Re: Portis v. Betts: The Grass is Always Greener
 

What's really impressive about Shanahan is how he's won three Super Bowls with three different running backs....oh wait

Re: Portis v. Betts: The Grass is Always Greener
 

True enough that Selvin Young had a nice run, but he also averaged 3.8 yards per carry last night. Moreover, since Portis left Denver, exactly how many 1,500 yard rushers has Denver had? Zero. Since Portis left Denver, exactly how many Pro Bowlers has Denver had? Zero. Denver has gone through a whole host of backs in an attempt to find a feature back and guess what? Denver hasn't found a feature back. They had to sign a big name free agent in his late twenties with a drug problem to a big deal. So the idea that Denver can plug anyone into their system and he will become some huge stud is simply a myth.

Re: Portis v. Betts: The Grass is Always Greener
 

I posted this in another thread, but I am also posting it here because it is appropriate.

Offensive lines in Seattle, St. Louis, KC and NYJ are having an awful time opening running lanes for their backs. And, to no surprise, Shawn Alexander, Steven Jackson, Larry Johnson, and Thomas Jones are having a really hard time running the ball. Did all of those guys suddenly lose their talent or desire to win? No and the same is true of Portis.

If Portis had not been injured in 2006 making an all-out effort to tackle a guy, we wouldn't be talking about Portis having lost it. We would simply be saying that Portis, like Jackson, Alexander, Johnson, and Jones is a victim of circumstance. To be honest, it kind of makes me nauseous to trash a guy like Portis who goes all out on every play (and is worse for the wear for it).

I do appreciate the stats and thought that you have put into this thread dgack. Your posts have been among the most coherent and best-supported on this site in the past week or so. But, putting the stats aside, are you honestly seeing the O-line doing a good job opening lanes? [I] If so, why is Betts rushing for under 3 yards per carry? I realize that Betts needs to find a rhythm, but less than 3 yards per carry (the worst of his career)?[/I] So Portis is having the worst year (ypc-wise) and it is because he is washed up, meanwhile Betts is averaging a full ypc less than Portis and he is a victim of circumstance (i.e., not getting the ball enough and playing behind a poor o-line)?

Seriously, Washington fans are almost never pleased with who is playing. They almost always want the "other" guy, even if the current starter guy holds the franchise record for most rushing yards in a season. And the worst of it all is those same people are the ones who complain about the lack of stability, the player turnover, and "little Danny's free agent spending sprees." Give me a -------- break.

Re: Portis v. Betts: The Grass is Always Greener
 

What exactly is making people say that Portis is wearing down? In 2004 and 2005 he was a stud (unless you don't consider 1,300+ and 1,500+ rushing seasons beastly), even if his ypc was not great in 2003. In 2006 the guy had a freak injury making a the kind of balls-out play that we expect of our players. In 2007, again the guy is getting hit in the backfield and people wonder about his production? PLEASE.

Is it possible that Portis is wearing down? Yes. Have we seen enough of Portis to make that conclusion? No. But, perhaps the 2.9 per carry guy will be better.

Re: Portis v. Betts: The Grass is Always Greener
 

MTReskinsfan - yeah i agree with ya, our coaching approach to the game is messed up.

For gibbs smashmouth, protect the ball, control the clock football to work we need a strong O-line and solid runningbacks . . . unfortunately our O-line got the injury-bug and our starter portis is playing slow and our #2 guy needs carries to get in rythm but he doesnt get the ball enough to get it started.

I VOTED PORTIS b/c he is the better all-around back but i think betts is a better fit for gibbs offense scheme = cluster f*$k

Re: Portis v. Betts: The Grass is Always Greener
 

I think Portis is on a different level than Betts. But I don't think he is 100% yet. Until he gets 100%, I would put Betts back there, especially because Betts seems motivated and wants more carries.

Re: Portis v. Betts: The Grass is Always Greener
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;371339]What exactly is making people say that Portis is wearing down? In 2004 and 2005 he was a stud (unless you don't consider 1,300+ and 1,500+ rushing seasons beastly), even if his ypc was not great in 2003. In 2006 the guy had a freak injury making a the kind of balls-out play that we expect of our players. In 2007, again the guy is getting hit in the backfield and people wonder about his production? PLEASE.

Is it possible that Portis is wearing down? Yes. Have we seen enough of Portis to make that conclusion? No. But, perhaps the 2.9 per carry guy will be better.[/quote]

What's wearing him down is the fact that he carried the ball almost 350 times a season for back-to-back seasons. As I've said a number of times, his ypc is way, way, WAY down since leaving Denver, in part because we're trying to hammer a square peg into a round hole by forcing him into an offense that isn't well-designed for his body or talents. He's making it work by compensating with quantity, and that is taking its toll on his body.

Again, this effect is well known in fantasy football circles, but this is a case where the fantasy impact does correlate back to the real game because it directly speaks to a RB's durability and career longevity.

Here's are some of the articles on the topic:

[url=http://www.footballoutsiders.com/index.php?p=4764]FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Football analysis and NFL stats for the Moneyball era - Authors of Pro Football Prospectus 2007[/url] (this one isn't bad)
[url=http://footballguys.com/06yudkin_400touches.php]David Yudkin - RB Production After Seasons With 400+ Touches (Including Regular & Postseason)[/url] (more FF oriented than "real" NFL based)
[url=http://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/wordpress/?p=328]Pro-football-reference.com blog » Running Back Overuse and Injuries, Part One[/url]
[url=http://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/wordpress/?p=330]Pro-football-reference.com blog » Running Back Overuse and Injuries, Part Two (Playoff Edition)[/url] (by far the best articles I've read on the phenomenon)
[url=http://www.footballdocs.com/RB_carries_2005.html]FootballDocs Fantasy Football - Effect of Running Back Carries on Future Production[/url] (this one is old but it's interesting to see how their predictions panned out)

Re: Portis v. Betts: The Grass is Always Greener
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;371339]What exactly is making people say that Portis is wearing down? In 2004 and 2005 he was a stud (unless you don't consider 1,300+ and 1,500+ rushing seasons beastly), even if his ypc was not great in 2003. In 2006 the guy had a freak injury making a the kind of balls-out play that we expect of our players. In 2007, again the guy is getting hit in the backfield and people wonder about his production? PLEASE.

Is it possible that Portis is wearing down? Yes. Have we seen enough of Portis to make that conclusion? No. But, perhaps the 2.9 per carry guy will be better.[/quote]The sheer number of carries in 2005. He always seemed to fall on his shoulders after contact and I thought that it might save his legs a bit.

Well, what happens in the first preseason game he plays following a long offseason following an abusive year? Shoulder subluxation. Is that freak injury? If your shoulders get abused and then you hurt your shoulder?

Then this year with the nagging knee tendonitis and then a sprained knee, and virtually zero effectiveness.

Can a healthy Portis still provide a burst? Maybe, but 6 years into his career, healthy is relative, and that's just not good enough.

He is a high effort guy who can still contibute to this team in so many ways, but I just can't defend him as a running threat any more. I'm almost thinking his best use is short yardage at this point because he always delivers a blow.

Of course, we don't run in short yardage, so I guess the point is moot.

Re: Portis v. Betts: The Grass is Always Greener
 

I guess we will have to agree to disagree. I think Portis is more than a 3rd down, change of pace back that offiss thinks he is. I also still think he is a "running threat" GTripp. But, only time will tell. I admit that I could be wrong, even though I strongly believe that I am right.

Re: Portis v. Betts: The Grass is Always Greener
 

And to reiterate, I DON'T know that Betts can do any better. He did have the longest run of the day against Arizona and it should have been a TD.

I do know that Betts is fresh, relatively healthy, and has no theoretical abuse issues. Sellers is the same way...but he can't block for himself.

Re: Portis v. Betts: The Grass is Always Greener
 

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;371409]I do know that Betts is fresh, relatively healthy, and has no theoretical abuse issues. Sellers is the same way...but he can't block for himself.[/QUOTE]

Well Betts does have a long history of injuries. Does anyone remember that he almost got cut by Gibbs because he was always falling prey to some injury.

And let me reiterate that I really don't care who is playing in the backfield as long as we are running the ball effectively. I just think Portis is clearly the better option at this point. Hopefully, Buges will coach up the linemen and they will gel as the season continues and this whole issue will become a moot.

Re: Portis v. Betts: The Grass is Always Greener
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;371416]Well Betts does have a long history of injuries. Does anyone remember that he almost got cut by Gibbs because he was always falling prey to some injury.

And let me reiterate that I really don't care who is playing in the backfield as long as we are running the ball effectively. I just think Portis is clearly the better option at this point. Hopefully, Buges will coach up the linemen and they will gel as the season continues and this whole issue will become a moot.[/quote]Agreed.

Re: Portis v. Betts: The Grass is Always Greener
 

[QUOTE=dgack;371401]What's wearing him down is the fact that he carried the ball almost 350 times a season for back-to-back seasons. As I've said a number of times, his ypc is way, way, WAY down since leaving Denver, in part because we're trying to hammer a square peg into a round hole by forcing him into an offense that isn't well-designed for his body or talents. He's making it work by compensating with quantity, and that is taking its toll on his body.

Again, this effect is well known in fantasy football circles, but this is a case where the fantasy impact does correlate back to the real game because it directly speaks to a RB's durability and career longevity.

Here's are some of the articles on the topic:

[url=http://www.footballoutsiders.com/index.php?p=4764]FOOTBALL OUTSIDERS: Football analysis and NFL stats for the Moneyball era - Authors of Pro Football Prospectus 2007[/url] (this one isn't bad)
[url=http://footballguys.com/06yudkin_400touches.php]David Yudkin - RB Production After Seasons With 400+ Touches (Including Regular & Postseason)[/url] (more FF oriented than "real" NFL based)
[url=http://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/wordpress/?p=328]Pro-football-reference.com blog » Running Back Overuse and Injuries, Part One[/url]
[url=http://www.pro-football-reference.com/blog/wordpress/?p=330]Pro-football-reference.com blog » Running Back Overuse and Injuries, Part Two (Playoff Edition)[/url] (by far the best articles I've read on the phenomenon)
[url=http://www.footballdocs.com/RB_carries_2005.html]FootballDocs Fantasy Football - Effect of Running Back Carries on Future Production[/url] (this one is old but it's interesting to see how their predictions panned out)[/QUOTE]


Excellent post!

Re: Portis v. Betts: The Grass is Always Greener
 

Yup Portis is washed up. He's just got more rushing yards than every back besides Adrian Peterson and Willie Parker.

Re: Portis v. Betts: The Grass is Always Greener
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;377019]Yup Portis is washed up. He's just got more rushing yards than every back besides Adrian Peterson and Willie Parker.[/quote]

Wow. He sure does. That's awesome. Imagine if he wasn't banged up all offseason/preseason. With Peterson getting dinged today he has a chance for the rushing title if he stays healthy. (A loud, resounding knock on wood).

Re: Portis v. Betts: The Grass is Always Greener
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;377019]Yup Portis is washed up. He's just got more rushing yards than every back besides Adrian Peterson and Willie Parker.[/quote]He's also one of 5 backs to be averaging more than 20 carries a game.

His now 4.2 yards a carry is more than acceptable to run with every game. If he can keep up this pace, we should keep feeding him.

If it falls off, we should go back to emphasizing the pass.

Re: Portis v. Betts: The Grass is Always Greener
 

[QUOTE=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;377019]Yup Portis is washed up. He's just got more rushing yards than every back besides Adrian Peterson and Willie Parker.[/QUOTE]

He had a good game. That's two in a row now. But those were way overdue.

For some reason I didn't think it would take until Week 9 to see it.

Re: Portis v. Betts: The Grass is Always Greener
 

portis did well today. Finally the last two weeks he done well, but the other 12 weeks he was shit.

Re: Portis v. Betts: The Grass is Always Greener
 

[QUOTE=CHIEF CHUCKING MY SPEAR;377053]portis did well today. Finally the last two weeks he done well, but the other 12 weeks he was shit.[/QUOTE]

12 weeks?

Re: Portis v. Betts: The Grass is Always Greener
 

yes his first 100 hundred yard game last week was his first in the last 12 weeks that he played in against the jets

Re: Portis v. Betts: The Grass is Always Greener
 

Portis. just took him half the season to get back into playing shape

Re: Portis v. Betts: The Grass is Always Greener
 

It's funny that 2 weeks ago Portis was "washed up," has been "worn down by injury," has "lost his vision," is "no better than a 3rd down back," etc. and now people are saying that he wasn't irredeemable. Eat your crow like a man and admit that you were wrong; Portis's career wasn't done like so many implied or expressly stated.

Re: Portis v. Betts: The Grass is Always Greener
 

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;377107]It's funny that 2 weeks ago Portis was "washed up," has been "worn down by injury," has "lost his vision," is "no better than a 3rd down back," etc. and now people are saying that he wasn't irredeemable. Eat your crow like a man and admit that you were wrong; Portis's career wasn't done like so many implied or expressly stated.[/quote]

He's rushed for 333 yards the last 2 games. Not bad for a 3rd down back.

Re: Portis v. Betts: The Grass is Always Greener
 

[quote=Mattyk72;377110]He's rushed for 333 yards the last 2 games. Not bad for a 3rd down back.[/quote]

I know this isn't what you guys are specifically calling out, but to me this just proves one of my original theorems -- that prior to the last 2 games, we have been calling the wrong plays for an effective run game with the staff we have.

I think even CP was saying this a few weeks ago, that the playcalling has been anything but productive for him.

I also still think that we're leaning too hard on him and that's dangerous. As I said several posts ago, we are getting CP his yards through quantity -- he's carried a whopping 66 times in the past 2 games! When you consider the most heavily worked RB in the league -- Willie Parker -- gets 23.6 carries a game, I think we should all be a little concerned about CP seeing 30 and 36 carry games.

However, it appears that Ladell's penchant for coughing up the ball in key situations is still very much an issue, so certainly it's difficult to say right now he should be in there instead of Clinton. That said, Portis has the dubious honor of being tied for 8th on the NFC's fumbles leader list (ugh, J-Cam is first), so it's not as though Betts is alone in his woes here.

In any event, IMO, the important numbers of the past two games are the rushing average and the long runs. I hope these continue to climb while the actual number of carries fall, because we are still WAY down the charts on big rush plays and could be doing a lot better in yards per carry.

Re: Portis v. Betts: The Grass is Always Greener
 

[quote=Mattyk72;377110]He's rushed for 333 yards the last 2 games. Not bad for a 3rd down back.[/quote]

Betts lost a drive-killing fumble on his only run of the day. We were lucky McNabb gave it right back to us, but Ladell belongs on the bench when CP is healthy.

Makes this poll look pretty stupid. :D

Re: Portis v. Betts: The Grass is Always Greener
 

[quote=Buster;377187]Betts lost a drive-killing fumble on his only run of the day. We were lucky McNabb gave it right back to us, but Ladell belongs on the bench when CP is healthy.

Makes this poll look pretty stupid. :D[/quote]

I agree. Betts is a fumbler. Last year his fumbles cost us two games.

Re: Portis v. Betts: The Grass is Always Greener
 

Ladell got one carry yesterday, fumbled.

Re: Portis v. Betts: The Grass is Always Greener
 

This arguement is over!! After Clinton's previous two games IMO we can put this to bed.

Re: Portis v. Betts: The Grass is Always Greener
 

More hard evidence against Betts, from the obsessive maniacs at PGH:

[URL="http://www.postgameheroes.com/?p=1636"]Does Ladell Betts have fumblitis?[/URL]

Re: Portis v. Betts: The Grass is Always Greener
 

[quote=Skinsfan1967;377517]This arguement is over!! After Clinton's previous two games IMO we can put this to bed.[/quote]

If only it were that simple.

Re: Portis v. Betts: The Grass is Always Greener
 

[quote=JWsleep;377558]More hard evidence against Betts, from the obsessive maniacs at PGH:

[URL="http://www.postgameheroes.com/?p=1636"]Does Ladell Betts have fumblitis?[/URL][/quote]

Not that I don't like the style of this piece, but I do take a bit of umbrage with calling this "hard evidence" because the author takes some liberties to excuse some fumbles of one RB or another, and sort of waves his hands around the fumbles of Alexander and Jamal Lewis because they're both "excellent runners" or what have you.

There's nothing wrong with quasi-statistical articles like this; I post stuff like this all the time. It's just not as "hard" as it sounds because the data is being manipulated in different ways to help tell a specific story.

That doesn't really change the fact that Ladell has a knack for coughing up the ball at inopportune moments, though.

If anything, I'd like to see the author ponder why it seems that almost none of the key starting skill position players on our offense can hang onto the ball. It's not just Betts -- Portis, Campbell, and Moss have all had big problems holding onto the football. Hard to believe this is from the highest paid coaching staff in the league...

Re: Portis v. Betts: The Grass is Always Greener
 

both running backs are good, I don't understand what there is to complain about.

Re: Portis v. Betts: The Grass is Always Greener
 

[quote=Campbell17;377568]both running backs are good, I don't understand what there is to complain about.[/quote]
Wrong, Betts is good, Portis is GREAT.

He may be the best RB in the NFC this season (yardage-wise) now that Peterson is out for 3 weeks.

Portis is 3rd in the NFL in rushing (Peterson, Parker) and has more yards than Tomlinson at this point in the season, and 6 TDs. (LT has 8)/

Re: Portis v. Betts: The Grass is Always Greener
 

Portis 766 3rd in the NFL 2nd in the NFC. Enough said.

Re: Portis v. Betts: The Grass is Always Greener
 

betts always did, and still does fumble way too much, and simply doesnt get it done like clinton... he's a guy that can only produce the way we want when he gets the ball alot more than 3 times a game... i say fuck betts, give it all to sellers instead