Re: Portis and Betts: Should We Just Stick With Portis?
 

[QUOTE=SouperMeister;361079]AMEN!!![/QUOTE]

Is Soup's Uncle actually your uncle?

Re: Portis and Betts: Should We Just Stick With Portis?
 

Bottom line is this....we have 2 REALLY good running backs...Portis gives more of a burst and straight speed in the open, not to mention one HELL of a blocker...Betts is a good change of pace and a good solid backup...he's not gonna be the next Larry Johnson coming after Priest Holmes. Remember too guys, we only have Rabach and Samuels from last year...this IS a make-shift O-line! We still have a good running game which is contributing to Campbells development and the passing game improving.

Re: Portis and Betts: Should We Just Stick With Portis?
 

I still say they put them both in at the same time.

BTW...anyone notice that they didn't have Betts running sweeps this week...THANK YOU Coach!

Re: Portis and Betts: Should We Just Stick With Portis?
 

I don't think Portis has been 100% healthly all year, except for the first game. He has been nicked up a lot and that is probably why he is out of the game so much. I would like to see him get really healthy and then we might see his "break out" game.

Re: Portis and Betts: Should We Just Stick With Portis?
 

Does anyone remember a running back by the name of Stephen Davis when we had Terry Allen??? When Allen left, everyone thought that Skip Hicks would be our stud (another scat back)... now... what type of career did Stephen Davis have, and what ever happened to Skip Hicks???

:duel:

Re: Portis and Betts: Should We Just Stick With Portis?
 

[QUOTE=Redskin Rich;361091]Does anyone remember a running back by the name of Stephen Davis when we had Terry Allen??? When Allen left, everyone thought that Skip Hicks would be our stud (another scat back)... now... what type of career did Stephen Davis have, and what ever happened to Skip Hicks???

:duel:[/QUOTE]

What's your point?

Re: Portis and Betts: Should We Just Stick With Portis?
 

[quote=Redskin Rich;361091]Does anyone remember a running back by the name of Stephen Davis when we had Terry Allen??? When Allen left, everyone thought that Skip Hicks would be our stud (another scat back)... now... what type of career did Stephen Davis have, and what ever happened to Skip Hicks???[/quote]

Please tell me you're not relating Clinton Portis to Skip EFFING Hicks...

And comparing Stephen Davis to Betts is a bit of a stretch too, considering Davis wasn't allergic to touchdowns.

Re: Portis and Betts: Should We Just Stick With Portis?
 

Hasn't everyone here daydreamed about if we still had Davis in his prime when Gibbs came back???? Ahhhh....what might have been.

Re: Portis and Betts: Should We Just Stick With Portis?
 

[quote=Redskins247;361102]Hasn't everyone here daydreamed about if we still had Davis in his prime when Gibbs came back???? Ahhhh....what might have been.[/quote]

Uhhh... Portis broke Davis' rushing record under Gibbs. And what would it have mattered? The quarterback situation was still a mess when Gibbs came back.

Re: Portis and Betts: Should We Just Stick With Portis?
 

Im not even gonna get into this squabble because anyone that doesn't see Portis' talent or the amount of heart he has simply doesn't know what the F they are talking about. I am glad to see people come to his defense. He is by fr my favorite player in the NFL. Noone seems to play with as much passion and love for the game as him (ok, maybe Brett Favre). I hope he is here for years to come, and I hope to one day see his name and # hung up in the Skins ring of honor. He is the heart of this team and to question that is ridiculous.

Re: Portis and Betts: Should We Just Stick With Portis?
 

Uhhhh they are 3-1, I say the 2 back system is working nicely.

Re: Portis and Betts: Should We Just Stick With Portis?
 

Great idea. Then we'll do to our running game what the Bears did to theirs in the offseason. Gut it. we have 40% of last year's starting offensive line. Our entire right side is staffed with backups.

And Clinton plays with a reckless abandon that 35 snaps a game will virtually guarantee he misses time through a season due to injury. You can keep him running healthier, and thus harder if you can keep his load between 20 and 25 carries.

And, they are different types of backs. Defenses get used to how fast Clinton hits the hole, and then the change of pace with Ladell can affect the timing for the opposition's run attack.

Come on.

Re: Portis and Betts: Should We Just Stick With Portis?
 

Until Portis is 100% healthy I don't really see this as a debate.

As far as getting better as the game wears on, sometimes it has to do with the mental aspect as well. Have you ever played sports and come out onto the field with some jitters? Than once the game has settled, you find your knack.

Also physically, if you're in the game longer your muscles aren't going to tighten up because your sitting on the sidelines. You stay loose, get into a rhythm, and perform better. I know this may vary from back to back, but I definitely think there is room for speculation here... but it may very well be a moot point.

Re: Portis and Betts: Should We Just Stick With Portis?
 

agreee with Monk's down completely, Betts and Portis work in tandem!!!!!

Re: Portis and Betts: Should We Just Stick With Portis?
 

[quote=Southpaw;361096]Please tell me you're not relating Clinton Portis to Skip EFFING Hicks...

And comparing Stephen Davis to Betts is a bit of a stretch too, considering Davis wasn't allergic to touchdowns.[/quote]
Nah, I wasn't really trying to compare Portis to Hicks in regard to talent... but as to a scat back with the Redskins... I like a smash mouth... and yes, I was comparing Betts to Stephen Davis from his early days here in DC.

Please tell me people's memories are not so short to remember how lowly we thought of Davis in the early days.