Redskins in Review: RUNNING BACKS
 

[B][url=http://dcprosportsreport.com/?p=2403]Redskins in Review: RUNNING BACKS | DC Pro Sports Report -- Sports news, stats and analysis from the capital of the free world[/url][/B]

[QUOTE]This is another position that really is not in need of critical repair, personnel wise, we’ll explain more later. [B]RB Clinton Portis [/B]is the star here, no question. Portis had his second season as a Washington Redskin, rushing for 1,487 yards on 342 carries, averaging 4.3 yards per carry. Portis also carried the ball into the end zone 9 times. He also finished the season with 28 receptions for 218 yards.[/QUOTE]

Also, vote in our Poll, in the review article!

Re: Redskins in Review: RUNNING BACKS
 

So do you think that a Portis-Betts backfield tandem is an effective combo? Any thoughts on whether we'd be better off with a back that brings more speed/pass catching ability rather than Portis-lite which is what Betts represents?

Re: Redskins in Review: RUNNING BACKS
 

Good work. I thought Zorn really under-utilized Betts this season. Betts might not be a 350-carry-per-year back, but neither is Portis, as everyone should have learned by now. Portis should be carrying the ball no more than an average of 20 times per game, which still yields over 300 carries for a season. The Skins need to cut Portis' workload whether he likes it or not [and it would be nice if the owner would tell Portis to keep his mouth shut whether he likes it or not].

I don't know why the Redskins didn't throw to Sellers more. Pass-catching fullbacks are a staple of west coast offenses and Sellers can really get yards after the catch once he gets moving. I suppose, like so many things, Sellers had to sacrifice his yards to cover for an inadequate offensive line.

Re: Redskins in Review: RUNNING BACKS
 

[quote=PennSkinsFan;518554][B][url=http://dcprosportsreport.com/?p=2403]Redskins in Review: RUNNING BACKS | DC Pro Sports Report -- Sports news, stats and analysis from the capital of the free world[/url][/B]



Also, vote in our Poll, in the review article![/quote]

Like I've been saying, our challenge ahead is going to be @ RB. If Zorn does not allow our other backs to develop we will be shaking our heads in 2010. Unless of course our star keeps shining.

Re: Redskins in Review: RUNNING BACKS
 

[quote=Paintrain;518556]So do you think that a Portis-Betts backfield tandem is an effective combo? Any thoughts on whether we'd be better off with a back that brings more speed/pass catching ability rather than Portis-lite which is what Betts represents?[/quote]Betts is a very nice pass-catching tailback. He doesn't block as well as Portis, but he's improved and he's got better hands than Portis does out of the backfield.

Re: Redskins in Review: RUNNING BACKS
 

[quote=PennSkinsFan;518554][B][url=http://dcprosportsreport.com/?p=2403]Redskins in Review: RUNNING BACKS | DC Pro Sports Report -- Sports news, stats and analysis from the capital of the free world[/url][/B]



Also, vote in our Poll, in the review article![/quote]

The Skins definitely have weapons at this position. I'd just like to see them be used more effectively. Whether or not it hurts Portis' feelings, the coaches should get everyone involved in the offensive attack.

I knows Betts was injured for a few games, but he should have gotten more than 61 carries. And many of Portis' 28 receptions were on check downs vs. plays designed to get him the ball in space.

I'd like to see Betts and Portis used almost equally with Portis being the official goal-line back. I'd also like to see Cartwright emerge as a passing threat, much like we saw Sproles, Westbrook, Norwood and Cobbs (in Miami) used over the weekend. I think Rock can do damage in the passing attack. He's the one guy that can make things happen if given some space to operate.

Better play calling (Wildcat anyone?) and a commitment to use all of the backs in the running AND passing game could help the Skins become more dynamic on offense, keep Portis and others healthier at the end of the season and keep defenses honest.

Just my two cents.

Re: Redskins in Review: RUNNING BACKS
 

[quote=Paintrain;518556]So do you think that a Portis-Betts backfield tandem is an effective combo? Any thoughts on whether we'd be better off with a back that brings more speed/pass catching ability rather than Portis-lite which is what Betts represents?[/quote]

I think they can use both effectively and even get Rock more involved on third downs. It doesn't always have to ba a thunder and lightning-like combo. Besides, Portis is as physical as anyone. He's great on the goal line and has evolved into a punishing runner (as good as anyone not named Brandon Jacobs).

Betts is quick and nifty enough to be a change of pace back, especially if the Skins learn how to use the screen pass a la the Eagles, Chargers, Falcons, Pats, Dolphins, etc. The bottom line is that they are both very good NFL backs. Betts could and should be used more effectively.

Re: Redskins in Review: RUNNING BACKS
 

[quote=44ever;518558]Like I've been saying, our challenge ahead is going to be @ RB. If Zorn does not allow our other backs to develop we will be shaking our heads in 2010. Unless of course our star keeps shining.[/quote]
I think our other running backs are alldready developed they just need to see more playing time.

Re: Redskins in Review: RUNNING BACKS
 

[quote=Spence;518557]Good work. I thought Zorn really under-utilized Betts this season. Betts might not be a 350-carry-per-year back, but neither is Portis, as everyone should have learned by now. Portis should be carrying the ball no more than an average of 20 times per game, which still yields over 300 carries for a season. The Skins need to cut Portis' workload whether he likes it or not [and it would be nice if the owner would tell Portis to keep his mouth shut whether he likes it or not].

I don't know why the Redskins didn't throw to Sellers more. Pass-catching fullbacks are a staple of west coast offenses and Sellers can really get yards after the catch once he gets moving. I suppose, like so many things, Sellers had to sacrifice his yards to cover for an inadequate offensive line.[/quote]

Amen on more passes to the backs. What about Rock though? Maybe I'm delusional, but I think he can do damage if he gets some passes in space. It almost becomes a punt return at that point. And Campbell doesn't need all day to set up a screen pass, so the O line isn't required to block for long. They just need to get their fat asses downfield to block;)

Re: Redskins in Review: RUNNING BACKS
 

look at how many times Jacobs was slowed just to have Ward come in to finish off a tired D with big runs. Or the way Dallas used Barber in the 4th quarter of out last game. Our D was helpless against a fresh back.

So I agree we need a duo in the back but at the least we should be alternating backs

Frustrating to think of what we could be doing with a balanced Portis/Betts combo, but not.

Re: Redskins in Review: RUNNING BACKS
 

[quote=44Deezel;518561]I think they can use both effectively and even get Rock more involved on third downs. It doesn't always have to ba a thunder and lightning-like combo. Besides, Portis is as physical as anyone. He's great on the goal line and has evolved into a punishing runner (as good as anyone not named Brandon Jacobs).

Betts is quick and nifty enough to be a change of pace back, especially if the Skins learn how to use the screen pass a la the Eagles, Chargers, Falcons, Pats, Dolphins, etc. The bottom line is that they are both very good NFL backs. Betts could and should be used more effectively.[/quote]

We have differing opinions on our backup RB. I see them both as slower, smaller versions of Portis. I know that people love Rock, but to me he's just a guy. He's not special in any of his abilities. He's not exceptionally fast, quick, elusive or powerful. He's a hard worker and a tough SOB but he's not a difference maker in any regard.

I wouldn't associate 'quick' nor 'nifty' in regards to Betts. I don't know that I've ever seen him shake a defender in the open field, rather he just puts his head down and tries for an extra yard or two. He just seems to be more of what we already have. I'd much rather have a Sproles, Leon Washington, Chris Johnson, Norwood type of pure speed-explosive type back to represent a true 'change of pace'.

Re: Redskins in Review: RUNNING BACKS
 

[quote=firstdown;518562]I think our other running backs are alldready developed they just need to see more playing time.[/quote]

I was talking about developing into a equal to Portis and/or eventual sucsessor.

Rock still need to develop if we are to use him in said position IMO

Re: Redskins in Review: RUNNING BACKS
 

[quote=Spence;518559]Betts is a very nice pass-catching tailback. He doesn't block as well as Portis, but he's improved and he's got better hands than Portis does out of the backfield.[/quote]

Not only dose CP get's pounded when he runs but also is blocking like an O Lineman the rest of the time. No doubt he is tough, but how long can he take it. Betts seems to be the next choice, but it's the same style of play. JZ needs to find away to mix it up a little with his running game. Let Rock and Sellers get involed.

Re: Redskins in Review: RUNNING BACKS
 

[quote=44ever;518567]I was talking about developing into a equal to Portis and/or eventual sucsessor.

Rock still need to develop if we are to use him in said position IMO[/quote]

Rock's been in the NFL a few years now. If he was going to develop, don't you think he would have by now?

Re: Redskins in Review: RUNNING BACKS
 

[quote=44ever;518567]I was talking about developing into a equal to Portis and/or eventual sucsessor.

[B]Rock still need to develop if we are to use him in said position IMO[/B][/quote]

Rock is 29 years old and has been a Redskin since 2002. He is what he's going to be.

Re: Redskins in Review: RUNNING BACKS
 

I totally agree about Betts, it really made me wonder if there wasn't more behind it. Betts saw little more than spot duty in several games. He's a solid back & might at this point have more elusiveness & break away potential than Portis. Anybody ever think that maybe Danny wants to keep CP's #s up?

Rock isn't much of an every down back, he's in his place at 3rd. However, I do think he could make plays on screens & be a 3rd down back. He blocks well, he's the punter's protector after all, but probably hasn't had enough experience at picking up blitzes to be really good at it. If JZ really wants to run a 2 back system it would be ideal to have a 3rd back that can spell them for 5 plays or so a game to preserve them & limit injury potential.

Certainly not this year, but in the 10 draft Vinny would be wise to look at some mid round rb's.

Re: Redskins in Review: RUNNING BACKS
 

I'm not sure really why Betts isn't used more, apart from the fact that he has an aggravating tendency to fumble at the worst times. Especially considering the few carries he gets.

Someone like a Tyrell Sutton or a Keegan Herring could be an interesting 5th round or so choice for us.

As for FB, I wonder if they ever have any plans of having Nemo on the active roster. Otherwise, it's Sellers or bust. Though I wouldn't be totally surprised if Zorn suggest they make a run at Heath Evans

Re: Redskins in Review: RUNNING BACKS
 

[quote=PennSkinsFan;518578]Rock's been in the NFL a few years now. If he was going to develop, don't you think he would have by now?[/quote]

Yes. I do. That's why I said "at said position" I agree with scud. He is where he is. I never said I think he should be a "RB". I was talking about Betts if you read all my earlier posts. With that said: I'm a big Rock fan and would love to see him have a bigger role on offense. Sorry obout the misunderstanding

Re: Redskins in Review: RUNNING BACKS
 

if "splitting carries" means using Portis and Betts interchangeably during a game, then I think its a bad idea. The idea is that if one guy is in there, he's going to get the "feel" of the defense and wear it down. I'm not saying one back should be on the field for every offensive snap, but one guy should be there for an entire series or quarter at a time. Someone somewhere suggested making Betts the "feature back" in about 4 games next year. Portis would still play in these games, but he would just play a series or two here and there. This would take the load off portis and keep him fresh for December (and hopefuly January). I like that idea alot. What do you guys think?

Re: Redskins in Review: RUNNING BACKS
 

I doubt that Clinton Portis would "share the RB job" with anyone. And when Clinton Portis is unhappy, he has a tendency to let the world know about it...

Betts was definitely underutilized this year. However, recall the spitting contest that erupted when Zorn tried to use him instead of Portis...

Rock is a special teams player. He might give you a big game at RB once every other season but he has had shots there in the past and is mediocre.

I think the evaluation of Sellers is a bit over the top in praise. As a blocking back, he's fine. As a guy to get you important yards on short yardage situations - - remember his two great shots at the goal line from the one-yardline this year. Could not average 18 inches per carry there - - and it cost the team a game and a playoff shot...

Re: Redskins in Review: RUNNING BACKS
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;518592]if "splitting carries" means using Portis and Betts interchangeably during a game, then I think its a bad idea. The idea is that if one guy is in there, he's going to get the "feel" of the defense and wear it down. I'm not saying one back should be on the field for every offensive snap, but one guy should be there for an entire series or quarter at a time. [B]Someone somewhere suggested making Betts the "feature back" in about 4 games next year.[/B] Portis would still play in these games, but he would just play a series or two here and there. This would take the load off portis and keep him fresh for December (and hopefuly January). I like that idea alot. What do you guys think?[/quote]

This would be unconventional but who's to say it wouldn't work? I don't like the idea as much as them just splitting carries.

To your first point, if you watched the games this year when Betts played it was either as 3rd down back or for a whole series in the 2nd quarter. I liked the plan, they just didn't keep Betts in enough to follow through w/it. I agree you want each back to get a feel for the game, but they should be able to do that w/a couple of series. Bottom line is if you run the ball well there will be plenty of carries for 2 guys.

Re: Redskins in Review: RUNNING BACKS
 

ive discussed this so much in similar threads but this is new... CP & BEANIE WELLS would be a sick tandem.

Re: Redskins in Review: RUNNING BACKS
 

[B]Portis[/B] is a ProBowl player. When he is healthy and fresh Portis is a top 3 RB in the NFL. That being said Portis is reaching an age that most RB start to be become less productive due to injuries. Portis has a lot of miles on him. I am not sure how long we can rely on him to be our #1. I would bet all my chips on him to keep this up much longer. We need to have a young RB waiting in the wings. Currently we do not have one. But we have two young WR's. Nice going FO.

[B]Betts [/B]has a reoccuring knee problem. Betts is a talented RB with the skills to be an excellent backup. But I think he has had only one or two seasons where he has not missed games due to injury. His first couple of seasons he could not stay healthy at all. It was a major problem. He has a knee that he injures every so often. the more you use him the more it becomes a problem.

Bottom line - we need to get a young RB to prepare for Portis' eventual decline and departure. After 28 years of age RB's age in dog years.

Re: Redskins in Review: RUNNING BACKS
 

[quote=Paintrain;518566]We have differing opinions on our backup RB. I see them both as slower, smaller versions of Portis. I know that people love Rock, but to me he's just a guy. He's not special in any of his abilities. He's not exceptionally fast, quick, elusive or powerful. He's a hard worker and a tough SOB but he's not a difference maker in any regard.

I wouldn't associate 'quick' nor 'nifty' in regards to Betts. I don't know that I've ever seen him shake a defender in the open field, rather he just puts his head down and tries for an extra yard or two. He just seems to be more of what we already have. I'd much rather have a Sproles, Leon Washington, Chris Johnson, Norwood type of pure speed-explosive type back to represent a true 'change of pace'.[/quote]

Betts looks quicker than Portis to me, but I concede that him and Rock are no spring chickens. Neither is Portis for that matter. It couldn't hurt to look for a complimentary back in the middle to late rounds. Leon, Norwood and Sproles were all 3rd or 4th round picks. Michael Turner was a 5th rounder.

RBs can be found anywhere, so I don't think they need to chase any in free agency, especially with Portis' salary already on the books.

Re: Redskins in Review: RUNNING BACKS
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;518592]if "splitting carries" means using Portis and Betts interchangeably during a game, then I think its a bad idea. The idea is that if one guy is in there, he's going to get the "feel" of the defense and wear it down. I'm not saying one back should be on the field for every offensive snap, but one guy should be there for an entire series or quarter at a time. Someone somewhere suggested making Betts the "feature back" in about 4 games next year. Portis would still play in these games, but he would just play a series or two here and there. This would take the load off portis and keep him fresh for December (and hopefuly January). I like that idea alot. What do you guys think?[/quote]

I don't know what the formula should be, but I think they should do whatever it takes to figure it out. Other teams have figured out a way to do it, so why not the Skins? I guess at the end of the year, I'd like to see Portis with 200 plus carries and Betts with 100 plus (and at least 40 receptions). I'd like to see Portis get ALL the goal line carries. I still think Rock can get some reps on passing downs.

I'd even like to see Betts AND Portis on the field at the same time a few plays each game. Don't Ricky Williams and Ronnie Brown share the backfield every once in a while?

Someone said having fresh backs would help against tired defenses in the 4th quarter... much like teams ran the ball on our defense to run out the clock late in games. I concur.

Re: Redskins in Review: RUNNING BACKS
 

We could have had CPs successor this year in the 2nd round instead of 3 recievers. Steve Slaton.

Re: Redskins in Review: RUNNING BACKS
 

Rock is set were he is. He is a special teams player. That's it. It would have been nice to keep Mason around as the fourth but we didn't. I really think a third back is in order this year. I know we don't have many draft picks though, so maybe a cheaper veteran Rb who is in for all of training camp until we draft one in '10. I think the guys on the page who are discussing another RB are on to something, CP and Betts just arent enough to keep the guys fresh. Who knows maybe Zorn has figured that part out after one year in his system here in DC. I think we need a third.