is still raw running routes. No thank you to him at 15.
who said top 15 pick?…you pick for need and Pittsburgh would get the best bang at 15 for him immediately
well when he wears black and gold you can sit on your hands
Yup same thing I said mike evans has the size to high point but dont really see him do it too often
Newsflash the Steelers have a top 15 pick. No they wouldn't. He is raw and drops way too many balls.
The Steelers will not take him at 15. He is already 23, and the Steelers don't like that, especially when he is raw. He will not be a steeler.
Imagine benjamin, Moye, Miller and Spaeth in the game inside the 20. They are all 6'5″ plus. What the hell do you do if you're the defense? I know, I know! It probably won't happen! But, holy crap, just think about it. It seems like they would be unstoppable. They could run or throw it high to anyone mentioned above. Look at Detroit last year with Megatron and that 6'8″ TE that caught all those TD's. Crazy potential.
But I still say they go 3rd round WR like usual. And I'm still praying for a trade down with San Fran.
One problem I have with him on the TD thing: Only 4 of his TDs were against teams that finished more than 1 game over .500. Combined with the drops and other issues, I just don't see top 15 value.
The Steelers don't pick for need. They rarely ever do. They pick the best value at a position of need. which KB is unlikely to be at 15.
Part of this assesment should be how much young talent we have at either position. The answer should be that it's more needed at TE. Other than that, I thin youre onto something.
any if any drops he has are largely seen as fixable his offensive production is ridiculous 54 catches for over 1,000 yards and 15 TD's….we need redzone weapon…he at 15 will be our pick ….I mean seriously who would you take at 15? a CB or LB who won't help for a year or two
"Bottom Line A monster-sized, intimidating, big-play receiver,
Benjamin has the overall strength, length and wide catching radius that
will demand extra coverage be rolled his way. Showed continual
improvement, is still growing into the position, and possesses the
traits to become a legitimate No. 1 receiver. A very intriguing mismatch
weapon with ascending talent."
as per his NFL profile
I don't understand. What's to like here? If you just want a big, slow receiver who can't catch; why waste a first-round pick? You could sign Burress and get all of those qualities and still have a first round pick.
Agreed… But it would be that much more easier to run down there if there was a monster red zone threat at wr that the opposing d have to respect and be cautious of
Yea since they're always right
I doubt I'm the first to have this thought, but….Given the widespread idea that a lot of teams are looking to move back in the draft and the Steelers having quite a few picks to use…any possibility that they try to move up in order to get Evans? Personally, i'd like to see them use every one of their picks to fill some holes, but would it be much of a stretch for that scenario to play out?
I really hope we draft KB and then take a cb in the 2nd. Any player has "bust" potential… But KB has the size and athleticism to make us a top tier offense instantly
Would help with the turnovers and the pass rush. The longer your corner covers the longer our d-line and linebackers have to get to the QB.
No, no, if he was there in the 2nd then it might be a good fine. Not worth a 15 pick though. One dimensional, slow, doesn't break away from coverage, stone hands. He's big amd tall that's about it. Might as well get Ebron with 15, he'll give you the same redzone production plus some. I just hope Evans somehow falls to 15, so we can forget Benjamin all together.
Might be alone on this, but I tend to disagree w/ the notion of draft an offensive weapon just because he'll be a starter/make and impact this year. As opposed to a defender who might not be on the field much this year, but next year. That point alone has me leading towards defender. I want nothing more than to get the ball rolling w/ this defense. Ben and the offense will get it done this year w/ whatever adjustments are made to the game plan/personnel. What we really need to do is ramp up this defense. That is what is most important to me. We've gotten a lot younger in a hurry on defense. Just a couple more positions stacked w/ quality players and our D should be good to go for another dynasty run. Not saying the Seahawks are the end all be all for a team blueprint. But they hammered the Broncos with no big receivers and an awesome D. They have a good running game also. We should have a good running game as well. I mean sooner rather than later. At this point leading up to the draft, i could see Pittsburgh landing a number of players I'd be happy with: Gilbert is my fav. as far as best available and covering needs, after that, I'd be ok w/ Mosley, Dennard, Roby, Fuller, (you can see I'm high on cbs) Ebron, Benjamin, etc.. Basically, I trust the front office. I'm sure once the draft is over with, it will make sense. Would like to see us double dip at cb, grab a decent DL prospect, grab a "big bodied" receiver i suppose, grab another OLB and ILB prospect, and throw in another DL and a guy with good speed and agility out of the back field who can also return punts/kicks.
Same red zone production from Ebron? All 5 career red zone TDs?
I don't know if Landry Jones is a good QB but it seems that the Steelers believe he can be. The Steelers drafted Landry Jones because they had to senior citizens as backups.
I could say the same for your response. I just see nothing from Benjamin that warrants a 15 pick over a guy like Davonte Adams in the second, who has lower upside but is still a big time red zone threat and has much better hands.
Silly to see people argue against Benjamin because he might not see a second contract. Has it really come to that? That's seriously grasping for straws.
Peshek has KB with a 9.68% drop rate. Based on him being targeted 87 times in 2013, that's a total of 8.5 drops. If you saw those drops, you would see that most are because he turns his head up-field too quickly instead of watching the ball all the way in. These are not Heyward-Bey kind of drops.
I agree with everything you said, but I just not a big fan of Ebron.
I think Evans is just flat out better. Throw what positions they play out the window. Who's a better all around receiver?
Thank you! Did everyone hear that?!!!
You're on a roll today!!!
To keep it 100% honest with you, I have seen neither play except flashes in bar while drinking of Manziel running around and heaving it up towards Evans.
I don't watch college. From what I have read, evans is probably the better prospect, but my argument is that is very close and offset by our higher need at tight end due to ageing starter(s).
I should of been a politician huh? Said a bunch of nothing that sorta makes sense.
Evans has great hands, and better speed. He can do it all.
Ebron's ceiling to me is an Aaron Hernandez type player(on the field)
Evan ceiling? He reminds me of Jimmy Graham.
True. But that is dessert.
You have to crawl before you can walk. To me, make sure u can run at will. Then go and add someone like that.
Let me know wit u think , I have more to add
I agree. I like a strong running game over a passing game… Like we used to have. I'm just thinking that would help open it up
Sure did last year with Jarvis??
Peshek has Jordon Matthews with a 7.69% drop rate and he said he was being kind that it really is somewhere between 7-11%. I bring this up because many people on here are also high on Matthews but his drop percentage is only 2 percent lower than Benjamins. Benjamin had twice the red zone production of Matthews last year and I will take the extra 2 drops per 100 throws to him for that kind of red zone production. I couldn't find the drop rate percentage for adams. Jarvis Landry has the best hands in the draft with only 2 dropped passes and reminds me of a mixture of hines ward and anquan boldin. If the steelers pass on Benjamin I wouldn't mind landry in the 3rd round.
Watch again. Against Arizona Lee have over 400 recieving yards. If that is not remarable, nothing is.
I just think that if you're gonna be a WR picked at 15, soft hands and crisp routes should be part of the scouting report.
Since Benjamin isn't known for those qualities, i believe it would be a reach at 15.
The NFL defenders will expose his skills when he can no longer dominate with his size.
I will listen to them over random guys on Steelersdepot. Thank you anyway Brad.
Benjamin didn't exactly lead Division one in Red Zone TDs this season. I don't get why so many seem to think he has the RZ threat market cornered. Yeah, he played for the top team, but that is a two-way consideration.
You draft for long term help, not short term gain. Yeah, he put up gaudy numbers in college. So did Mike Evans, Sammy Watkins, Davonte Adams, Brandon Cooks,and others, many of whom had better red zone production. There is a ton of WR depth in this draft and we could get a CB/LB/DE in the first and still address the WR need in the second without much drop-off in potential.
Especially when you consider the Steelers like younger players, which he is not.
Was replying to what you said: But you also can't draft on where your biggest holes are. The Steelers sure did last year in drafting Jarvis Jones.
Dave, although he would have been an attractive pick had he come up the year AFTER our last SB appearance, I think I just may slit my wrists if Colbert and Co. take Benjamin with our 1st rd pick!!!
So many needs, so many MUCH safer picks to be had……
I see. I was talking about how I'd approach it. As for the Steelers…given the reports that they assumed JJ would be well gone by then…they went by biggest hole and best tallent (according to them). Not a bad approach. All I was saying is there needs to be a balance of more than one factor…I think they did that last year and are continuing the same this year.
Benjamin does the same thing midfield but also does it in the endzone. I also wouldnt call what Evans does high pointing the ball… sure he goes up but i rarely see him extended to his full potential… there has to be a reason he doesnt do it in the red zone. Actually in all his film i watched(4 games) and his highlights I havent seen a true high point.My thinking is he doesnt have the knack to… maybe I'll eat my words this year. Maybe he'll learn… maybe he wont. Maybe he has a better QB so he doesnt have to like Benjamin does? Regardless he's gona be a good player.
My original point was he doesnt high point it like Benjamin. We dont need somebody to stretch the field and Benjamins ability to go up, stretch out and get the ball is unmatched in this draft. Until I see Evans do it I'll be happier with Benjamin…even at 1.15.
So whos worth the 15th pick? And let me remind you that everybody thought le'veon bell was a reach and we all know how that worked out
When I watched Superbowl 43 and I seen Larry Fitzgerald make a leaping grab over the head of Ike Taylor the Cardinals radio announcer called Fitz the "scourge of the redzone". At that point I really wanted to see the Steelers have a weapon like that. Not saying Benjamin is as good as Fitz by any stretch of the imagination. He gives me the "scourge of the redzone" sense. He makes those leaping grabs over the heads of defenders and they are powerless to stop him. Its a trait the Steelers need in a receiver. I hope I hear Roger Gotohell announce "With the 15th pick in the 2014 NFL draft the Pittsburgh Steelers select Kelvin Benjamin, wide receiver, Florida State".
I'm now open to the possibility of selecting KB with the 15th pick, as Dave has effectively defended his position on him. I was not convinced that he'd be good fit at 15 but after Dave suggested that I review the animated GIFs in one of his podcast (i.e., smell a lot like Limas Sweed), I stand corrected… You can't deny the kid's redone production and if him and the rest of the O can manage to get to the redone consistently, his presence alone should help immensely… KB has now moved up to number 4 on my wish list for the Steelers at 15: Gilbert, Evans, Ebron, KB…
Me too
For what it's worth , The Steelers did take him to dinner. The last guy they took to dinner ended up in the Black n Gold . (L. Bell )
How do we know how that worked out? He missed a quarter of the season, and he wasn't a great back by any means. I still call for a trade back and take CB Kyle Fuller
Evans dropped 3% of his passes, while Benjamin dropped 11% of his passes. Evans is also faster. Evans all day.
I'm an FSU fan and I love Benjamin, but I recognize that Evans is a better receiver. To get Evans, however, the Steelers will more than likely have to move up 5 or 6 spots, which I doubt they can do. Giving up a 4th rounder probably isn't enough to get a deal done. They can't trade their 3rd because it's a compensatory pick. And giving up a 2nd is probably too rich for Colbert's blood. This is especially so when the Steelers can probably move back 5 or 6 spots, add a 3rd or 4th rounder in the process and still draft Benjamin. I won't be surprised if the Steelers take neither of them and instead go for one of the sub 4.4 guys like Brandon Cooks, John Brown or Martavius Bryant – Tomlin loves speed.
Good points
He can yawn all he wants, but you're absolutely right. Everyone is so enamored with Benjamin's size, while the reality is that Marquis Lee is a far better receiver in every conceivable way except for size (Round 1 option). Davante Adams is also a better overall receiver than KB (Round 2 option). If the argument is that most of the pro bowl receivers last year were large, these folks should remember that those receivers all had other desirable qualities, like elite hands, speed and/or route running ability, none of which applies to Benjamin. He's a raw one-trick pony as of right now, but he does have enormous upside. That is the kind of player you take on day 2 or 3, not at 15 overall.
My aversion to taking him at #15 has nothing to do with a 2nd contract. It has to do with 4-5 other players being better receivers.
I wasn't pleased with Landry's pedestrian 40 time, but he's a football player. His hands, blocking and route running are phenomenal. He just looks like a Steeler, doesn't he?
Moncrief I think is a great second day option as well. he is less of a RZ threat than Adams, but more polished overall.
Ignore Spaeth because he's a blocker, Jam Moye, then you only have two guys to defend. J/K.
I am very high on Moncrief as a 2nd round option. He has size, speed and production against top competition. His athleticism is what really sticks out. Like Benjamin, he has some drops, but I'm far more comfortable taking a player like that in round 2.
My top 4 picks would go this way:
1. Evans, Gilbert or Dennard
2. Moncrief, Mathews or best CB available
3. Best RB available (I really like Charles Sims from WVU)
4. DE Josh Mauro, Stanford.
Jarvid jones is 23
1 jarvis Jones is 23
2 any cb in this draft and the nfl give up height and weight when covering this guy
3 the tallest cb is 6 '3 benjamin is 6'5 and all ben needs to do Is throw it higher than the cb can reach just like what winston did and boom bang its a first down or touchdown
"boom bang its a first down or touchdown"
LOL, because football is that simple. Which is why he's the consensus #1 pick in the draft…
Your actual arguments are pretty weak:
1: One example does not refute that the Steelers like to pick younger players
2: Coverage is not about height and weight
3: If this were remotely true we would only see 6'5″ WRs in the league and they would all be pro-bowlers. Derek Moye is 6'5″. If your premises were all that mattered, he would be our guy and we wouldn't be having this discussion.
Ever hear of a thing called Vertical Leap? Both Moncrief and Adams are over 6'1″ and have good body sizes. Both have vertical leaps that were 7″ higher than Benjamin's, which negates his height. In fact, both had better 40 times, broad jumps, 3-cone drill and shuttle times than Benjamin. Both are younger, both are better route runners, all three are in the top 8-10 WRs in the draft depending on where you look (CBS has KB 6, Adams 8 and Moncrief 10), and both could be had in the 2nd round or later.
A lot of people have Benjamin as a 2nd round grade (myself included, for the sake of disclosure). I have not seen anything from Benjamin that warrants the higher pick over other of them. The size and playing in the ACC is not enough of a reason to pick him at 15.
There is a difference when the prospect is supposed to be well off technically (Jarvis), and one who may be the most raw at his position (Benjamin).
Yeah, he leaves his feet way too much when completely unecessary. If he continues that in the NFL, he's gonna get crushed.
Copyright © 2013 Hot Topix Theme. Theme by MVP Themes, powered by Wordpress.


text:
If you're the type that grimaces at the thought of a snow day — a day of lost work, kids home all day, shoveling out the driveway — I have bad news for you. You're old.
Or at least middle aged. It's easy to get bogged down with all the important duties of daily life, and of course, you might have a job you need to get to. But come on! Ten inches of snow! You could make a fort! You can stay in your pajamas and "work from home". You can watch Oprah.
Here are some of my tips for helping you to "get your snow day on".
DO go back to sleep after the 5:00 a.m. robocall from the school telling you that school is closed. Don't think you're going to creep downstairs and get a few things done before the kids get up. That would be very unsnow day of you.
DO make a special breakfast for the kids, like pancakes or eggs and bacon. Then ignore the sticky dishes in the sink till later. No one is coming over anyway.
DON'T rush outside to shovel just because all your neighbors are doing it. The idea is to slack off. Those industrious neighbors are just ruining it for the rest of us.
DO let the kids watch as much TV as they want. This is your quiet time. Read that book.
DO make the kids make their beds and brush their teeth. They will moan at this, and it will seem like a Herculean effort to them to accomplish these things when they are supposed to be doing nothing. They will be exhausted. They will watch more TV. You will read your book.
DO make the kids go out and play. Mine just put their snow pants on over their pjs. If you don't force them outside in the afternoon, it will soon be too dark and then they will suddenly feel a rush of pent up energy from watching TV all day and bounce off the walls. This is a waste of good snow.
You can also MAKE THE KIDS help you shovel. Mine howl at this unfair torture, but once they get outside, they shovel a little. Then someone throws the first snowball, and IT IS ON! Before you know it they are playing. Sure, you are shoveling, but you need the exercise. You ate 12 pancakes for breakfast.
DO NOT stand and watch while your kids go sledding. Get on that sled and ride down yourself. It will take ten years off of your life. For optimum benefit, scream like a little girl as you fly down the hill.
DO make a snowman. Put it someplace where you can see it from a window in your house. My niece and nephew in North Carolina (yes, it snowed there) dressed theirs up in costumes from the dress up box, including a bikini top on one the snow gals. That's thinking!
DO have hot chocolate when you come inside. If you want, you can also bring in fresh snow and squirt chocolate syrup all over it. It's a snow cone! Yeah, yeah, germs in the snow, blah blah. You have to eat a peck of dirt before you die.
After playing, everyone can take hot showers and change into a fresh pair of pajamas for the evening. Wash the first pair. Immediately.
Give the kids cereal for dinner if you don't feel like cooking. You and your husband can drink wine and snack on whatever's around. Watch some more TV, but make sure the kids are in bed on time. It's a school night after all.
Snow days don't last forever.
Four Horsemen of Downsizing: Newark ending mounted police program
N.J. weather forecast: State is getting more snow!
Snooki wrote a book? It's 'A Shore Thing'
Now that's funny: Angie's got a bump!
Gov. Christie will not make New Year's resolutions
Christmas photos ... do the kids really look like that?
True confessions — I got bailed out by Fed's Ben Bernanke!
Gov. Paterson wants New Jersey to help pay for repairs to New York's Tappan Zee Bridge
Billboard at the Lincoln Tunnel celebrates atheism
'Dancing with the Stars' — a spin off?
It's official. Chris Christie might run for president in 2016
'Real housewives of N.J.' star Teresa Giudice will be back
Who wears the pants in your family?
N.J. dad drops toilet paper from plane while flying over son's school
Jewish Standard caught in the middle on same-sex wedding announcements


text:
VIEWS: 12 PAGES: 16 CATEGORY: Personal Finance POSTED ON: 8/6/2011 Public Domain
TESTIMONY OF PAUL A. ALLEN BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION, Joint Venture Project June 24, 1997 My name is Paul Allen. I am Executive Vice President and General Counsel of Visa U.S.A. I commend the Commission for holding these hearings and I am pleased to be here. Background My purpose, in coming from Silicon Valley to Washington, is to urge the Commission to rethink in a fundamental way the legal rules applied to joint ventures creating new, branded consumer products and services. I speak as the chief legal officer of an organization that – to its increasing dismay – has been one of the great patrons of the antitrust bar – and even of antitrust economics and learning. Visa (and its predecessor, BankAmericard) has engaged in fairly continuous dialogue with the federal antitrust agencies during the entire three decades of our existence, and we have been willing to litigate our business and legal judgments in substantial antitrust cases brought by disgruntled rivals and opponents. While we have won the litigation battles, we have not won the war in a broader sense – any more than the victorious allies sitting at the Versailles Peace Conference had won the First World War. We have expended a great deal of our resources and a great deal of our management time in thrashing and battling with antitrust issues. Such expensive triumphs were only "victories" in the sense that the alternatives were very much worse. And it is not just Visa. I first got into the payments business in 1982, as General Counsel to a new nationwide ATM system – called "Plus" – which was designed to compete with traveler's cheques and cash advances to enable business travelers and tourists to obtain cash when far away from home. This was a small enterprise headquartered in Denver with a staff of only half a dozen. It had the trademark that we were just beginning to promote around the country, it had high costs and low volumes – and nothing approaching "market power." Yet, even so, we were bedeviled by antitrust issues at every turn. Ultimately, we found ourselves in a very expensive antitrust battle with a regional bank, represented by formidable Washington counsel, that did not like the Plus rule against surcharges1. This fledgling network did not want to permit ATM owners to impose surcharges or "access fees" for a simple reason: Surcharges could discourage consumers from using their ATM cards at distant locations and could drive already low network volumes lower. It seemed reasonable judgment at the time; yet, we faced a bitter battle at the hands of an opportunistic bank that thought that it could do better, even if the network did worse, and that case ended up in something of a draw – because the state legislature, acting on behalf of the bank – mandated surcharges in that state. (Years later the Plus System ultimately prevailed on the same issue in a later battle in another circuit.) In 1987 Visa acquired a substantial stake in the Plus network, and it was thus that I came to this much larger joint venture with its own rather rich antitrust history (that was due to get even richer). My Question As I think about Visa's history (and that of Plus, too), I find in the law and government enforcement policy a deep and pervasive bias against product-creating joint ventures that seems totally unjustified from the standpoint of productive efficiency or consumer welfare. If Visa were a unitary enterprise rather than a joint venture, with the same market share position in any relevant 1 Surcharges are access fees levied by an ATM owner on the cardholders of other financial institutions when such cardholders use the ATM. F:\… \pallen\ftc_paa_testim ony 9/16/9 -3- market, would Visa have faced any antitrust case or business review clearance issue worth talking about, or even had an interesting law review article written about it? The answer, it seems, is a clear "no." Yet because Visa is a joint venture – composed of thousands of members that are regulated financial institutions – its business practices are subject to scrutiny in a manner and to a degree unthinkable for a unitary enterprise. In short, it is structure not behavior that shapes our legal battlefield. And that is bad legal and economic policy. Let's look at what Visa is and compare it to some arguably comparable enterprises. Visa is the creator of a famous consumer service based on a network that enables its members (card issuers and acquirers) to communicate with each other, interchange traffic, and allocate risks and losses. Because it is a consumer product, the network (unlike an automated clearing house or an electric power pool) has had to create and promote a new, but now famous, service mark among consumers and merchants. The network has had to persuade (a) consumers that its trademarked cards would be widely accepted and (b) merchants that these cards would be so widely used as to generate additional sales volume. All this has required creation of technically sophisticated systems that are capable of processing the consumer-merchant transactions efficiently and reliably, as well as rules to assure that risks are appropriately allocated and that there would be no discrimination against any particular Visa card or card issuer. This is a formidable task operationally and legally, but it has created a system in which small banks as well as large banks can offer customers a very widely accepted product over which the issuing bank retains substantial control. In short, Visa has created a system that permits the smallest independent bank – to say F:\… \pallen\ftc_paa_testim ony 9/16/9 -4- nothing of regional or super-regional banks – to compete head to head with Visa's brand competitors (such as MasterCard, American Express or Discover) and with Visa's biggest members such as Citicorp or First U.S.A. Indeed, competition among members is a critical part of the way that Visa has chosen to have its trademarked services offered to consumers and merchants. Visa does not set the terms on which a card-issuing bank deals with a consumer, or an acquirer bank (or processor) deals with a merchant. Visa left these issues to competition – which is intense. Intra-brand competition among Visa members is manifested in the financial terms, such as annual fees, APR's, and miscellaneous fees; as well as credit lines, payment terms, airline miles, special discounts, or other bonuses as special differentiating inducements. It is thus Visa's task to define the core product, maintain its integrity, and promote the brand in a noisy marketplace. It is the member's task to set the key terms of the consumer and merchant relationship, to sign up cardholders to initiate transactions, and to sign merchants to accept them. Visa does not dictate any of these terms to members, cardholders, or merchants. In other words, Visa has created a powerful trademark and the system behind it to make the trademark valuable. It licenses its trademark and systems to its members, who happen to be the "owners" of this "not for profit" corporation. Now let's contrast Visa with several other familiar licensors of well-known trademarks. For example, take Coca-Cola: It has developed the formula, promoted the familiar trademark, and provided the syrup to franchisees who bottle the product and sell it, generally within assigned territories. In a few cases, the bottling company is owned by Coca-Cola itself, but the majority of bottlers are apparently independent. Coca-Cola itself, of course, is a publicly-traded company listed on the New York Stock Exchange. So is McDonald's. It, too, has developed a famous trademark F:\… \pallen\ftc_paa_testim ony 9/16/9 -5- based on expensive advertising, careful positioning of franchisees, and a quality control system. What the public eats at the McDonald's stand is produced by the franchisee under McDonald's specifications. Now, why should everything be so different, because Coca-Cola and McDonald's happen to be owned by the public at large, rather than by their franchisees? Should it make a difference that these are two, profit-seeking companies structured as unitary enterprises – rather than a not for profit company structured as a joint venture with its thousands of member financial institutions? As I understand it, Coca-Cola and McDonald's would be free to do many things under the antitrust laws that could raise problems if done by Visa: M Under the so-called Colgate doctrine, such a company is free to decide who it wants as a franchisee; M Under the GTE Sylvania doctrine, it is free to assign licensees particular territories; M Under the trademark laws, it cannot be compelled to license its mark involuntarily; M Under the Tampa Electric doctrine, it is free to impose an exclusive dealing license requirement on its licensees; M It is free to price services to its licensees in any manner that it regards as making good business sense. And, in fact, Coca-Cola and McDonald's have generally done exactly these kinds of things while Visa has had to forego doing so or litigating about the right to do so. Networks Are Different Of course, the operation of a network involves an even greater degree of interdependence – and need for rules – than the fast-food franchising or self-drink bottling businesses. There is more F:\… \pallen\ftc_paa_testim ony 9/16/9 -6- room for fraud, free riding, and opportunism among the participants in a network than there probably is among bottlers or hamburger vendors. Accordingly, I suggest that in the name of efficiency networks ought to have even more flexibility in setting the rules of operation and in deciding who is going to participate and on what terms. In fact, it is probably true that a network does have substantial flexibility so long as it can show that its rules are necessary to the working of the network – provided that the network is controlled by a unitary enterprise rather than a joint venture. In our own business, Visa competes (among other areas) at the "brand creation" and "systems" level with at least two enterprises which are part of publicly-traded companies, not joint ventures. These are, of course, (a) American Express and (b) Morgan Stanley, Dean Witter, Discover & Co. These companies can and do make legal demands against Visa on various "conspiracy" and "boycott" theories that neither Visa nor its members can make against them. Visa had a long and costly battle with Dean Witter over the latter's claim that Visa had to admit Dean Witter as a member and license it to use the Visa marks – but never with a hint of a suggestion that Visa could demand a compulsory license to Dean Witter's "Discover" mark for use by it and its members. Similarly, Visa and American Express are now engaged in a noisy legal dialogue over whether Visa can exercise the right enjoyed by the typical trademark owner of licensing its mark on the condition that the licensee not issue products under certain competing marks. Thus, it is structure – joint venture or unitary enterprise – rather than conduct that made Visa a target, not American Express or Discover. But let's go beyond payment cards. Today we have a variety of non-dominant long-distance telephone networks – and indeed it is nevertheless clear that AT&T can still be called a "dominant" F:\… \pallen\ftc_paa_testim ony 9/16/9 -7- competitor. Sprint and MCI – and I think even AT&T – have broad freedom to deal with whom they want and to set prices and terms designed to assure that their individual networks are effective, reliable and viable. They don't seem to get sued for what we get sued for. My main point here is simply that being a network may require more sophisticated rulemaking and more sophisticated pricing to make sure the right incentives exist to generate traffic and to restrain the opportunistic instincts of individual users. All that we ask is to be treated to the same set of rules as a network that is owned by the investing public rather than its users. The Black "Joint Venture" Badge The response to my plea may be: "Well, you have chosen to be a joint venture and you must just take the legal baggage that goes with it." Such a response harms competition and consumers – because it makes a distinction based simply on the type of organization, on structure rather than conduct, and it fails to recognize that a joint venture may make it possible to create something efficient that might not otherwise exist. This seems particularly true in the network environment. Starting a new network – particularly one involving a branded consumer service – is complicated and difficult. In the payment card area, somebody has to issue the consumer a card and educate the consumer on its value and use. Somebody else has to persuade a merchant to accept the card in payment of a sales transaction – or to persuade an ATM owner to accept the card and dispense cash. Somebody has to finance all the start-up costs. In order for this to work, cardholders have to be assured that there will be a reasonable range of outlets where the card will be accepted, and the merchants (or the ATM owners) have to be persuaded that there are sufficient number of F:\… \pallen\ftc_paa_testim ony 9/16/9 -8- cards in the hands of consumers willing to use them to generate an economic level of traffic. There have to be rules to allocate risk and assure timely settlement. Such a system necessarily has a high degree of interdependence, and the network brand becomes ever more valuable to all concerned if more card issuers, consumers, and merchants can be added up to the point that transaction costs level out (beyond that point, the branded service may lose its potential product differentiation advantage to those participating licensees). And, given the potential harm to the brand, rules must insure that all network participants are financially sound and conduct their programs in a safe manner. A large, well-funded corporation, with mass merchandising experience, can by itself create a successful branded payment service. The Discover card was launched by Sears Roebuck, a successful merchandiser with a great many existing customer relationships and a history of issuing proprietary cards. Another major issuer, American Express, created the original "travel and entertainment" card, enjoyed a well-known brand and a long customer list comprised of the most desirable customer segments, and can generate new network-type payments products, including credit and ATM cards. AT&T no doubt could have started a payments network: It had technical expertise, immense customer base, undeniable marketing skills, and a well-known brand. Instead, it opted to issue a Visa card, and Visa swallowed its reservations on this, rather than face the risk of antitrust litigation. My point is that AT&T could not have gone to American Express and demanded as a matter of law the right to issue American Express cards. And the law, by forcing Visa to acquiesce, achieved the rather perverse result of discouraging the creation of a new systems competitor. Indeed, Professor Philip Areeda, with whom I had the wonderful opportunity to work in connection with our appeal from the adverse trial decision in the Discover case, noted the perversity of the antitrust laws encouraging overinclusion in existing joint ventures rather than F:\… \pallen\ftc_paa_testim ony 9/16/9 -9- encouraging competition through formation of new competing ventures. Visa's Expensive History Let me illustrate the issues I have described by briefly recounting some chapters from Visa's history2. We will, of course, amplify these in subsequent written presentations. In each instance, what I am offering you is a very brief view of what is a much longer story. 1. Exclusivity. Visa's original predecessor was organized in the late 1960s by Bank of America (which owned the "BankAmericard" trademark) and a series of licensees in other parts of the country. The basic BankAmericard model was to have one licensee in each major market with the exception of New York City (where there were two). Meanwhile, a more "town meeting" type of organization was created by others: It was called Master Charge and ultimately become today's MasterCard. Thus, in each local market, a BankAmericard issuer (such as 2 (Some of this history was recounted to the Commission over two years ago at a similar setting by my colleague Bennett Katz, Group Executive Vice President and General Counsel of Visa International.) F:\… \pallen\ftc_paa_testim ony 9/16/9 - 10 - Philadelphia National Bank or First National Bank of Chicago) competed against several other banks in offering what it believed was a distinct "blue, white and gold" product. BankAmericard members were very committed to this idea of exclusivity, because each thought it had something special to offer that no other local rival could. Unfortunately, this system was upset by a disrupter – the Worthen Bank in Little Rock – which wanted to issue both cards and acquire both types of transactions. It brought a "boycott" suit which went up to the Eighth Circuit and resulted in a remand for a rule of reason trial. At that point, Visa and Worthen agreed that Visa would submit an exclusivity rule to the Justice Department for clearance under the Business Review procedure, rather than continue to litigate. In 1975, after contemplating the matter for almost a year, the Department declined to issue a favorable business review clearance. Visa, then a small company faced with the risk of litigation and treble damage exposure, abandoned its exclusivity rule; and perhaps to the surprise of the Justice Department, most banks in the country quickly became dual-issuers. If Visa had been a public corporation, not a joint venture, it surely would have had no problem with the Worthen issue at all since at the time it had under 25 percent of all the card transactions. It could have said to Worthen, "No – see Colgate." 2. Prices. It is necessary in a network to make sure that critical players have the right incentive to promote the network's products. In credit cards, the key problem was to get cards issued and to reimburse issuers for promotional costs, fraud losses and float (which was substantial under the original paper-based system). In a new ATM network, the problem was different: No ATM owner has any incentive to allow a foreign card in its machine unless it gets paid for it. In dealing with these realities, the credit card network set up a system of interchange fees payable by the merchant's bank to the card issuing bank, while in the ATM environment they created a system F:\… \pallen\ftc_paa_testim ony 9/16/9 - 11 - of payments by the cardholder's bank to the ATM-owning bank on a foreign transaction. Visa litigated the legality of the credit card interchange fee at great lengths, all the way up to the Eleventh Circuit, in a suit brought by a third party processor who said that it was disadvantaged. Visa won the case3, but it took four years and millions of dollars in costs. American Express, or AT&T, or Discover would not have had these issues if they had chosen to franchise part of their system: they could simply provide necessary subsidies to card issuers on credit card transactions and ATM owners on ATM transactions. There would have been no antitrust question at all. 3. Exclusivity Revisited. Sears Roebuck, after an exhaustive study, decided to launch its own new credit card (the "Discover Card") in 1985 because this seemed to be the most profitable course. Several years later, it decided that it also wanted to issue a Visa card in competition with the thousands of banks that were already issuing the Visa card. Visa responded with a bylaw that said that those who created competing credit cards (at the time Sears-Dean Witter and American Express) were not eligible to issue Visa cards. Sears-Dean Witter sued on a "boycott" theory in a state (Utah) where it quite publicly – indeed, on the State House steps – promised to set up a large credit card solicitation and processing operation (and hire 4000 Utahns) and it secured a jury verdict that threatened Visa with hundreds of millions of dollars of liability. Visa appealed to the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals and won a hard-fought victory that rested on findings that Visa lacked market power and that the denial of membership had no effect on consumers4. (Dean Witter had alleged that you could simply add up all the market shares of the Visa and MasterCard issuers and thus obtain a 75 percent market share, without considering that those various issuers whose shares 3 NATIONAL BANCARD CORP. v. VISA U.S.A. INC., 779 F.2d 592 (11 th Cir. 1986) 4 SCFC ILC, INC. v. VISA U.S.A. INC., 36 F.3d 958 (10 th Cir. 1994) F:\… \pallen\ftc_paa_testim ony 9/16/9 - 12 - were being aggregated competed very hard with each other.) The plaintiffs sought certiorari and it was denied. Again, there would have been no issue if Dean Witter had chosen to go after American Express and insist on the right to issue American Express cards. That suit would have been eliminated on a motion to dismiss – even if American Express had as large a share of processed credit card transactions as Visa has. Instead, we spent years in discovery and courts and incurred millions of dollars in litigation costs. 4. Brand Protection. Earlier this year, Visa successfully defended itself against an antitrust challenge by a member which claimed the right to issue a Visa card that earned points towards the American Express Membership Rewards Program, thereby co-mingling Visa's brand with American Express, threatening to dilute the impact of Visa's successful marketing campaign (…and they don't take American Express) and promoting the brand of a formidable competitor. In other words, opportunistic behavior that may have benefited one member at considerable cost to the other network participants and would have allowed American Express to free ride on the Visa brand. That claim could not have been brought without fear of Rule 11 sanctions if McDonalds objected to one of its franchisees engaging in a promotion with Burger King whereby sales of Quarter Pounders earned points toward a Whopper. And, once again, I ask why the different standard? Why should the law require that Visa, or any other similar product creating joint venture, engage in expensive litigation with no guarantee of success and the consequential risk of treble damages or retreat from a sound business decision protecting its most important assets simply because of its organizational structure? 5. Exclusive Dealing. Now, American Express (and presumably Discover) are publicly challenging a Visa rule which says that a Visa member, while licensed under the VISA trademark, F:\… \pallen\ftc_paa_testim ony 9/16/9 - 13 - cannot issue a branded American Express or Discover card. This would be essentially the same issue that would arise if a Coca-Cola bottler was insisting that it had a legal right to bottle Pepsi. But that is not our world. In an important sense, these examples represent the tip of the iceberg – decisions that were made and defended. My list does not tell you anything about the decisions foregone because of perceived antitrust risk, especially from treble damage exposure to disgruntled market participants. In many instances, the antitrust risk was not great – but the business benefits were simply not great enough to justify the cost of defending a low-risk case against us. This loss of incremental, but still useful, business decisions is an opportunity cost that a joint venture faces in competing with unitary enterprises. Conclusion I have chosen to look at the payments network business more from a business perspective than a legal one: First, because the business environment is important for an understanding of the branded network business, which is very different from the rail terminals, local commodities markets, and electric power pools that are the standard stuff of historic antitrust analysis. Second, the business environment must inform the legal analysis if we, and you as regulators and enforcers, are to vindicate the purpose of the antitrust laws. We will, of course, provide the Commission with a much more detailed view on the war when we file our written comments in August. What we will be telling you will include these basic points: 1. While the per se rules of the pre-1977 era were worse, the "rule of reason" is still a F:\… \pallen\ftc_paa_testim ony 9/16/9 - 14 - source of immense uncertainty – and hence deterrence – to a joint venture that must justify every business decision under it. It often seems a "Brandeisian Swamp"5 in which everything is relevant but nothing dispositive. Outcomes are very hard for counsel to predict. 2. Joel Klein's proposed "stepwise approach" is the wrong way to look at joint venture operations.6 It starts with efficiencies (which are notoriously hard to evaluate precisely and like the concept of "good cause" in employee wrongful termination cases always subject to cries of "pretext" that may prove persuasive to a jury) and then turns to competitive effects. When applied to the hundreds of decisions that a joint venture must make every year, it will add nothing but difficulty. 3. The "inside" decisions of a product-creating joint venture ought not to be treated under cartel-flavored "agreement" principles under Sherman Act §1. A joint venture should be as free as a single firm in setting network incentives (interchange fees, etc.), interface standards, service and advertisement requirements, free-riding prohibitions, and anti-fraud standards for its members. Such a joint venture would of course be subject to Sherman Act § 2 type rules for exclusionary "inside" decisions supported by substantial market power; and "agreement" type rules for its agreements with outsiders (suppliers, competing joint ventures, independent licenses, etc.). I simply ask that the Commission think hard about how a brand-creating joint venture (which is plausibly efficiency-enhancing) can be treated in a way that does not either face it with a series of one-way streets versus unitary enterprises or discourage joint venture partners from taking the risk and making the effort to create a new branded network. 5 Due credit here to Donald I. Baker for this apt term . 6 "A Stepwise Approach to Antitrust Review of Horizontal Agreements", Washington, D.C., November 7, 1996. When it comes to cross licensing and pooling, Mr. Klein advocates the "competitive harm first", "efficiencies second" approach. See "Cross Licensing and Antitrust Law", San Antonio, Texas, May 2, 1997, Mr. Klein's speech to the American Intellectual Property Law Association. F:\… \pallen\ftc_paa_testim ony 9/16/9 - 15 - One of the classic joint venture justifications is the "voyages of discovery" idea – where primitive early stock companies were created to finance and share risks on the obviously risky voyages across the Atlantic to the new World in the 15th and 16th centuries. In our world, there are risky voyages and in addition there are potential economies of scope and scale. The Commission should not want to do anything to deter joint ventures from being created, to create new products, or to be independent competitors in our ever changing market of global competitors. F:\… \pallen\ftc_paa_testim ony 9/16/9 - 16 - About the Witness Paul Allen is Executive Vice President and General Counsel of Visa U.S.A. Inc., based in the San Francisco Bay area. As such, he is responsible for legal and government affairs for Visa U.S.A. He joined Visa in 1991 as vice president and staff counsel. From 1983-1991 he was General Counsel of Plus System, Inc., a Denver based joint venture of regulated financial institutions that developed the first global ATM network. Prior to that, he was a partner in a Washington, D.C. law firm that specialized in antitrust litigation. Mr. Allen has an undergraduate degree from Johns Hopkins University, a law degree from New York University, and an MBA from the University of Colorado. F:\… \pallen\ftc_paa_testim ony 9/16/9
Pages to are hidden for
"TESTIMONY OF PAUL A"Please download to view full document