![]() |
Re: Who's better, Clinton Portis or Tatum Bell?
i'll tell you one thing we needed ARRINGTON in that ball game , i thought portis needed more carries.........take away the tuck (b.s.) rule we're in ..........
|
Re: Who's better, Clinton Portis or Tatum Bell?
[QUOTE=Schneed10]It is nothing short of asinine to say that Tatum Bell is better than Clinton Portis based on one isolated game. I expect better from you, offiss.[/QUOTE]
As you can see in the headline there is a question mark, and the question was after 1 game, now I want to know who believes Portis outperformed Bell? Now that would be asinine. Let's see, Bell scored 2 long TD's on crucial 3rd down plays, and rushed for 127 yds. against the toughest run defense in the league, In fact he's the only back to do it in the last year or so, and yes he did it without a passing game. Yes that's right I said 2 rushing TD's in 1 game against us, that's 1 shy of Portis's carreer rushing TD's for us. Portis, fumbled once which resulted in a TD for denver, but apparently made some nice blocks on Al Wilson, but he did manage to crack the 100 yard barrier, so I guess I have to admit, I WAS WRONG! Personally I believe without a doubt that Portis is a better pure runner and player than Bell, I also agree with many evaluation's through this thread on that comparison, but I really didn't start this thread to find out who believes Bell is better than Portis, I started this thread to shed light on the fact that even a player like Bell can put up big time numbers against the #1 run defense in that denver system, only to aluminate the fact that Portis is vastly over valued because of what he has done in that system, he has done nothing for us remotly resembling what he did in Denver? I am tired of hearing 1300yds, if you run a player enough and he can stay healthy that's very obtainable, the most telling stat is his 3.8 yards per carry, and he does not get it done in short yardage. Bottom line you can't gauge a RB in denver, it's like trying to gauge a home run hitter at coors field in colorado, they both stop hitting HR's when they leave. I don't lie to my friends and tell them how great they are when there not, and I am not going to talk about how great we are just because the Skins are my team, by buying into everything they do whether it is right, wrong, or indifferent. Does anyone think that the Portis we have seen, is the same back you expected to see when we traded for him? |
Re: Who's better, Clinton Portis or Tatum Bell?
portis cant block for himself. the line was terrible last year. the opposing teams stacked the line against portis because there was no passing threat.
portis went from a top 5 offence to a bottom 5 offence with difference of 200 yards. thats pretty damn good. look at it this way, what back in our system last year would've ran for more yards/tds than portis? Tomlinson is the best back in the league and thats the only one that comes to mind. how do you think bell wouldve played in our system last year? |
Re: Who's Better?
[QUOTE=TAFKAS]Identity Theft is something we all need to be careful about. Someone's been using your username Offiss.
[url]http://www.thewarpath.net/showpost.php?p=106191&postcount=72[/url] (no mention of Gibbs there, just how awful Brunell is) [url]http://www.thewarpath.net/showpost.php?p=108209&postcount=18[/url] "This garbage that all of sudden Brunell is a big time QB again is just that garbage, in almost 2 games he's had exactly 4 minutes of good QB play, in fact you can probably encorperate last season and find that after last years Dallas game he's had exactly 4 minutes of good QB play period." [url]http://www.thewarpath.net/showpost.php?p=108694&postcount=98[/url] "Anyone who wants to put there faith in Brunells miracle 4 minutes can, good luck if you think that will happen again, the real Brunell showed up for 56 minutes, and couldn't have recieved more luck in the final 4 minutes if he paid off the defense himself." [url]http://www.thewarpath.net/showpost.php?p=97071&postcount=5[/url] "I would like to take this time to reapologize to Brunell, YOU STILL STINK!" Too lazy to look for other examples. I know you haven't been thrilled with Gibbs' playcalling and his use (or lack thereof) of Ramsey, the kid with the 200 IQ. But you have laid the blame on Brunell's feet many times. Basically saying that he's washed-up and could no longer be an effective starter. But really, it's ok to admit you're wrong. You've been wrong before, [URL=http://www.thewarpath.net/showpost.php?p=13338&postcount=1]for example[/URL] As have I. I thought Ohalete was going to be a fixture on this team for many years and Bowen would be gone. Guess what. I was wrong. See, it's really not that hard to say. I don't come with "I've always maintained..." or "The problem wasn't Ohalete" or "What had happened was..." No, just "I was wrong" You've been right before and you've been wrong before. And I will bet that in the future you'll be right some more times and you'll be wrong. It wouldn't hurt to just admit it once in a while[/QUOTE] Not a problem, I thought I was wrong once, but later found out that I was right, so I was wrong. ;) I know Taf that you believe if you throw a link up there you have done something special, but really don't be so lazy next time and dig the rest up as well please don't paraphrase threads to suit your needs, you know full well that these threads go back and forth from one extreme to another, and a lot of what's said is made in conjuncture of what someone else has said, you know darn well we have had topics on both regarding both Ramsey and Brunell and why they haven't succeeded and who's fault it is, so to say Brunell is washed up was an after thought for myself, I was never a big fan of him in his prime, what I find funny is how many here were saying he's washed up after his performance last season, where are they? There disguised as lifelong Brunell fans. Did you jump on any band wagons when Gibbs made the switch Taf? Most of those posts were right on, the fact that Brunell has finally managed to put us in the end zone twice a game losing 1, is no reason to be backing down. Gibran Hamden is your big time example? Your really digging deep aren't you, you might want to take a time out and rationalize what you read, perhaps there was nothing going on the warpath at the time considering NFL europe was playing, and I made a funny gesture at the end of the thread laughing trying to get something going in a slow month, but in a court of law you got me. I am starting to think the prevailing thought is that Brunell has somehow arrived as a QB for us? Need I remind you that we lost to the Broncos, and last week if it wasen't for a missed field goal stemming from a Brunell INT in the final minute against Seattle, we wouldn't be so fast to jump on the bandwagon. Do I think Brunell has markedly improved over the last 2 games? Absolutly! I am very encouraged by what I have seen? Yes. But that doesn't mean Ramsey wouldn't have made the same strides or more. I am defiently rooting for Brunell to succeed, but I am far from anointing him the man, but we are becoming fun to watch, which has been a rarity over the last few years. Ohalate-Bowen? Kind of a very small misque for you Taf, don't you think? I know you can do much better than that. What will they say after we beat Denver? Let's not put the cart before the horse here, I think we will come out of this game with much more media respect win or lose, I feel we will give them a good game and in doing so we will start to gain respect, but I don't see us winning this one, it's not by any means impossible, but it will be a tough one to come away with a W in mile high. Your more than welcome to critique this pre-game prediction as well. Feel free to let me know if I was right. I have no problem admitting your right once in a while, like your stance on Lavar and how he can't get on the field because he's highly overated, see how easy it is. |
Re: Who's better, Clinton Portis or Tatum Bell?
so tafkas is lazy for looking up posts, yet you bring up none to prove that you were misquoted, and you also say that you play both sides, so you can't be wrong... then you go point by point to minimize the quotes that you yourself posted.. oh yeah, i forgot, offis is always right, even when he's not and even when he says he's not.
and again, in that one game portis was hurt and had his longest run called back, so i don't think that final stat line is accurate. you bring up the 3.8ypc, yet fail to mention the awful oline and the fact that his average is much higher this year (4.4) and we've faced generally better defenses. So for all the i told you so's and i'm rights you've been trying to cram down our throats, you're recounting of facts seems a bit convenient. |
Re: Who's better, Clinton Portis or Tatum Bell?
here's another stat:
portis is #9 in ypg. bell can't even crack the top 25. also, sometimes defenses have bad days... the falcons (#9 in run D in 2004) were good against the run, yet the chiefs still put up 8 rushing TDs on them in one game. It happens. Since bell had 330% of his his average ypg against us (sans run stopping corners), i'd say maybe we also had a bad day. |
Re: Who's better, Clinton Portis or Tatum Bell?
Sorry offiss, you got pwned, admit it and let's move on.
As for Portis with his 3.8 ypc, let's focus on THIS year and his 4.4 shall we? I know people love to keep bringing up last year, but can't we finally move on? We're a 1/4 of the way through the 2005 season, last year is looking more and more irrelevant especially with the way Brunell has resurected himself. |
Re: Who's better, Clinton Portis or Tatum Bell?
Portis is proven. Bell is a prospect. Especially with the obvious block in the back to Marcus Washington on one of the 2 TD runs.
|
Re: Who's better, Clinton Portis or Tatum Bell?
looked at the game yet again... the first bell run both daniels and holdman missed fairly routine tackles. the second one would have been much harder to stop. marshall had the best shot, but he couldn't get away from the blocker, and bowen just wasn't fast enough (or didnt break soon enough) to get the extra 2 feet he needed to stop that run.
|
Re: Who's better, Clinton Portis or Tatum Bell?
[QUOTE=Mattyk72]Sorry offiss, you got pwned, admit it and let's move on.
[/QUOTE] Ah, more geek speak. You're gonna be an honorary member in the geek patrol if you keep it up. And yes, offiss has been pwn3d. |
Re: Who's better, Clinton Portis or Tatum Bell?
Yards per carry and 100 yard games are great but what counts in this league is points and right now CP is having a tough time scoring them. He needs to find a way to score TDs.
|
Re: Who's better, Clinton Portis or Tatum Bell?
With this topic you have to remember we were missing our two starting corners. We played different schemes to help protect our young corners which made use more acceptable to the long runs. If Springs and Harris were in the for the entire game we would have shut Bell down and forced them to pass more.
|
Re: Who's Better?
[QUOTE=offiss]I know Taf that you believe if you throw a link up there you have done something special, but really don't be so lazy next time and dig the rest up as well please don't paraphrase threads to suit your needs, you know full well that these threads go back and forth from one extreme to another, and a lot of what's said is made in conjuncture of what someone else has said, you know darn well we have had topics on both regarding both Ramsey and Brunell and why they haven't succeeded and who's fault it is, so to say Brunell is washed up was an after thought for myself, I was never a big fan of him in his prime, what I find funny is how many here were saying he's washed up after his performance last season, where are they? There disguised as lifelong Brunell fans. Did you jump on any band wagons when Gibbs made the switch Taf?[/QUOTE]
Who's paraphrasing threads to suit their needs? All I did was copy and paste what you wrote. And yes, last season I thought maybe, just maybe, Brunell actually had nothing left in the tank. But then the more I thought about it. I thought all the fault for last season can't be placed on him. And I expressed that in the spring time. Even then though, I thought Ramsey should be the starter with Brunell a capable backup. By mid-preseason though Matty and I went (along with some other warpathers) to get the Brunell Bandwagon rolling because Ramsey wasn't looking so hot, and Brunell was on point. So if anything, Gibbs jumped on my bandwagon! That bastard! [Quote=offiss]Gibran Hamden is your big time example? Your really digging deep aren't you, you might want to take a time out and rationalize what you read, perhaps there was nothing going on the warpath at the time considering NFL europe was playing, and I made a funny gesture at the end of the thread laughing trying to get something going in a slow month, but in a court of law you got me.[/QUOTE] Well it was a thread you started [QUOTE=offiss]Ohalate-Bowen? Kind of a very small misque for you Taf, don't you think? I know you can do much better than that.[/QUOTE] I thought Marty would be our coach for at least three years and get us at least to the NFC championship game. I thought Trung would have Marshall Faulk like numbers here. Better? [QUOTE=offiss]What will they say after we beat Denver? Let's not put the cart before the horse here, I think we will come out of this game with much more media respect win or lose, I feel we will give them a good game and in doing so we will start to gain respect, but I don't see us winning this one, it's not by any means impossible, but it will be a tough one to come away with a W in mile high. Your more than welcome to critique this pre-game prediction as well. Feel free to let me know if I was right. I have no problem admitting your right once in a while, like your stance on Lavar and how he can't get on the field because he's highly overated, see how easy it is.[/QUOTE] Like I said, you've been right before and you'll be right again. And you'll be wrong again. |
Re: Who's better, Clinton Portis or Tatum Bell?
I've seen some pretty absurd threads on this site, but this one is really up there.
If we are really comparing the two (even though there really isn't a comparison), shouldn't we also take into account the durability of the two backs? Tatum Bell spent a significant portion of last year missing games for a variety of injuries. Additionally, shouldn't we also consider that Portis won the Denver starting RB job a few games into his rookie season, while Bell has been with the team for 21 games and is still yet to start a game. I just can't even imagine seriously comparing these two guys at this point. Bell's career (over 1.25 seasons) has yielded 677 yards total. Congratulations to Bell for amassing 45% of what Portis had in his rookie year alone. Next we can turn to receiving. For his illustrious career, Bell has amassed 8 catches for 104 yards. Portis, in his Rookie year alone, had 33 catches for 364 yards. Factor in the fact that Portis is a better blocker and team leader, and I can't even imagine where the argument could be that Bell is somehow better than Portis. Bell had a better game than Portis? So what? Bell wasn't playing on the road against Denver's defense and Portis wasn't playing at home against our defense. I hate to say it, but those two big runs were the result of our Defense simply breaking down. Do you really think in the same situation Portis wouldn't have done as well? It's just a rediculous argument. |
Re: Who's better, Clinton Portis or Tatum Bell?
Did the original title of this thread get changed?
|
Re: Who's better, Clinton Portis or Tatum Bell?
[QUOTE=jacobyfan]Did the original title of this thread get changed?[/QUOTE]
lol, don't they all? |
Re: Who's better, Clinton Portis or Tatum Bell?
Looks like it was changed to something a little more descriptive than "who's better".
We rarely change the titles unless it's a merged thread... cpayne do you see a lot of this or were you joking? |
Re: Who's better, Clinton Portis or Tatum Bell?
[QUOTE=That Guy]so tafkas is lazy for looking up posts, yet you bring up none to prove that you were misquoted, and you also say that you play both sides, so you can't be wrong... then you go point by point to minimize the quotes that you yourself posted.. oh yeah, i forgot, offis is always right, even when he's not and even when he says he's not.
and again, in that one game portis was hurt and had his longest run called back, so i don't think that final stat line is accurate. you bring up the 3.8ypc, yet fail to mention the awful oline and the fact that his average is much higher this year (4.4) and we've faced generally better defenses. So for all the i told you so's and i'm rights you've been trying to cram down our throats, you're recounting of facts seems a bit convenient.[/QUOTE] O-line???? What on earth has been my contention all along?????????? Are you saying the line blocking has everything to do with a backs success, because your going to get some opposition on that one, I know I have. The fact is I can't go back far enough to pull up things that were said unlike Taf, for whatever reason I can only go back to recent posts. I wasen't misquoted nor did I say that, what I said was I was paraphrased which means it was taken out of context. For example if I made a point about Gibbs not running a modern day offense and the main cause for our inability to move the ball, but many said it's not Gibbs it's the fact that Gibbs wasted to much time on Ramsey, and Brunell needs to catch up, then I had presented Brunells starting numbers and the amount of time he has had to catch up comparitvly to Ramsey, A lot of what was said in almost all the posts I have made were a back and forth fight over Brunell VS Ramsey, where Gibbs was thrown out of the controversy and the focus was strickly on the 2 QB's, considering someone [whomever] wanted to make it about Brunell, I said last season as well as all off season, I don't like Brunell regardless, but he was made to look far worse than he really is by the inaffectivness of Gibbs game planning. As if there can only have been 1 problem with our offense not 2, as in a Gibbs and Brunell problem, which it was, even when there were players open he couldn't get the ball downfield he couldn't hit a reciever 5 yards over the line last year, and all we heard was Gibbs pass patterns are simplistic and easy to cover, but we all know for as heated as that debate became that it was constantly pushed to a Brunell against Ramsey debate, or a Gibbs debate so to comment on what was wrong with either one in seperate posts and then try to jumble them together without putting up the context of the rest of the post as well as other threads isn't fair at all. It's funny how Portis gets cut slack for being hurt, but that was one of the first excuses I heard about Bell not being a good back last season because he can't stay on the field because of injury. Take a good look at your post, you are contradicting yourself in disagreing with me, your contention is Portis didn't run well because of his line, my contention all along is Portis has to have major blocking to be effective, I said it before we traded for him, when you give a back that kind of blocking you don't need a superstar at RB. Which brings us right back to square 1, he's not LT, he's not Deuce MC, he's not Corey Dillion, he's not Curtis Martin, or Tiki Barber, or Westbrook, or Sean Alexander, Edgerin James, what kind of line does Tampa have? Yet we have a rookie in Williams setting records, I could continue on with comparisons, but does anyone think Portis is better than the players I just mentioned? I find it ironic how time and again I hear how circumstances dictate why Portis didn't have a Portis year last year, line etc. Yet circumstances didn't dictate why he succeeded in Denver? As Al Wilson said it's the system not the back. Will Portis become the runner for us that he was in Denver? My answer is yes, as soon as we give him holes the size he saw in Denver, other wise he will be a good back for us, GOOD, but it cost us a whole lot for a good back, we paid for a great back, GREAT. Probably the best example I can give you is Tiki vs Portis, Tiki had no offensive line last season, no WR's, and a rookie QB for most of the season, as much as I don't like the Giants, you can't dispute that Barbers situation was worse than ours, and he had a great season, sorry I wish Portis was a great back I really do, I don't hate the guy in fact I like him he's got a good personality but production is another issue all together. |
Re: Who's better, Clinton Portis or Tatum Bell?
:thumb: PORTIS,sorry i shouted:lol:
|
Re: Who's better, Clinton Portis or Tatum Bell?
Portis isn't productive???????
|
Re: Who's better, Clinton Portis or Tatum Bell?
[quote=offiss]
Take a good look at your post, you are contradicting yourself in disagreing with me, your contention is Portis didn't run well because of his line [/quote] No, i'm not, maybe you should re-read it. I said that if you want to compare why his numbers weren't as good, the oline wasn't as good as what bell has had. Now his line is better and his stats are up... if you think having a good oline wouldn't make any back better, that's hard to sell. TO and mcnabb inflate each other's stats too, thats just obvious. My main point was that bell has averaged about 30-something yards per game before last week while portis averaged 90-something... that's for their careers. [QUOTE=offiss] It's funny how Portis gets cut slack for being hurt, but that was one of the first excuses I heard about Bell not being a good back last season because he can't stay on the field because of injury. [/QUOTE] maybe that's because you're looking at a one game comparision in which one back was hurt and the other wasn't. all RBs are judged based on the combination of their ability, the scheme, the talent around them (oline, QB, WRs etc) and the defenses they face. portis switched systems and still put up 1300 yards, so is he now a 2 system back? Its hard to buy that when he's been successful outside the "system" that apparently made him everything that he is. |
Re: Who's better, Clinton Portis or Tatum Bell?
So, when Portis proves the doubters, or doubter wrong, then who do we move on to complain about next? First, it was Gibbs being washed up and that the game has passed him by, obviously that doesn't look to be the case now. Gibbs not having the ability to pick the quality players he needs without Bobby Beathard, and the only crutch holding that case up was Mark Brunell based on his performance last season. Now, that crutch has been taken away by how well Brunell has played this year.
I swear, it's almost as if people are wanting the other shoe to drop just for the sake of being right. To me, that's just plain sick! It's usually justified by saying, "I'm just keeping it real and not drinking the kool-aid, blah blah blah Rose-colored glasses blah blah blah." The fact is, it has already been proven that the Redskins have vastly improved themselves from last year. And, as we have seen so far, it's not because we have under gone major changes to the offense (besides installing the shotgun formation,) but because Gibbs was smart enough to go get the quality receivers we didn't have last year (something I said last year was all this offense needed to get things going.) Furthermore, we're 3-1. That's alot better than 1-3! Sure, you can side with Pastabelly and say we haven't played anybody yet, but part of being a good team is beating the teams you're supposed to beat. If we can continue to do just that in these next two weeks, we could easily be 5-1! Each week, we continue to improve...if you can't see that - you're blind! The only thing now is to get more points on the board, but I'll tell you, if we have an offense that is able to move the ball and gain yardage as much as we have been able to, the points are going to start coming. |
Re: Who's better, Clinton Portis or Tatum Bell?
I'm not sure who is better but I do know that my dad can beat up your dad and I think that Spider-Man is just as strong as The Thing.
|
Re: Who's better, Clinton Portis or Tatum Bell?
[QUOTE=Mattyk72]Looks like it was changed to something a little more descriptive than "who's better".
We rarely change the titles unless it's a merged thread... cpayne do you see a lot of this or were you joking?[/QUOTE] I was joking. The title says one thing, and then the discussion usually goes in a different direction... |
Re: Who's better, Clinton Portis or Tatum Bell?
I have a headache from this crap
|
Re: Who's better, Clinton Portis or Tatum Bell?
If Portis were still on Denver he would be putting up 1600+ yard seasons every year. He is much better than Bell...he just doesn't fit the Redskins offense as well as he did Denvers.
|
Re: Who's better, Clinton Portis or Tatum Bell?
[QUOTE=skinsguy]So, when Portis proves the doubters, or doubter wrong, then who do we move on to complain about next?[/QUOTE]
That sounds like the perfect poll! What Will the Warpath Complain About Next? |
Re: Who's better, Clinton Portis or Tatum Bell?
[QUOTE=TAFKAS]That sounds like the perfect poll!
What Will the Warpath Complain About Next?[/QUOTE] i vote sigs.... grr. |
Re: Who's better, Clinton Portis or Tatum Bell?
didn't really have the patience to sift through the other posts,lol, so if someone already mentioned this than my bad, but one huge advantage Portis has over Bell, is his ability to pick up the blitz. I can't remember who it was against but there was a play that Portis faked a handoff to one side and then flashed across the line to pick up a blitzer on the opposite side of the o-line. Plus like 12thMan mentioned it's a bit early to say we got the short end of the stick when the player we gave up is out right now and hasn't played like the "shutdown" cb a lot of people had deemed him to be and the player drafted with the pick in the trade has a grand total of 677 yards rushing to his name. I think I'll give it a little bit of time before declaring Portis a bum, unless of course he keeps having costly fumbles.
|
Re: Who's better, Clinton Portis or Tatum Bell?
[QUOTE=TAFKAS]That sounds like the perfect poll!
What Will the Warpath Complain About Next?[/QUOTE] Probably start complaining that the Redskins Cheerleaders don't wear enough clothes.....you won't hear me complaining though! :biggthump |
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:42 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
We have no official affiliation with the Washington Commanders or the NFL.