If Chargers can get a 1st & 3rd for Turner, don't we have to shop Betts?

Two things:

1) First off, I do know what I am talking about. I said in my earlier post, "this is the NFL ladies and gents, people get traded and released after better seasons than Betts had last year." My entire point was that a move of that mature would NOT be a precedent in NFL front office policy. Key words were "released" and "traded."

Javon Walker wanted a deal done b4 his breakout season, and when it came back that he was performing at a probowl level, he wanted a renewed contract b4 his last season. He never got it, then reported to camp and got hurt early in the season. After a great season, injury came, and then he was traded on draft day. Hmmm, a draft day trade, oh, how SO relevant, but it is often overlooked, by the eager to respond internet pundits.

2) Betts contract is made to be trade bait. 5 yrs 12 mill + 3 mil bonus. There are kickers and back up across the league that have WwaaaaayyyY better contract than than, especially after ther resigning. Albeit, we could use a good backup RB, we need more depth as a team via draft picks, which we seriously lack.

thats all. we both/all have points, but draft day will show up soon and we will either have our deal or out one 1st day pick.

My point is, when the draft comes, and we see ALL of the players pass us by, we are gonna be wishing we could get at leat one or two. Then the forums will pop up here, and I will be there to let everyone know that we'd be pissed after we couldn't pick anymore in the first day.

BUt we will see come draft day.

Fine. I just thought it was wrong to lump Betts in the same sentence as guys like James and Vinatieri because the situations are not the same.

Moving on

Two things:

1) First off, I do know what I am talking about. I said in my earlier post, "this is the NFL ladies and gents, people get traded and released after better seasons than Betts had last year." My entire point was that a move of that mature would NOT be a precedent in NFL front office policy. Key words were "released" and "traded."

Javon Walker wanted a deal done b4 his breakout season, and when it came back that he was performing at a probowl level, he wanted a renewed contract b4 his last season. He never got it, then reported to camp and got hurt early in the season. After a great season, injury came, and then he was traded on draft day. Hmmm, a draft day trade, oh, how SO relevant, but it is often overlooked, by the eager to respond internet pundits.

2) Betts contract is made to be trade bait. 5 yrs 12 mill + 3 mil bonus. There are kickers and back up across the league that have WwaaaaayyyY better contract than than, especially after ther resigning. Albeit, we could use a good backup RB, we need more depth as a team via draft picks, which we seriously lack.

thats all. we both/all have points, but draft day will show up soon and we will either have our deal or out one 1st day pick.

My point is, when the draft comes, and we see ALL of the players pass us by, we are gonna be wishing we could get at leat one or two. Then the forums will pop up here, and I will be there to let everyone know that we'd be pissed after we couldn't pick anymore in the first day.

BUt we will see come draft day.

I agree that we should trade off a back for picks, but it aint Betts, I would think we could get something along the lines of the hershel Walker deal for a superstar like Portis.

the colts only got a 2nd and a 5th for marshall faulk

What it comes down to is this, you either have the eye to see what this guy really is, or you don't. I recieved the same nonesense about Lavar when I said he wasen't that good, as well as Brunell, so we will just take the wait and see aproach.

And if you think the 2004 season is meaningless think again, there is a reason Portis bulked up, he didn't want to be battered like he was in 2004 where Gibbs ran him into the ground as if he were Riggins trying to justify the trade for him. Bottom line regardless it was and will always be a lowsey trade for us. Portis is under the gun this season because he will be compared to Betts under the same conditions so he better outplay him.I'm guessing you don't have the mystical eye of running back evaluation then.

Explain why I should put more stock into 2004 when two more recent seasons argue that it was a fluke.

That was a lowsey post, Smootsmack.

Often times I understand where Offiss is coming from, and agree with him on a regular basis. But I can't do it for Portis. I agree he's a system back, but many backs in this league are. You build the offense to his strengths and he's a definite stud in this league. Worth the trade we gave, probably not, but champ didn't want to be here and Portis is awesome!If most RBs are system backs, then what does the term system back really mean?

I don't think "system back" has any meaning whatsoever.

I think that there are systems that are more RB friendly than others. Denver is the most obvious example. RB friendly sytems such as Denver will inflate a RB's raw numbers the same way a QB friendly system, such as the west coast, would inflate a QB's raw numbers. But this is a universial effect. If Portis is a better back than Betts here, he's a better back than Betts in ANY system. Every one of the 32 teams. Some systems are better for RBs than others. That means they are better for ALL RBs, not just a select few.

If a guy was a "system back", most certainly he would have weaknesses as a runner that a certain system would hide. But what weaknesses does a runner have? Take TJ Duckett for example. He tends to tiptoe into contact, and doesn't always drive his legs once he makes contact. Can someone give me an example of a running system that would hide this weakness?

System backs, as we believe them to be, simply do not exist.

I guess I don't get what a system back is, at least not the way some people use the term around here.

Portis has proven he is still a top back outside of Denver... so how does that make him a system back??

Portis should actually be the poster child for calling bs on the system back theory.

His raw numbers fell slightly from Denver because his current system isn't as friendly to RBs. That's to be expected.

But anyone expecting him to fall off the face of the earth once he left Denver now has to explain why he performed so well in 2005 and the first half of 2006. I'd be willing to bet that no one here can come up with a response that can just write off a year and a half of accomplishments.

2004 was a horrible year for Portis. But can anyone really explain why, and give a reason to expect 2004 to repeat itself? I doubt it.

I guess I don't get what a system back is, at least not the way some people use the term around here.

Portis has proven he is still a top back outside of Denver... so how does that make him a system back??Additionally, I don't understand how people throw around the term "north-south runner". Seems that every back that's ever had success in this league knew that to gain yards, he'd have to get up the field. Seems to me that that would make him, by definition, a "north-south" runner.

Doesn't south imply running backwards?

The ultimate conclusion: Watching football discussion shows is bad for the american public.

Well, if he's a "system back" he's in the right system. Joe Gibbs did win Super Bowls with three different lead running backs after all

I'm guessing you don't have the mystical eye of running back evaluation then.

Explain why I should put more stock into 2004 when two more recent seasons argue that it was a fluke.

I do, becuase if it were my call Stephen Jackson would be a Skin, and SJ is a much better back then Portis.

Funny all I here is how great Portis was last season, who was better him or Betts? You know Betts the RB I have been saying is better suited for Gibbs style of offense for 3 years now, almost everyone on this site was calling him a waste and a lowsy RB before Portis went down, and now he's so valuable he's untradable.

One more for the mystical eye, Adrian Peterson will be a better back than Portis!