Clinton Portis over Ladell Betts is a no brainer
 

I agree Betts is doing a very good job handling the job and running well but fumbling like that is pretty ridiculous and I'm sorry to say but its not really all Betts it is the O-Line that is creating monster holes for him to run his down hill running game for 100 yards a game. I am a Portis supporter i love his game and how he blocks and doesn't fumble. And his moves, some of Betts runs for 10 yards would be T.Ds with Portis. Thats my opinion and some will probably think differently. Yea Portis did not play well this season when he did but I mean he was hurt who would. I really hate the talk of starting Betts over Portis, or getting rid of Portis. I would just throw up if they even thought about getting rid of Portis.

Re: Portis over Betts no brainer
 

I love what Betts is doing, and there [I]may[/I] be case to be made that his style is more north-south and fits the current playbook/blocking scheme better. However, there's simply not enough evidence that he's a 325-plus carries-epr-year back.

To this day I still can't quite shake the feeling that Portis is a round peg in a square hole in this system, but in terms of raw talent there's also no question in my mind that Portis is the superior back. Betts is nice to have but no way should be starting over Portis despite his excellent play as of late.

Re: Portis over Betts no brainer
 

betts is a quality back up that has some fumbling issues

Re: Portis over Betts no brainer
 

[quote=dmek25;263453]betts is a quality back up that has some fumbling issues[/quote]

Man, you guys kill me. I was watching the game and this is horrible, but when that happened, all I could think was "well, guaranteed the Warpath guys will be screaming about how Betts sucks and should be traded / cut now".

Betts has fumbled two times more than CP did last year (5), and has lost exactly as many as CP did (2). BFD. The replay was fairly clear, and I don't know how you defend against that, a guy had one half of his body wrapped and punched the ball out with the other hand, away from anyone on our team who could have fallen on it. It happens. SJax coughed up on a far less defensible carry and I doubt guys in St. Louis were calling for his head.

The fact is, had the defense been able to stop them ONCE out of like 5 or 6 crucial spots, that fumble would have been irrelevant and we would have won. Ladell played great and is not the scapegoat here. For once it wasn't the kicker, either.

This one is on Grilliamss and his guys.

Re: Portis over Betts no brainer
 

[quote=dgack;263457]Man, you guys kill me. I was watching the game and this is horrible, but when that happened, all I could think was "well, guaranteed the Warpath guys will be screaming about how Betts sucks and should be traded / cut now".

Betts has fumbled two times more than CP did last year (5), and has lost exactly as many as CP did (2). BFD. The replay was fairly clear, and I don't know how you defend against that, a guy had one half of his body wrapped and punched the ball out with the other hand, away from anyone on our team who could have fallen on it. It happens. SJax coughed up on a far less defensible carry and I doubt guys in St. Louis were calling for his head.

The fact is, had the defense been able to stop them ONCE out of like 5 or 6 crucial spots, that fumble would have been irrelevant and we would have won. Ladell played great and is not the scapegoat here. For once it wasn't the kicker, either.

This one is on Grilliamss and his guys.[/quote]


The fumble blew the game for us there is no question of that. The defense's stop in over tiome was a pretty big stop if you ask me.

Re: Portis over Betts no brainer
 

[quote=Redskin;263462]The fumble blew the game for us there is no question of that. The defense's stop in over tiome was a pretty big stop if you ask me.[/quote]

I guess you missed the 17 unanswered points before Ladell even had the chance to fumble. And the total collapse right before Wilkins missed the automatic FG. And the special team collapse, allowing a 33 yard return to essentially hand the game to them.

The big "stop" we had in OT was preceded by a freaking 30 yard pass play, BTW. So, what, preventing a single first down in like a quarter or two is acceptable to you?

We allowed 25 fricking first downs, 7 more than our average. That's one less than HOUSTON allows, and only a few less than Chokeland and Arizona.

Sorry, there is no way you can claim the defense didn't roll over in this one.

Re: Portis over Betts no brainer
 

[quote=dgack;263468]I guess you missed the 17 unanswered points before Ladell even had the chance to fumble. And the total collapse right before Wilkins missed the automatic FG. And the special team collapse, allowing a 33 yard return to essentially hand the game to them.

The big "stop" we had in OT was preceded by a freaking 30 yard pass play, BTW. So, what, preventing a single first down in like a quarter or two is acceptable to you?

We allowed 25 fricking first downs, 7 more than our average. That's one less than HOUSTON allows, and only a few less than Chokeland and Arizona.

Sorry, there is no way you can claim the defense didn't roll over in this one.[/quote]

If you werent so quick to flame you could realize that Betts blew our chance to win the game with that fumble, easily within field goal range in a dome and he was running well enough to draw enough clock and kick a field goal for the win.

But becuase you are so quick to flame i expect a full flame on this post too about how the defense blew it for us in the long run well that fumble was a pivital play in the game for us not an ongoing problem like the defense.

Dont Bother responding to my post

Marry Christmas

Re: Portis over Betts no brainer
 

Man, Skins fans turn on you on a dime. I don't get this whole Betts vs Portis issue. We have two capable backs and the one that gives us the best chance to win will be on the field. Portis is a proven commodity but great players emerge when players ahead of them gets injured. Betts has stepped it up big time and if he gets the nod over Portis I'll be comfortable with that but he will have to live up to what we have come to expect from Portis. Either way just f'ing win baby.

Re: Portis over Betts no brainer
 

[quote=Redskin;263471]If you werent so quick to flame you could realize that Betts blew our chance to win the game with that fumble, easily within field goal range in a dome and he was running well enough to draw enough clock and kick a field goal for the win.

But becuase you are so quick to flame i expect a full flame on this post too about how the defense blew it for us in the long run well that fumble was a pivital play in the game for us not an ongoing problem like the defense.

Dont Bother responding to my post

Marry Christmas[/quote]

If I was flaming, I wouldn't be backing up my argument with stats, homepiece. It's like when you lose on a bad spot or instant replay call by the officials. If you put your team in a situation where all their chances hinge on one single event, you probably aren't a very good football team anyway.

Call it flaming all you want, but the fact remains we had 28 seperate downs to get a turnover and prevent 17 unanswered St. Louis points, and gave up 12 first downs in that span, that, had we made a stand at any point, would have prevented a St. Louis score.

Do you realize we allowed the Rams to score more points today than any other game they played this season except the LIONS? And these guys play Arizona and San Fran twice a year.

If pointing this stuff out means I'm "quick to flame" then call my lawyer, because I'm guilty as charged, guv'na...

Re: Portis over Betts no brainer
 

No kidding Saden. I wasn't even trying to say Betts is better than Portis, just that it isn't Betts' fault, and that coughing up one ball after basically being the entire offense for most of the game does not mean you deserve to be skewered and broiled alive.

Have you guys gotten so used to the defense just not playing football, that you don't even bother holding them responsible anymore? I don't get it at all.

Re: Portis over Betts no brainer
 

I'm just glad that Portis over Betts isn't a choice that we are required to make.

Re: Portis over Betts no brainer
 

Who cares about the fumble or anything else. I do not think there is a discussion at all when it comes to who our back is. Portis has shown (He does hold our team record for yards) that he can be a back in any system. He was injured this year and will come back next year healthy as ever. I am okay with Betts as a back up, but in no way shape or form would I ever consider getting rid of Portis for Betts. Portis is 25 and just getting into his prime. Betts is 27 and a career back up. Anyone who thinks we should get rid of Portis and rely soley on Betts is just crazy. They probably also think Brunell should be our starter again next year as well.

I am saying all this after Betts hass had 4-5 good games, but have felt this way since he has been on our team. I love what Clinton brings to this team in terms of leadership, heart, work ethic and skill. Portis is the man, and Betts is here to give him a break from time to time. End of discussion.

Re: Portis over Betts no brainer
 

[quote=dgack;263457]Man, you guys kill me. I was watching the game and this is horrible, but when that happened, all I could think was "well, guaranteed the Warpath guys will be screaming about how Betts sucks and should be traded / cut now".

Betts has fumbled two times more than CP did last year (5), and has lost exactly as many as CP did (2). BFD. The replay was fairly clear, and I don't know how you defend against that, a guy had one half of his body wrapped and punched the ball out with the other hand, away from anyone on our team who could have fallen on it. It happens. SJax coughed up on a far less defensible carry and I doubt guys in St. Louis were calling for his head.

The fact is, had the defense been able to stop them ONCE out of like 5 or 6 crucial spots, that fumble would have been irrelevant and we would have won. Ladell played great and is not the scapegoat here. For once it wasn't the kicker, either.

This one is on Grilliamss and his guys.[/quote]

Let's talk facts.

2005 - Betts 3 fumbles 3 lost 89 carries
2005 - Portis 3 fumbles 2 lost 352 carries

2006 - Betts 5 fumbles 2 lost 225 carries
2006 - Portis 0 fumbles 0 lost 127 carries

How the hell do you blame Gregg Williams for losing the game when all Betts had to do was hold onto the ball? By the way, who caused the fumble to set up the tying field goal? The D that you have maligned.

Don't come in here throwing a couple of ill researched stats around here and expect excuses to prove your point.

Bottom line. He holds onto that ball, we win. I am tired of excuses whether it is from fans or players.

At least we get a good draft pick next year....

Damn it!!!!!

Re: Portis over Betts no brainer
 

[quote=Grim21Reaper;263491]Let's talk facts.

2005 - Betts 3 fumbles 3 lost 89 carries
2005 - Portis 3 fumbles 2 lost 352 carries

2006 - Betts 5 fumbles 2 lost 225 carries
2006 - Portis 0 fumbles 0 lost 127 carries

How the hell do you blame Gregg Williams for losing the game when all Betts had to do was hold onto the ball? By the way, who caused the fumble to set up the tying field goal? The D that you have maligned.

Don't come in here throwing a couple of ill researched stats around here and expect excuses to prove your point.

Bottom line. He holds onto that ball, we win. I am tired of excuses whether it is from fans or players.

At least we get a good draft pick next year....

Damn it!!!!![/quote]

Okay then, let's talk facts, since all the other stats I posted are apparently not real facts, since you disagree with my conclusions.

Let's see... How do I blame Gregg Williams?

* 579 yards of offense allowed (Rams season high)
* 37 points allowed (2nd highest total Rams season, Detroit allowed 41)
* 25 first downs allowed
* 17 unanswered points allowed after holding a 14 point lead
* Allowed not only a 350 yard passer, but also an 150 yard rusher! Wow! Great defense!
* 1 OT period forced on the grace of an unlikely career long 52 yarder made by Suisham and an equally unlikely missed 41yarder by Jeff Wilkins.

Really, if you want to try and cast aspersions on my research, you ought to try bolstering your own arguments first. Of course the game would have been over had Betts held onto the ball. That's rather obvious. My point is that had the defense actually played like a pro football team rather than the Pop Warner crew we had out there today, Ladell's fumble would not have even occurred and if it did, it would not have cost us the game.

I love when a team plays poorly on one or both sides of the ball for an entire game and one guy takes the blame for making a mistake. How many blown plays did the secondary make today that lead DIRECTLY to points on the board for St. Louis? How many points did St. Louis score off Ladell's fumble, BTW?

Oh that's right, zero. Because our defense stopped them, right? Oh no, that's right, because a guy kicking 88% on the year missed a 40 yarder.

So, sure, Betts' fumble caused us to not ice the game. But it didn't put points on the board for St. Louis, and not because "that defense I've maligned" stopped them.

How close of a game would it have been without 129 yards and 2TD's from Betts today?

Re: Portis over Betts no brainer
 

And before you accuse me of not addressing your comparisons of Ladell to Clinton, all you've shown me is that Clinton is particularly good at not fumbling, not that Ladell is horrible. Read the other thread where I posted a long ass list of other pretty good NFL RB's who have coughed up the ball as much or more than Betts this season on similar amounts of carries.

You need to actually look at average carry/fumble numbers for the NFL if you think 2 fumbles lost is some amazingly bad stat line for a guy in the 230 carry tier.

Re: Portis over Betts no brainer
 

Oh wait, never mind, I just saw your alias and realized I must have offended you because I didn't praise Sean Taylor enough. My bad. He had another outstanding game in what was clearly a Pro Bowl season (damn conspiracy) and it was all Ladell's fault.

Forget I said anything, how could I have known to whom I was speaking???

Re: Portis over Betts no brainer
 

Our non existant defense gave up OVER 500 yds! Betts got mugged, he didnt LOSE the game. It was a great play by the defender. Fumble or no fumble it should not have come down to that play anyway. If Im not mistaken, thats the most yds our defense has given up since GW has been here and probaly for many yrs prior. Betts is a great, starting caliber RB. But his place here is at #2. It will be awesome to see CP run behind our line as they are obviously gelling as a unit and with the blocking schemes. We now have 2 RBs opponents have to respect and will give us even more threats next yr. Bottom line is our D once again did nothing to help us win. Yeah a Defensive stop in OT is nice, but when we score 31 pts, should we really be in OT?

Re: Portis over Betts no brainer
 

[quote=SkinEmAll;263497]Yeah a Defensive stop in OT is nice, but when we score 31 pts, should we really be in OT?[/quote]

Careful, you shouldn't "come in here throwing a couple of ill researched stats around" and "malign the D" like that. Someone's liable to talk facts with you and inform you of the error of your ways.

Re: Portis over Betts no brainer
 

yeah It appears that way, I mean cmon wheres all the 'Marry' Christmas spirit?

Re: Portis over Betts no brainer
 

I think you guys are arguing over semantics. Betts blew a chance for the win, but he wasn't responsible for us losing the game. You really can't argue the first - he screwed up by not putting both hands on the ball. If he had had both hands on the ball and the defender still got it out, then I would say that Betts did everything he could have. However, he didn't cover up the ball when he felt contact, and that's basic skills in that situation (tied, driving for win). CP doesn't cough that one up, IMO.

That said, I agree that Betts didn't "cost us the game" in the greater sense. That's on the D.

Re: Portis over Betts no brainer
 

[quote=dgack;263457]

Betts has fumbled two times more than CP did last year (5), and has lost exactly as many as CP did (2). BFD. The replay was fairly clear, and I don't know how you defend against that, a guy had one half of his body wrapped and punched the ball out with the other hand, away from anyone on our team who could have fallen on it. It happens.
This one is on Grilliamss and his guys.[/quote]
first of all, if betts would have had BOTH hands on the ball, there is no fumble, and the skins probably win. with that out of the way, i did not blame betts for the loss. only stating, like i have in other threads, that betts seems like he is going to fumble on just about all of his touches. i dont care if you run for 10000 yards a game, if you fumble, you are worthless in this league

Re: Portis over Betts no brainer
 

Portis over Betts was a no-brainer from the start.

Re: Portis over Betts no brainer
 

Posted the wrong stat here. He does have 5. Announcers during the game it was his sixth...strange.

Re: Portis over Betts no brainer
 

[quote=dmek25;263516]i dont care if you run for 10000 yards a game, if you fumble, you are worthless in this league[/quote]

Well, like I said in the other thread, that means there are a lot of worthless RB's starting in this league, then. Might as well just say LT and Portis are the only RB's who aren't worthless.

And Lee Suggs. He hasn't fumbled at all this year. That guy is golden.

Re: Portis over Betts no brainer
 

yea... Redskin, you don't know what you're talking about. If you ask me, that was one hell of a strip by chavous, not betts making a dumb play. I do agree that if he held onto the ball we probably would have won the game. But, without betts having the performance he had, the score would have been what? 17 to 31? Come on, he was not the direct cause for losing the game. Don't come up in here saying how betts sucks just because your ass is pissed of we lost the game...

Re: Portis over Betts no brainer
 

Once again. Dgack you can argue how many yards were put up and everything else. It was a good strip blah blah blah.

Here is the bottom line. The team was in a position to win the game. Betts had the ball and knows that someone is going to try and strip the ball (that is no secret). He didn't make the play.


I AM TIRED OF EXCUSES. When you have a chance to seal the game, do it. It is that simple. Make the play.

Our team has been deficient in making plays this year that is why they are 5-10.

I don't care if the D gave up 6000 yards. If there are 2:00 left in the game and you have just broken into the secondary, hold onto the ball.

By the way, Taylor was embarrassed yesterday, that is fine. He also won three games for us this year. Without him, we are 2-13 and probably the most disappointing team of all time.

Re: Portis over Betts no brainer
 

[quote=dgack;263494]Okay then, let's talk facts, since all the other stats I posted are apparently not real facts, since you disagree with my conclusions.

Let's see... How do I blame Gregg Williams?

* 579 yards of offense allowed (Rams season high)
* 37 points allowed (2nd highest total Rams season, Detroit allowed 41)
* 25 first downs allowed
* 17 unanswered points allowed after holding a 14 point lead
* Allowed not only a 350 yard passer, but also an 150 yard rusher! Wow! Great defense!
* 1 OT period forced on the grace of an unlikely career long 52 yarder made by Suisham and an equally unlikely missed 41yarder by Jeff Wilkins.

Really, if you want to try and cast aspersions on my research, you ought to try bolstering your own arguments first. Of course the game would have been over had Betts held onto the ball. That's rather obvious. My point is that had the defense actually played like a pro football team rather than the Pop Warner crew we had out there today, Ladell's fumble would not have even occurred and if it did, it would not have cost us the game.

I love when a team plays poorly on one or both sides of the ball for an entire game and one guy takes the blame for making a mistake. How many blown plays did the secondary make today that lead DIRECTLY to points on the board for St. Louis? How many points did St. Louis score off Ladell's fumble, BTW?

Oh that's right, zero. Because our defense stopped them, right? Oh no, that's right, because a guy kicking 88% on the year missed a 40 yarder.

So, sure, Betts' fumble caused us to not ice the game. But it didn't put points on the board for St. Louis, and not because "that defense I've maligned" stopped them.

How close of a game would it have been without 129 yards and 2TD's from Betts today?[/quote]

That was a first 40 yarder this year chief so hes not exactly an "automatic" kicker.

Re: Portis over Betts no brainer
 

[quote=Grim21Reaper;263545]Once again. Dgack you can argue how many yards were put up and everything else. It was a good strip blah blah blah.

Here is the bottom line. The team was in a position to win the game. Betts had the ball and knows that someone is going to try and strip the ball (that is no secret). He didn't make the play.


I AM TIRED OF EXCUSES. When you have a chance to seal the game, do it. It is that simple. Make the play.

Our team has been deficient in making plays this year that is why they are 5-10.

I don't care if the D gave up 6000 yards. If there are 2:00 left in the game and you have just broken into the secondary, hold onto the ball.

By the way, Taylor was embarrassed yesterday, that is fine. He also won three games for us this year. Without him, we are 2-13 and probably the most disappointing team of all time.[/quote]


In the same argument that you said we lost because of Betts...you gave Taylor a get out of jail free card for giving up 3 touchdowns... Not sure how that works. If Betts doesnt fumble, and then we miss the field goal, is it the kickers fault we lost and still not the defense?

What about the defense in overtime when they let them score a TD?

my opininion is its a team sport, the whole team lost the game. you cant look at any one play because if another play had been different then that play might not matter. If we still have a two touchdown lead and were just running out the clock then it wouldnt have mattered that betts fumbled.

Re: Portis over Betts no brainer
 

[quote=DiehardSkin88;263544]yea... Redskin, you don't know what you're talking about. If you ask me, that was one hell of a strip by chavous, not betts making a dumb play. I do agree that if he held onto the ball we probably would have won the game. But, without betts having the performance he had, the score would have been what? 17 to 31? Come on, he was not the direct cause for losing the game. Don't come up in here saying how betts sucks just because your ass is pissed of we lost the game...[/quote]


Errm can I get a fuck you? Read around before you post against me. K Thx. I have stated that the defense on the whole is the reason we lost but if i had to pick one play that cost us the game it was Betts Fumble, I dont know how you can argue that. Blaming the defense is almost like blaming the offense for not scoring enough points, they had oppertunities. A single play can change the game or end the game and that play was Betts' fumble, whether you like it or not if he holds onto that ball we win.

Re: Portis over Betts no brainer
 

[quote=SKINSnCANES;263550]In the same argument that you said we lost because of Betts...you gave Taylor a get out of jail free card for giving up 3 touchdowns... Not sure how that works. If Betts doesnt fumble, and then we miss the field goal, is it the kickers fault we lost and still not the defense?

What about the defense in overtime when they let them score a TD?

my opininion is its a team sport, the whole team lost the game. you cant look at any one play because if another play had been different then that play might not matter. If we still have a two touchdown lead and were just running out the clock then it wouldnt have mattered that betts fumbled.[/quote]



i agree, the skins lost because they did not score as many points as the rams. one play does not win or lose a game, especially not a high scoring game.

looking at it from the rams side, i don't think that strip on betts won them the game, i would say steven jackson,issac bruce and mark bulger dominating our defense had more to do with it.

Re: Portis over Betts no brainer
 

On the bright side, the offense as a whole played well and we will receiving the 7th pick in the April Draft at worst. Start scouting them CBs... Merry Christmas!

Re: Portis over Betts no brainer
 

P.S. I know that my signature sucks..

Re: Portis over Betts no brainer
 

[quote=Eight in the Box;263558]P.S. I know that my signature sucks..[/quote]


My signature also doesnt really seem to fit anymore... I dont have the heart to change it though.

Re: Portis over Betts no brainer
 

[QUOTE=wolfeskins;263554]i agree, the skins lost because they did not score as many points as the rams. one play does not win or lose a game, especially not a high scoring game.

looking at it from the rams side, i don't think that strip on betts won them the game, i would say steven jackson,issac bruce and mark bulger dominating our defense had more to do with it.[/QUOTE]

I'd agree, if I'm the Rams, I don't feel like the strip won the game. However, if I'm in their shoes, it damn sure saved it.

Re: Portis over Betts no brainer
 

[quote=Eight in the Box;263557]On the bright side, the offense as a whole played well and we will receiving the 7th pick in the April Draft at worst. Start scouting them CBs... Merry Christmas![/quote]


if we go after nate clements in free agency then we should go after a d-lineman with our first pick


**preferably a pass rushing d-lineman as appossed to a run stopping d-lineman.

Re: Portis over Betts no brainer
 

I like the idea of moving Springs to FS with Taylor moving to SS (where he belongs), rotating in Vincent (if he is still around) and Prioleau at safety, while sarting Clements (if we get him) and Carlos on the outsides with Wright at the nickel. Springs would also be able to help at corner and Prioleau and Vincent can play a little corner as well in dime of quarter packages. Bye AA...

Re: Portis over Betts no brainer
 

[QUOTE=SKINSnCANES;263550]In the same argument that you said we lost because of Betts...you gave Taylor a get out of jail free card for giving up 3 touchdowns... Not sure how that works. If Betts doesnt fumble, and then we miss the field goal, is it the kickers fault we lost and still not the defense?

What about the defense in overtime when they let them score a TD?

my opininion is its a team sport, the whole team lost the game. you cant look at any one play because if another play had been different then that play might not matter. If we still have a two touchdown lead and were just running out the clock then it wouldnt have mattered that betts fumbled.[/QUOTE]

Bingo! Some people can't see the forest through the trees.

Re: Portis over Betts no brainer
 

[quote=SKINSnCANES;263550]In the same argument that you said we lost because of Betts...you gave Taylor a get out of jail free card for giving up 3 touchdowns... Not sure how that works. If Betts doesnt fumble, and then we miss the field goal, is it the kickers fault we lost and still not the defense?

What about the defense in overtime when they let them score a TD?

my opininion is its a team sport, the whole team lost the game. you cant look at any one play because if another play had been different then that play might not matter. If we still have a two touchdown lead and were just running out the clock then it wouldnt have mattered that betts fumbled.[/quote]


Taylor gave up 3 tds?

The last time I checked, when a runningback gets the ball, you expect a lineman or linebacker to make the tackle. To blame a safety on a run or screen doesn't make sense to me.

He blew the tackles, no doubt. But when a back has the ball the safety shouldn't even be in the play.

Re: Portis over Betts no brainer
 

[quote=Redskin;263549]That was a first 40 yarder this year chief so hes not exactly an "automatic" kicker.[/quote]

I was talking about Wilkins missing a 40 yarder. And he hasn't been automatic from 40-49 (who is these days?), but he hasn't missed from 30-39, so a 41 yarder isn't exactly scary hard for that guy.

Re: Portis over Betts no brainer
 

[quote=Grim21Reaper;263623]Taylor gave up 3 tds?

The last time I checked, when a runningback gets the ball, you expect a lineman or linebacker to make the tackle. To blame a safety on a run or screen doesn't make sense to me.

He blew the tackles, no doubt. But when a back has the ball the safety shouldn't even be in the play.[/quote]

Taylor didn't give up 3 TD's the same way that Betts' fumble didn't give the game to the Rams. But his failure to make a play and prevent the TD's DID contribute to us losing the game in the same way that Ladell's fumble did (by your own logic).