Interesting tidbit about our running game

Mattyk · 11-28-2005, 09:00 AM

I'm really tired of talking about Portis and "the trade".

What's done is done, Portis is our RB and we need to make the best of things.

Personally I like CP and what he brings to the table. I think as the offense continues to evolve the coaches will find ways to use him best and CP will continue to adjust to the system. He's taken some steps forward this year in running the counter and has shown much more patience over last year. He plays through injuries, he blocks and he can catch out of the backfield. I think in a lot of ways he's really underappreciated around here.

We can't go back and change the trade, what's done is done.

Sheriff Gonna Getcha · 11-28-2005, 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

I don't think any rational person will try to argue that we are seeing everything we hoped for from Clinton Portis. My argument to this is that Portis was supposed to be the running back that transformed our offense into levels like those of the Colts or Seahawks. He was supposed to get past 7 and 8 man fronts, and make defenses pay by opening up the passing game. Right now, our opponents have no reason to respect the threat Portis poses.

With all due respect, no rational person should have expected Portis to turn our offense into the Colts or Seahawks. That is unless you expected Portis to use his magic wand to turn Chris Samuels into Walter Jones, Mark Brunell into Peyton Manning, etc.

Not to sound like a real jerk, but apparently you haven't been paying attention to what guys like Antonio Pierce are saying or where opposing defenses are lining up. Pierce said after the Giants' blowout, "We knew that if we stopped Portis, we would stop their offense. So we did everything to shut him down." Moreover, opposing defenses are stacking the box with more than 7 guys on 90% of downs.

irish · 11-28-2005, 12:11 PM

I said a few weeks ago that CP was not what the team was looking for in a RB (due to his lack of explosiveness) and was ripped by almost everyone on this site because as I was told, CP is a great team player and blocker (he is but thats not why the skins got him). Yesterday's game proves again CP is a decent back but not the explosive threat the skins hoped he'd be when they acquired him. On top of that CP is not a money back and will not get that 1 or 2 yards when the chips are down. I dont think the skins would take CP if they had to do it all over again but like Matty said, its too late now.

TheMalcolmConnection · 11-28-2005, 12:57 PM

It's hard to prove a whole lot against the NFL's #1 run defense.

Beemnseven · 11-28-2005, 12:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ramseyfan

With all due respect, no rational person should have expected Portis to turn our offense into the Colts or Seahawks. That is unless you expected Portis to use his magic wand to turn Chris Samuels into Walter Jones, Mark Brunell into Peyton Manning, etc.

Not to sound like a real jerk, but apparently you haven't been paying attention to what guys like Antonio Pierce are saying or where opposing defenses are lining up. Pierce said after the Giants' blowout, "We knew that if we stopped Portis, we would stop their offense. So we did everything to shut him down." Moreover, opposing defenses are stacking the box with more than 7 guys on 90% of downs.

Yeah, you're right, I never should have expected Clinton Portis to take us to the next level. What was I thinking?

Sheriff Gonna Getcha · 11-28-2005, 01:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

Yeah, you're right, I never should have expected Clinton Portis to take us to the next level. What was I thinking?

Portis was supposed to boost our offense. It is impossible to know what our current offense would look like without Portis (as he's in it).

All I was saying that it is unrealistic to expect Portis to take this team from what it was like in 2003 to a stellar Indy or Seattle-type offense. But, I guess unrealistic expectations are to be expected here in D.C.

Southpaw · 11-28-2005, 01:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

Yeah, you're right, I never should have expected Clinton Portis to take us to the next level. What was I thinking?

Talk about misplaced expectations. Here I thought the missing piece for the past several years has been a decent quarterback, or even a steady and reliable coaching staff, but apparently Clinton Portis was supposed to strap the entire team on his back and carry them to the promised land.

Beemnseven · 11-28-2005, 01:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ramseyfan

Portis was supposed to boost our offense. It is impossible to know what our current offense would look like without Portis (as he's in it).

All I was saying that it is unrealistic to expect Portis to take this team from what it was like in 2003 to a stellar Indy or Seattle-type offense. But, I guess unrealistic expectations are to be expected here in D.C.

Unrealistic expectations? By the latter half of his second season, this should be about the time that this offense takes its shape and starts guiding this team to wins. By this time, I don’t think it’s unrealistic with an improved offensive line for Portis to gouge out the tough yardage, to pound teams into submission, to protect fourth quarter leads, and put teams away.

But if you never expected that Ramseyfan, or thought that such scenarios were unrealistic, it follows that everything’s just peachy with your analysis of Portis. After a 6-10 season, and now, losers of 3 straight and falling in 6 of their last 8 performances, sorry if I don’t share your optimism.

Sheriff Gonna Getcha · 11-28-2005, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

Unrealistic expectations? By the latter half of his second season, this should be about the time that this offense takes its shape and starts guiding this team to wins. By this time, I don’t think it’s unrealistic with an improved offensive line for Portis to gouge out the tough yardage, to pound teams into submission, to protect fourth quarter leads, and put teams away.

But if you never expected that Ramseyfan, or thought that such scenarios were unrealistic, it follows that everything’s just peachy with your analysis of Portis. After a 6-10 season, and now, losers of 3 straight and falling in 6 of their last 8 performances, sorry if I don’t share your optimism.

I think we did have a right to expect an improved offense. And, our our offense has improved over the last few years (as hard as that might be to believe), just not to the extent that we would like. Do you disagree?

My point was that you can't place all the blame for our offensive woes on Portis. I interpreted your previous posts as saying that Portis was supposed to revolutionize the offense and turn it into a Indy or Seattle type offense. I just don't believe that was a realistic expectation. There are 11 guys on the field on offense and Portis is just one of them.

Beemnseven · 11-28-2005, 01:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Southpaw

Talk about misplaced expectations. Here I thought the missing piece for the past several years has been a decent quarterback, or even a steady and reliable coaching staff, but apparently Clinton Portis was supposed to strap the entire team on his back and carry them to the promised land.

I'm not saying that Portis was supposed to do everything all by himself. I'm saying I've been less than impressed with his performance so far. But since you mentioned it, up until the last couple of weeks, we have had decent quarterback play, an experienced coaching staff that appears to be firmly entrenched, and we're now below the .500 mark, staring from the outside looking in yet again. Portis was supposed to help us get to the Promised Land. From what I've seen, he hasn't.

Sheriff Gonna Getcha · 11-28-2005, 01:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

My argument to this is that Portis was supposed to be the running back that transformed our offense into levels like those of the Colts or Seahawks.

I firmly believe that when the history books are written, the Portis trade will rank just below the Herschel Walker and Scott Mitchell moves in terms of one team getting a raw deal.

I think these are the two statements that I have the biggest problem with Beems. Portis was supposed to transform our offense into the Colts of Seahawks. Not to be a smart ass (sorry), but Portis can't wave a wand and turn Brunell into Manning or Samuels into Jones etc.

You actually believe the Portis-Bailey (2nd pick) deal is going to go down like the Walker-Mitchell trade. I think that's just a little bit of an overstatement and that is precisely the problem that I am having lately. I think people are overreacting to our recent losses (as disastrous as they are) and using hyperbole and exaggeration at every turn.

RedskinNation21 · 11-28-2005, 01:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

Portis' 87 yards against San Diego = LOSS

Portis' 103 yards against Denver = LOSS

Portis' 121 yards against Chicago = WIN (just barely a win, and look at the respective teams now)

Portis' 144 yards against Tampa Bay = LOSS

Ask yourself this: Knowing what you know now, would you have continued with the trade for Clinton Portis?

I really hope you dont think Champ Bailey is worth a damn. Denver got a better deal b/c of tatum bell. Champ isnt even top ten cb in the league. His ints this year was only because the qb threw it right to him.

Beemnseven · 11-28-2005, 01:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ramseyfan

I think we did have a right to expect an improved offense. And, our our offense has improved over the last few years (as hard as that might be to believe), just not to the extent that we would like. Do you disagree?

No, certainly the offense has improved, at least in the passing aspects. But now, we’re getting back to our 2004 ways. Teams are doubling Santana Moss, and the running game is not picking up the slack. In fact, it hasn’t even accomplished basic tasks that every quality team should expect – running out the clock, getting first downs near the end of the game to protect leads, giving your defense a chance to rest. None of this has happened when we needed it most. I just don’t think it’s too much to ask someone of his notoriety, considering what we parted with to bring him in here to accomplish those objectives. And I think it’s perfectly fair to criticize both he and the offensive line when they fail to do the things that could have prevented this current three-game slide.

No, it’s not all Clinton Portis’ fault. But judging from what I’ve seen so far, I think the trade was a raw deal, I think he was not worth the money, the cap implications, the excitement, and the second round pick to get him. I’m just not impressed.

irish · 11-28-2005, 01:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RedskinNation21

I really hope you dont think Champ Bailey is worth a damn. Denver got a better deal b/c of tatum bell. Champ isnt even top ten cb in the league. His ints this year was only because the qb threw it right to him.

The real killer on this deal is the draft pick. Denver has the skins 1st rounder this year. That would have been nice to have that pick and maybe boost the D line. The skins will never be able to build for the future giving away draft picks like they do.

Beemnseven · 11-28-2005, 02:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ramseyfan

I think these are the two statements that I have the biggest problem with Beems. Portis was supposed to transform our offense into the Colts of Seahawks. Not to be a smart ass (sorry), but Portis can't wave a wand and turn Brunell into Manning or Samuels into Jones etc.

If I implied that Clinton Portis is capable of genetic cloning, or applying a little “hocus-pocus” to give us Walter Jones and Peyton Manning, then I apologize for the confusion. I expected Portis to help lead this offense to levels among the Colts and Seahawks. If I’m guilty of great expectations, so be it. Ask the players if they expect to be the best every week. According to what I’ve read from your posts, you’d be surprised at their own expectations. Yes, I expect our team to be the best, and I want this team to win. I’m a fan! What do you expect of me? To be happy at 6-10 or 5-6? I don’t expect to blow fourth quarter leads for three games in a row with the personnel and the coaching staff this team has acquired. Clinton Portis is a part of this team that for three games in a row has not been able to secure the win when called upon to do it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ramseyfan

You actually believe the Portis-Bailey (2nd pick) deal is going to go down like the Walker-Mitchell trade. I think that's just a little bit of an overstatement and that is precisely the problem that I am having lately. I think people are overreacting to our recent losses (as disastrous as they are) and using hyperbole and exaggeration at every turn.

I’ve been saying that the Skins got a raw deal from the beginning, not just since this slump. Since there aren’t big trades in the NFL anymore, deductive reasoning tells me that this one, as of right now, could stand right with them.

11-28-2005, 09:00 AM	#16
Mattyk ‎\m/ Join Date: Feb 2004 Age: 40 Posts: 72,739	Re: Interesting tidbit about our running game I'm really tired of talking about Portis and "the trade". What's done is done, Portis is our RB and we need to make the best of things. Personally I like CP and what he brings to the table. I think as the offense continues to evolve the coaches will find ways to use him best and CP will continue to adjust to the system. He's taken some steps forward this year in running the counter and has shown much more patience over last year. He plays through injuries, he blocks and he can catch out of the backfield. I think in a lot of ways he's really underappreciated around here. We can't go back and change the trade, what's done is done.

11-28-2005, 12:11 PM	#18
irish Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Posts: 3,328	Re: Interesting tidbit about our running game I said a few weeks ago that CP was not what the team was looking for in a RB (due to his lack of explosiveness) and was ripped by almost everyone on this site because as I was told, CP is a great team player and blocker (he is but thats not why the skins got him). Yesterday's game proves again CP is a decent back but not the explosive threat the skins hoped he'd be when they acquired him. On top of that CP is not a money back and will not get that 1 or 2 yards when the chips are down. I dont think the skins would take CP if they had to do it all over again but like Matty said, its too late now.

11-28-2005, 12:57 PM	#19
TheMalcolmConnection I like big (_\|_)s. Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Lexington, Virginia Age: 31 Posts: 17,120	Re: Interesting tidbit about our running game It's hard to prove a whole lot against the NFL's #1 run defense. __________________ Regret nothing. At one time it was exactly what you wanted.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Interesting tidbit about our running game

Redskins Locker Room