Portis vs. Betts

A lot of the points being made in this thread are frusterating me. And its not because this topic isn't worth discussing. It's that people are taking sides, and saying very biased things for no good reason.

A lot of the points being made in this thread are frusterating me. And its not because this topic isn't worth discussing. It's that people are taking sides, and saying very biased things for no good reason.

The thread should be a non-issue. Joe Gibbs' toenail knows more about football than anyone in the Warpath and he has chosen Portis to be the starter.

Why is there even a debate?

The thread should be a non-issue. Joe Gibbs' toenail knows more about football than anyone in the Warpath and he has chosen Portis to be the starter.

Why is there even a debate?

Well that's fine then why do we even have this site?

The thread should be a non-issue. Joe Gibbs' toenail knows more about football than anyone in the Warpath and he has chosen Portis to be the starter.

Why is there even a debate?Of course if we all thought that Gibbs knew more than all of us on every issue, there wouldn't even be dissenting opinion, so this is not necessarily true.

Joe Gibbs is a great football coach. That doesn't make him right 100% of the time. It just makes him good at what he does (coaching).


Now, whats frusterating me is that we are debating the past. Theres no debate. Portis, excluding this season, has been better every year than Betts both in total and broken down per play.

However, if we debate what the future holds, then you could make a case that Betts will be better going foward. I tend to feel they will both be pretty good, and somewhat interchangable. If I had to pick one, I'll assume Portis will still be above league average coming back from injury, and Betts will regress towards the average after last year. Means I'm taking Portis. But its still a good debate...as long as we debate 2007, and not 2002-2006.

Of course if we all thought that Gibbs knew more than all of us on every issue, there wouldn't even be dissenting opinion, so this is not necessarily true.

Joe Gibbs is a great football coach. That doesn't make him right 100% of the time. It just makes him good at what he does (coaching).


Now, whats frusterating me is that we are debating the past. Theres no debate. Portis, excluding this season, has been better every year than Betts both in total and broken down per play.

However, if we debate what the future holds, then you could make a case that Betts will be better going foward. I tend to feel they will both be pretty good, and somewhat interchangable. If I had to pick one, I'll assume Portis will still be above league average coming back from injury, and Betts will regress towards the average after last year. Means I'm taking Portis. But its still a good debate...as long as we debate 2007, and not 2002-2006.


I do not want to build my running game on a guy who is just as likely to fumble as he is to get you in the endzone.

Betts has been a fumbler since we drafted him. No one can argue that. I just don't think that a team that wants to go for it all can trust him as a feature back.

Well that's fine then why do we even have this site?

Is the Warpath's fate hanging in the balance because of Betts vs. Portis?

That softball just went 350....

I do not want to build my running game on a guy who is just as likely to fumble as he is to get you in the endzone.

Betts has been a fumbler since we drafted him. No one can argue that. I just don't think that a team that wants to go for it all can trust him as a feature back.People who are chronic fumblers tend not to stay that way. If they have desirable carrying skills, they get it corrected. See: Barber, Tiki.

Betts isn't half as bad as Barber was and he turned out alright.

Is the Warpath's fate hanging in the balance because of Betts vs. Portis?

That softball just went 350....

I think you missed the point

I guess what annoys me is threads based on moot points.

Someone could spend hours studying film of every carry by Portis and Betts, break down all of their stats and compare every single variable about them but at the end of the day Portis is the starter. Let me repeat. Clinton Portis is the starting runningback for the Washington Redskins. So what is the point? Now if someone wants to claim that Betts is "quicker" or "more powerful", I guess that is worth a discussion but the argument of who is better is a waste of time.

I am going to trust the three time Championship winning Hall of Fame coach when it comes to picking the runningback. You can criticize Gibbs' personnel moves and his goofy laugh and predictable cliches after a loss but if we are going to talk about picking the best runningback for a team, I would completely, wholeheartedly and blindly accept his decision.

I guess what annoys me is threads based on moot points.

Someone could spend hours studying film of every carry by Portis and Betts, break down all of their stats and compare every single variable about them but at the end of the day Portis is the starter. Let me repeat. Clinton Portis is the starting runningback for the Washington Redskins. So what is the point? Now if someone wants to claim that Betts is "quicker" or "more powerful", I guess that is worth a discussion but the argument of who is better is a waste of time.

I am going to trust the three time Championship winning Hall of Fame coach when it comes to picking the runningback. You can criticize Gibbs' personnel moves and his goofy laugh and predictable cliches after a loss but if we are going to talk about picking the best runningback for a team, I would completely, wholeheartedly and blindly accept his decision.I don't think hes making a wrong decision at all. Then again, Rock Cartwright has been nothing but money for years, and he's lucky to ever see the ball.