Warpath  

Home | Forums | Salary Cap Info | Shop | Donate | Stay Connected




Go Back   Warpath > Redskins Forums > Redskins Locker Room


Clinton Portis over Ladell Betts is a no brainer

Redskins Locker Room


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 12-24-2006, 10:50 PM   #1
Impact Rookie
 
tdSKINS1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Altavista Virginia
Age: 24
Posts: 711
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.
__________________
#21 Never Forget
HOKIES!
tdSKINS1 is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 12-24-2006, 11:00 PM   #2
Camp Scrub
 
The Huddle's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Arrington, Va.
Posts: 99
Re: Portis over Betts no brainer

I love what Betts is doing, and there may 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.
The Huddle is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-24-2006, 11:09 PM   #3
MVP
 
dmek25's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: lancaster,pa
Age: 52
Posts: 10,504
Re: Portis over Betts no brainer

betts is a quality back up that has some fumbling issues
__________________
"It's better to be quiet and thought a fool than to open ones mouth and remove all doubt."
courtesy of 53fan
dmek25 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-24-2006, 11:26 PM   #4
The Starter
 
dgack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The ATX (formerly Balmer)
Posts: 1,125
Re: Portis over Betts no brainer

Quote:
Originally Posted by dmek25 View Post
betts is a quality back up that has some fumbling issues
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.
dgack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-24-2006, 11:38 PM   #5
Impact Rookie
 
Redskin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: University of South Carolina
Age: 25
Posts: 577
Re: Portis over Betts no brainer

Quote:
Originally Posted by dgack View Post
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.

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.
__________________
University Of South Carolina '11
Go Cocks and Go Skins
#21#RIP Sean Taylor a TRUE Redskin#21#
<--Hey wheres my green approval rating?
Redskin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-24-2006, 11:50 PM   #6
The Starter
 
dgack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The ATX (formerly Balmer)
Posts: 1,125
Re: Portis over Betts no brainer

Quote:
Originally Posted by Redskin View Post
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.
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.
dgack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-24-2006, 11:58 PM   #7
Impact Rookie
 
Redskin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: University of South Carolina
Age: 25
Posts: 577
Re: Portis over Betts no brainer

Quote:
Originally Posted by dgack View Post
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.
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
__________________
University Of South Carolina '11
Go Cocks and Go Skins
#21#RIP Sean Taylor a TRUE Redskin#21#
<--Hey wheres my green approval rating?
Redskin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2006, 12:15 AM   #8
Eternally Legendary
 
saden1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Seattle
Age: 34
Posts: 9,841
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.
__________________
"The Redskins have always suffered from chronic organizational deformities under Snyder."

-Jenkins
saden1 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2006, 12:19 AM   #9
The Starter
 
dgack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The ATX (formerly Balmer)
Posts: 1,125
Re: Portis over Betts no brainer

Quote:
Originally Posted by Redskin View Post
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
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...
dgack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2006, 12:21 AM   #10
The Starter
 
dgack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The ATX (formerly Balmer)
Posts: 1,125
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.
dgack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2006, 12:58 AM   #11
Playmaker
 
djnemo65's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: MA
Age: 33
Posts: 2,836
Re: Portis over Betts no brainer

I'm just glad that Portis over Betts isn't a choice that we are required to make.
djnemo65 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2006, 01:34 AM   #12
Special Teams
 
CanadianSkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Age: 37
Posts: 222
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.
__________________
HTTR from North of the 49th!!!!!

Two things I love.... Canada and the Redskins!!!!
CanadianSkin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2006, 02:04 AM   #13
Registered User
 
Pocket$ $traight's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Fairfax, VA
Age: 37
Posts: 4,261
Re: Portis over Betts no brainer

Quote:
Originally Posted by dgack View Post
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.
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!!!!!
Pocket$ $traight is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2006, 02:40 AM   #14
The Starter
 
dgack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The ATX (formerly Balmer)
Posts: 1,125
Re: Portis over Betts no brainer

Quote:
Originally Posted by Grim21Reaper View Post
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!!!!!
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?
dgack is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 12-25-2006, 02:49 AM   #15
The Starter
 
dgack's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The ATX (formerly Balmer)
Posts: 1,125
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.
dgack is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:29 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site is not officially affiliated with the Washington Redskins or the NFL.
Page generated in 0.36849 seconds with 9 queries

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25