Re: Who got the better of the Portis/Bailey trade?
 

Too hard to tell. Champ didn't want to be here anymore. Granted I thought the 2nd round pick was way too high to toss in, its still a bit of a wash.

Portis is a great personallity and a solid RB. But really good CBs are a bit more rare in this league. I also doubt Champ would be playing to that level here in DC right now. But Portis would be looking like Barry Sanders up there in Denver =p

Re: Who got the better of the Portis/Bailey trade?
 

[quote=Bill B;247398]I know a lot of people said that we had no option because Champ was going to leave here but I the Redskins could have franchised him and protected themselves that way by getting 2 first rounders for anyone wanting to sign him (or at least work out a deal if no team wanted to pony up 2 first rounder) - so the Redskins did have an option.[/quote]
If I'm correct if we made him a franchise player it would have made his cost to much for us with the salery cap issues.

Re: Who got the better of the Portis/Bailey trade?
 

lmaoooooooooooooooo @ Throwback Thread Thursday!

>mixin' the TANG<

Re: Who got the better of the Portis/Bailey trade?
 

[quote=skinsfan69;247288]I was thinking about this today as Portis went on IR for the year. I believe Denver got the better half on this one. Didn't they get a 2nd rounder too? If anyone out there knows who this players is I'd like to know. For the life of me I still can not believe that Snyder did not pay this guy. I know Champ told the media he hated the constant change but somehow we should have kept this guy. As much as I like Portis, this is another move we should not have made. Great cover corners are just too hard to find and we are sure paying for it now.[/quote]


I am a firm believer that if you have a choice of having a good "cover " corner back or a good running back, I would keep the corner back.

Running backs are a lot easier to get as opposed to a good corner that can cover. IMHO

Re: Who got the better of the Portis/Bailey trade?
 

Denver used the trade to get Bailey and used to pick to get Tatum Bell (98% sure). So they came off a bit ahead with the best CB and a starting running back.

With free agency, teams can't [B]make[/B] player stay when they want to go. If someone dug deeper on exactly why Bailey and Lav Coles wanted to leave so badly, we might have a better idea of what's happening in the background. I'd like to know.

Clinton Portis is an elite back and the soul of the offense. He wants to be here. Can't say the Skins got the short end here.

Re: Who got the better of the Portis/Bailey trade?
 

[quote=firstdown;247487]If I'm correct if we made him a franchise player it would have made his cost to much for us with the salery cap issues.[/quote]

This is correct. Honestly we both got a good deal, bc Champ didnt want to be here at all.

Re: Who got the better of the Portis/Bailey trade?
 

i never liked the trade. portis is a good back, but he isn't our style of back, and he doesn't run like he used to. i saw a replay of him when he was at denver and when he got free he pulled away from people. now he gets caught from behind.champ bailey is a once in a decade type cb, maybe decade and a half. while portis is a good back.we could have had corey dillon cheap, kevin jones, steven jackson, even the man child from kc larry. kc wanted champ and if 30 mil reasons wasn't enough to get him to stay we could have traded him to kc and got larry and a draft pick. we should have walked away from denver when they said you give us champ and two. i appreciate portis and his heart but he is not and i repeat he is not our style of back aka bigger 225 to 235 pds bruiser with good speed.yes he did great last year and showed me heart, but he is not built to carry the ball that way.also it has been reported he doesn't care for this style of running game, but prefers the style that denver and atlanta have.is this trade the reason we find ourselver at 3-6 ? no !!. that is gibbs all alone. i firmly believe that he blew it all up when he brought in al saunders. yes, he's a great offensive coord. but we didn't need him. we went from 30th to 11 th for offense. we just needed some help at wr. we got that. this team had to fight soo hard to find it's formula for winning and get an identity, and then gibbs blows it all up by bringing in saunders.i just think he out thought himself, or he was getting a replacement.it's been disappointing at best, maddning to me.such high hopes for the year.this is a group of players, they still have not become a team yet.what a shame.but this my team , soo, where do i go?

Re: Who got the better of the Portis/Bailey trade?
 

this is the same response i use when this thread is dug up, approx. every 2 weeks. BAILEY DIDNT WANT TO BE HERE. did everyone hear me?

Re: Who got the better of the Portis/Bailey trade?
 

Seriously guys...Champ did NOT want to be here. He was not going to resign. He got franchised and traded. Exactly what he wanted. The Skins got one of the best backs in the league for the best corner in the league. They didn't have a #1 back on the roster and drafting guys is kinda hit or miss. Betts is very average.

Getting Clinton Portis was a great move. They essentially gave up a 2 to get this guy because there was no chance Champ was coming back. He made that very clear. He had no intention of being a Redskin the next season so they had to move him, that's what they did and they got a great back for him. It was a pretty even swap.

Re: Who got the better of the Portis/Bailey trade?
 

Champ didn't want to be here because of the losing and the unstability of the skins.. My biggest concern is how long before our other good young players start to feel the same/