Who's better, Clinton Portis or Tatum Bell?
 

Portis, or Bell?

Well if we evaluate this move based on the last game it's a no brainer, it's Bell. Yes the player that was drafted with #2 pick we sent to Denver along with Bailey for Portis. I would include the fact that Bell is probably making somewhere around 8 million, compared to Portis's 50 mil, but I don't think that's really neccassary.

I will say it, system back, I TOLD YOU SO!

Looks like Shanahan knew what he was doing after all.

Re: Who's Better?
 

Take away those two long runs and then who looks better?

He really didn't break any tackles on those two runs. I wouldn't think that last game should be any indication. Portis is a special back and there's no doubt that the Denver system amplified that, but Bell better than Portis?

I think not.

Re: Who's Better?
 

o yeah broncos got a hell of a deal. and then they came back to us and we gave them another hell of a deal for big number 17.

Now it is obvious that they got a greater advantage than we did just because of that number 2, they picked up another runner who to answer this thread IS NOT AS GOOD AS PORTIS but they got him and champ. Both teams benefitted but they did a hell of a lot more.

had we not given the round 2 pick the deal would be slightly in our favor but with that 2nd round it is well in their favor

Re: Who's Better?
 

Well, if Bell puts together 2 x 1500 yds + 1300 yd season(s), then we can start to compare.

Honestly, one good game hardly warrants a serious comparison though.

Is Portis a system back?? I don't think so, but let's just say the jury is still out. To rush for 1300 yds and have one of the lowest ranked offenses in the NFL still seems good to me.

Re: Who's Better?
 

Jeez Bell has ONE good game and he's better than a RB who has rushed for over 1500 yds in his FIRST 3 seasons, and 29 td's in 29 games.

Once again Offiss hit on the head. He knows it all. Snyder should really give Offiss a call to get a few pointers. Since Offiss knows everything.

ToldyousoOffiss....that should be your screename. :rolleyes:

Re: Who's Better?
 

Who's to say Tatum Bell isn't a system back? Maybe he'll suck balls if he ever left Denver

Re: Who's Better?
 

[QUOTE=offiss]Portis, or Bell?

Well if we evaluate this move based on the last game it's a no brainer, it's Bell. Yes the player that was drafted with #2 pick we sent to Denver along with Bailey for Portis. I would include the fact that Bell is probably making somewhere around 8 million, compared to Portis's 50 mil, but I don't think that's really neccassary.

I will say it, system back, I TOLD YOU SO!

Looks like Shanahan knew what he was doing after all.[/QUOTE]

*checks calendar*
hmmm... not April 1st...

Seriously, your one game of evidence is severely lacking to make a call like this, much less an "I told you so". Just because you REALLY want to be right about something doesn't make it so. You may still be, but you have ZERO case at this point. As we say in my field, "Science is not about your feelings."

Let's also consider that Champ was going to be gone regardless of what we did aside from coughing up an extreme amount of cash that he was not worth. Also, I was in NM watching all the Denver games during Portis's last year there. Only airhead analysts that didn't SEE him play regularly, people who listen to said analysts, and the general category of mongoloids think Portis is just a "system back"

That is all.

Re: Who's Better?
 

A lot of us are getting caught up in the "Who got the better end of the deal?" That's VERY debatable.

Who's better? Portis or Bell?

Come ooooooooooon, no contest.

Re: Who's Better?
 

So we're comparing Portis and Bell off one game??

The wise move would be to wait a few more years to compare which is the better player.

Portis had an "off year" last season with 1300, and he's on pace for over 1400 so far this year. How much of a 'system back' is that?

Bell isn't even the starter yet.

Re: Who's Better?
 

If we want to get in to the 'I told you so' game, what's the score on that Brunell debate now, offiss?

I'd say it's
Gibbs 1
offiss 0

;)

Re: Who's Better?
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]If we want to get in to the 'I told you so' game, what's the score on that Brunell debate now, offiss?

I'd say it's
Gibbs 1
offiss 0

;)[/QUOTE]


Wrong! Gibbs has proven he can win with a nobody at QB, see Rypien, Williams, and Schroeder.

I was the one who said that although I hated the Brunell move he wasen't nearly as bad as he was made out to be, his biggest problem was Gibbs. My contention has been that Gibbs would be much more successfull if he gave the same attention to Ramsey that he's given to Brunell.

By the way I haven't heard anyone say it yet, but how great was Brunells decision to throw that ball on the 2 point conversion? Absolute stupidity! He had an easy score if he ran it in, there was one guy with a blocker on him he would have waltzed in, or he could have waited for Patten to clear, instead he makes a hurried throw with no one around him, you never throw the ball in a situation like that if the opportunity to run it in presents itself.

Bottom line regardless of Brunells success it was a stupid deal in the fact we could have obtained him for a lot less money, and no draft picks. so yes it was a stupid deal, especially for a coach who has proven he doesn't need a big name QB to win.

Are we judging Brunell off of 1 game? A game that he lost, which regardless of the circumstances he could have won all by himself late in the game.

I really like what I have been seeing lately from Brunell, but I think it's more of Gibbs starting to come around than anything, which is the biggest plus we can all take solice in.

Re: Who's Better?
 

So Brunell gets no credit here, it's all on Gibbs? That's a convenient copout.

As for the pass to Patten, he was wide open and the defender got his hand up and made a play. It's debateable as to whether he could have ran it in, he had a defender right in front of him and Royal was in no position to block him if Brunell took off for the endzone. Besides, I'm not going to overlook everything else he did in that game and boil his performance down to one tipped pass.

As I pointed out in another thread, Brunell's contact isn't what it appears to be when you consider he's probably outta here after next year. It's basically a 3 year, $10M deal.

Re: Who's Better?
 

Royal actually slipped when he was running his route, which explains why Ian Gold LUCKLILY got his hand on that pass. If Royal wouldn't have slipped on his route....that passing lane would've been wide open.

But then again, Offiss is always right so it doesn't matter.

Re: Who's Better?
 

Holy shit offiss is more off the mark then me trying to piss in the dark while doing jumping jacks. i will make a video if you guys want proof ;)


all kidding aside, portis is pretty damn good, its just
that when you run in max protect, the defence has 9 players in the box and you cant break long runs.

btw, portis had a long run called back for holding and he should've had a running TD but a cornerback tripped up samuels... A CORNERBACK!!!

Re: Who's Better?
 

Tatum Bell isn't half the total package that Portis is. Portis is a pure runner that can block and catch. Bell is a basically scatback that can't run without a hole, that was lucky enough to be drafted by Denver. Not to take anything away from his ability, but Washington always has more trouble with shifty backs than they do with hard runners.

Re: Who's Better?
 

Identity Theft is something we all need to be careful about. Someone's been using your username Offiss.

[url]http://www.thewarpath.net/showpost.php?p=106191&postcount=72[/url]

(no mention of Gibbs there, just how awful Brunell is)

[url]http://www.thewarpath.net/showpost.php?p=108209&postcount=18[/url]

"This garbage that all of sudden Brunell is a big time QB again is just that garbage, in almost 2 games he's had exactly 4 minutes of good QB play, in fact you can probably encorperate last season and find that after last years Dallas game he's had exactly 4 minutes of good QB play period."

[url]http://www.thewarpath.net/showpost.php?p=108694&postcount=98[/url]

"Anyone who wants to put there faith in Brunells miracle 4 minutes can, good luck if you think that will happen again, the real Brunell showed up for 56 minutes, and couldn't have recieved more luck in the final 4 minutes if he paid off the defense himself."

[url]http://www.thewarpath.net/showpost.php?p=97071&postcount=5[/url]

"I would like to take this time to reapologize to Brunell, YOU STILL STINK!"

Too lazy to look for other examples. I know you haven't been thrilled with Gibbs' playcalling and his use (or lack thereof) of Ramsey, the kid with the 200 IQ. But you have laid the blame on Brunell's feet many times. Basically saying that he's washed-up and could no longer be an effective starter.

But really, it's ok to admit you're wrong. You've been wrong before, [URL=http://www.thewarpath.net/showpost.php?p=13338&postcount=1]for example[/URL] As have I. I thought Ohalete was going to be a fixture on this team for many years and Bowen would be gone. Guess what. I was wrong. See, it's really not that hard to say. I don't come with "I've always maintained..." or "The problem wasn't Ohalete" or "What had happened was..." No, just "I was wrong"

You've been right before and you've been wrong before. And I will bet that in the future you'll be right some more times and you'll be wrong. It wouldn't hurt to just admit it once in a while

Re: Who's Better?
 

[QUOTE=TAFKAS]Identity Theft is something we all need to be careful about. Someone's been using your username Offiss.

[url="http://www.thewarpath.net/showpost.php?p=106191&postcount=72"]http://www.thewarpath.net/showpost.php?p=106191&postcount=72[/url]

(no mention of Gibbs there, just how awful Brunell is)

[url="http://www.thewarpath.net/showpost.php?p=108209&postcount=18"]http://www.thewarpath.net/showpost.php?p=108209&postcount=18[/url]

"This garbage that all of sudden Brunell is a big time QB again is just that garbage, in almost 2 games he's had exactly 4 minutes of good QB play, in fact you can probably encorperate last season and find that after last years Dallas game he's had exactly 4 minutes of good QB play period."

[url="http://www.thewarpath.net/showpost.php?p=108694&postcount=98"]http://www.thewarpath.net/showpost.php?p=108694&postcount=98[/url]

"Anyone who wants to put there faith in Brunells miracle 4 minutes can, good luck if you think that will happen again, the real Brunell showed up for 56 minutes, and couldn't have recieved more luck in the final 4 minutes if he paid off the defense himself."

[url="http://www.thewarpath.net/showpost.php?p=97071&postcount=5"]http://www.thewarpath.net/showpost.php?p=97071&postcount=5[/url]

"I would like to take this time to reapologize to Brunell, YOU STILL STINK!"

Too lazy to look for other examples. I know you haven't been thrilled with Gibbs' playcalling and his use (or lack thereof) of Ramsey, the kid with the 200 IQ. But you have laid the blame on Brunell's feet many times. Basically saying that he's washed-up and could no longer be an effective starter.

But really, it's ok to admit you're wrong. You've been wrong before, [url="http://www.thewarpath.net/showpost.php?p=13338&postcount=1"]for example[/url] As have I. I thought Ohalete was going to be a fixture on this team for many years and Bowen would be gone. Guess what. I was wrong. See, it's really not that hard to say. I don't come with "I've always maintained..." or "The problem wasn't Ohalete" or "What had happened was..." No, just "I was wrong"

You've been right before and you've been wrong before. And I will bet that in the future you'll be right some more times and you'll be wrong. It wouldn't hurt to just admit it once in a while[/QUOTE]

pwned

Re: Who's Better?
 

Damn TAFKAS you are so l33t.

Re: Who's Better?
 

[QUOTE=TheMalcolmConnection]Damn TAFKAS you are so l33t.[/QUOTE]

:confused: um....thanks? Jeez, just when I was figuring out what "pwned" meant you crazy 80s born kids, come up with more crazy lingo.

Re: Who's Better?
 

brunell could NOT have run it in, he was over 6 yards out an at least 2 faster LBs would have had a very good (unblocked) shot at knocking him out. I must have watched that replay about 10 times now.

and seriously, comparsions between a 4800yrd runner and a sub-700 yard runner after one good game is crazy... I mean, portis was gimped on the first play, couldn't rush to the outside (his strength) and had a 25+ yarder called back an still got 103 rushing and ~ 30 catching while throwing vicious blocks on linebackers.

Portis is a better leader, and blocker than bell for sure, and if he's a system back, how come he got 1300 last year and is on pace 1464 this year? (his "system back" counterpart is on pace for under 1200).

His contract is hefty, but bailey's is even worse, and i'm not sure there were any better offers on the table.

Re: Who's Better?
 

excuse me: correction that would most correctly be 133"7" not 133t

Re: Who's Better?
 

[QUOTE=BigSKINBauer]excuse me: correction that would most correctly be 133"7" not 133t[/QUOTE]
l33t is perfectly acceptable.

Re: Who's Better?
 

[QUOTE=That Guy]l33t is perfectly acceptable.[/QUOTE]
I will brush up then but all i know is that

Portis is 1337/t"ER" than bell

Re: Who's Better?
 

I'm with Tafkas, I just figured out pwned, now what's this l33t??

Internet slang, I just can't keep up with you crazy kids! LOL

Re: Who's Better?
 

[QUOTE=That Guy]brunell could NOT have run it in, he was over 6 yards out an at least 2 faster LBs would have had a very good (unblocked) shot at knocking him out. I must have watched that replay about 10 times now.

and seriously, comparsions between a 4800yrd runner and a sub-700 yard runner after one good game is crazy... I mean, portis was gimped on the first play, couldn't rush to the outside (his strength) and had a 25+ yarder called back an still got 103 rushing and ~ 30 catching while throwing vicious blocks on linebackers.

Portis is a better leader, and blocker than bell for sure, and if he's a system back, how come he got 1300 last year and is on pace 1464 this year? (his "system back" counterpart is on pace for under 1200).

His contract is hefty, but bailey's is even worse, and i'm not sure there were any better offers on the table.[/QUOTE]


Exactly right Guy! Comparing the two is insane - and follows on the coat tails of what the media is going to say. i.e..... Len Pastabelly! So, I suppose that's good company, huh??! :vomit-smi

Re: Who's Better?
 

portis.

Re: Who's Better?
 

Wolfeskins, the signature is amusing but it's gotta go my man.

Re: Who's Better?
 

there are laws against those kind of signatures

Re: Who's Better?
 

[QUOTE=Southpaw]Tatum Bell isn't half the total package that Portis is. Portis is a pure runner that can block and catch. Bell is a basically scatback that can't run without a hole, that was lucky enough to be drafted by Denver. Not to take anything away from his ability, but Washington always has more trouble with shifty backs than they do with hard runners.[/QUOTE]

After reviewing the highlights of the game on Extremeskins I am convinced that we got more from Portis than we expected . I saw Portis knock Al Wilson on his ass on several play action passes. I also saw Portis run,catch and run some more. Aside from his efforts to get in the endzone, he has stepped up as a leader of this team. He was dejected after the loss because he knew the fumble was a key play that turned into points. I'm sticking with Clinton for the long haul.

Re: Who's better, Clinton Portis or Tatum Bell?
 

Bell hasn't been a factor in 20 of the 21 games that the Broncos have played since he was drafted. It's a tad early to try to compare Bell to Portis. Denver's "system" does make backs look better than they really are, but Portis is the real deal.

Re: Who's better, Clinton Portis or Tatum Bell?
 

I'm amazed that this lunacy was even entertained for 3 pages.. Let it end now.

Re: Who's better, Clinton Portis or Tatum Bell?
 

you guys don't know what the 1337 language is? awe, you oldsters. 1337 is the language of speaking over the internet replacing letters with numbers and symbols. it's like the cool language of the kids who spend a lot of time on the internet. you have your normal users that post in english, then you have your "cool" group who likes to talk in numbers and symbols, yet it looks like actual letters.

Re: Who's better, Clinton Portis or Tatum Bell?
 

Is this it?

[url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leet[/url]

Re: Who's better, Clinton Portis or Tatum Bell?
 

yeah it is.that pretty much sums it up. i don't speak it, cuz for me its' kinda confusing, and it wastes too much time trying to translate.

Re: Who's better, Clinton Portis or Tatum Bell?
 

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]Is this it?

[url="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leet"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leet[/url][/QUOTE]

Yes that would be it. i prefer 1337 over 133t because if your are gonna spell it out then why not just elite. I don't know if or when i have ever used it but i am gonna use it now

I'm 1337 BITCH

Re: Who's better, Clinton Portis or Tatum Bell?
 

[QUOTE=offiss]Portis, or Bell?

Well if we evaluate this move based on the last game it's a no brainer, it's Bell. Yes the player that was drafted with #2 pick we sent to Denver along with Bailey for Portis. I would include the fact that Bell is probably making somewhere around 8 million, compared to Portis's 50 mil, but I don't think that's really neccassary.

I will say it, system back, I TOLD YOU SO!

Looks like Shanahan knew what he was doing after all.[/QUOTE]

It is nothing short of asinine to say that Tatum Bell is better than Clinton Portis based on one isolated game. I expect better from you, offiss.

Re: Who's better, Clinton Portis or Tatum Bell?
 

Timmy Smith. If one game means everything.

Re: Who's better, Clinton Portis or Tatum Bell?
 

[IMG]http://www.tshirthell.com/shirts/products/a401/a401.gif[/IMG]

Re: Who's better, Clinton Portis or Tatum Bell?
 

That's too easy, either that or I've absorbed this nerdy 1337 stuff way too quickly LOL

Re: Who's better, Clinton Portis or Tatum Bell?
 

lol yeah that was pretty easy, try harder next time.