Updated Title: Will Portis Shine Again in a West Coast Offense?

[smoot27]

Now i know i made some dumb posts. But i think i have to really start thinking what i'm doing. Any ways i really believe that Clinton can explode this year.

If many didn't see the interview with Clinton Portis (3 days ) before our lil match with Seattle , he said he was forced to be a Joe Gibbs RB.

"Heres the interview''.

"Who is Clinton Portis"" thats what the video is called.
NFL Video Galleries

Ever since hes been here ,he was force from being a 206-210 to a 223-225 pound RB. He didn't make alot of long runs and every year it decreased . Now i have to say their was good chances he could of made a big run but he never had the speed to do that.


But now that Gibbs is gone i herd some recent stuff that Portis is back at 210 and less. Now i don't know if thats really true but i have to say i really never belived that Portis could catch up with Laron Landry...and Landry ran on draft day ,as if it was Chad Johnson speed out their.


But after all this paragraph. Portis back to being super fast,WCO,healthy OL could =

1600 yards- 302 carriers- 14 TD
321 Catching yards-1 TD catch
Pro-bowl


FYI Jim Zorn has said that Portis will be an every down play making RB which means he'll see an avg of maybe 20 or more rushing yards.


Would love to see Portis hit alot of yards this year. Hes a caring guy and loves to be a Redskins. I think if he puts up good numbers like he has , he can probably become one of our best RB's ever or perhaps the best RB we ever had.

*BTW predict his rushing season this year*

HTTR hail to Clinton.
YouTube - Clinton Portis back when he was a stud pt 2
YouTube - Clinton Portis back when he was a stud
YouTube - Clinton Portis Welcome to Washington.
PS: YouTube - Clinton Portis - Redskins 2007

[chrisl13]

I hope he does return to form. If we have that Broncos Portis then we can be the best rushing team in the league. Portis was doing it all in Denver. And if that's true that Portis is down to 210lbs, I think he'll have that type of year. Hopefully, Zorn wants to use him as he used Alexander back in 2005 (I think).

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by chrisl13

I hope he does return to form. If we have that Broncos Portis then we can be the best rushing team in the league. Portis was doing it all in Denver. And if that's true that Portis is down to 210lbs, I think he'll have that type of year. Hopefully, Zorn wants to use him as he used Alexander back in 2005 (I think).

Well Zorn was a QB coach and did not have any say in how Alexander was used back in 2005. I also think its tough to know at this point because we have know idea what kind of plays Zorn is going to use he is still working on the play book. I heard him say he was going to keep a good bit of the running plays we allready have so I'll wait and see.

[mheisig]

[SC Skins Fan]

I think WCO gets tossed around a whole lot without any real definition as to meaning. People use the term as if it means one single thing, when it is a general offensive philosophy that numerous coaches have added to over the years. I also think the magical quality this philosophy is imbued with is overdone. Moreover, from what I can gather about the San Francisco Walsh offense at least, it was predicated predominately on man blocking rather than zone blocking with lots of cut backs. So people are making Denver stand-in for the 'WCO' when it is really the Shannahan variation on the offense. What you mean really is lots of stretch plays and cut blocking allowing the runner to find his hole and cut back if the lane is there. Does this correlate to what Seattle does (Zorn) or Tennessee (Smith)? Basically, why are we even talking about Denver's offense when that is not what the Redskins will be running? We don't really know what the offense will look like, and basically people throw around WCO without really defining (or knowing) what they mean by the term.

I also don't particularly like Paul Zimmerman, but I do like how he points out that the very term WCO is a misnomer since the term itself derives (apparently) from a quotation from Bernie Kosar that referred to the San Diego offensive tree that ran through guys like Norv Turner, Ernie Zampese, Joe Gibbs, Don Coryell, and Sid Gillman, and was only applied to Walsh through later misquotation of that story by some other writer(s). Anyway, I just like that, though 'West Coast Offense' obviously has become synonomous with the Walsh offense.

CNN/SI - Inside Game - Dr. Z - SI's Dr. Z: The real West Coast offense - Friday October 29, 1999 07:19 PM


Other useful quotations from another guy I don't love, but these points speak to my point above.

"Indeed, the West Coast offense that Walsh created has seen more spinoffs than "Happy Days," which spawned an entire subset of sitcoms. Even in a league where coaches insist there is nothing new under the sun, the West Coast scheme is arguably the most bastardized offense of the modern game, a blueprint smudged by years of alteration."

"Gruden prefers an I-formation or a one-back set to the standard split backfield that Walsh used and also relies on zone-blocking. In the classic West Coast offense, the blocking was primarily man-to-man, and the staple rushing play was the sweep."

ESPN.com: NFL - All roads lead to Walsh ... sort of

[MTK]

Originally Posted by SC Skins Fan

I think WCO gets tossed around a whole lot without any real definition as to meaning. People use the term as if it means one single thing, when it is a general offensive philosophy that numerous coaches have added to over the years. I also think the magical quality this philosophy is imbued with is overdone. Moreover, from what I can gather about the San Francisco Walsh offense at least, it was predicated predominately on man blocking rather than zone blocking with lots of cut backs. So people are making Denver stand-in for the 'WCO' when it is really the Shannahan variation on the offense. What you mean really is lots of stretch plays and cut blocking allowing the runner to find his hole and cut back if the lane is there. Does this correlate to what Seattle does (Zorn) or Tennessee (Smith)? Basically, why are we even talking about Denver's offense when that is not what the Redskins will be running? We don't really know what the offense will look like, and basically people throw around WCO without really defining (or knowing) what they mean by the term.

I also don't particularly like Paul Zimmerman, but I do like how he points out that the very term WCO is a misnomer since the term itself derives (apparently) from a quotation from Bernie Kosar that referred to the San Diego offensive tree that ran through guys like Norv Turner, Ernie Zampese, Joe Gibbs, Don Coryell, and Sid Gillman, and was only applied to Walsh through later misquotation of that story by some other writer(s). Anyway, I just like that, though 'West Coast Offense' obviously has become synonomous with the Walsh offense.

CNN/SI - Inside Game - Dr. Z - SI's Dr. Z: The real West Coast offense - Friday October 29, 1999 07:19 PM


Other useful quotations from another guy I don't love, but these points speak to my point above.

"Indeed, the West Coast offense that Walsh created has seen more spinoffs than "Happy Days," which spawned an entire subset of sitcoms. Even in a league where coaches insist there is nothing new under the sun, the West Coast scheme is arguably the most bastardized offense of the modern game, a blueprint smudged by years of alteration."

"Gruden prefers an I-formation or a one-back set to the standard split backfield that Walsh used and also relies on zone-blocking. In the classic West Coast offense, the blocking was primarily man-to-man, and the staple rushing play was the sweep."

ESPN.com: NFL - All roads lead to Walsh ... sort of

I think the basic point being raised is will Portis be used more as he was in Denver vs. the power based schemes used under Gibbs.

[freddyg12]

Originally Posted by SC Skins Fan

I think WCO gets tossed around a whole lot without any real definition as to meaning. People use the term as if it means one single thing, when it is a general offensive philosophy that numerous coaches have added to over the years. I also think the magical quality this philosophy is imbued with is overdone. Moreover, from what I can gather about the San Francisco Walsh offense at least, it was predicated predominately on man blocking rather than zone blocking with lots of cut backs. So people are making Denver stand-in for the 'WCO' when it is really the Shannahan variation on the offense. What you mean really is lots of stretch plays and cut blocking allowing the runner to find his hole and cut back if the lane is there. Does this correlate to what Seattle does (Zorn) or Tennessee (Smith)? Basically, why are we even talking about Denver's offense when that is not what the Redskins will be running? We don't really know what the offense will look like, and basically people throw around WCO without really defining (or knowing) what they mean by the term.

I also don't particularly like Paul Zimmerman, but I do like how he points out that the very term WCO is a misnomer since the term itself derives (apparently) from a quotation from Bernie Kosar that referred to the San Diego offensive tree that ran through guys like Norv Turner, Ernie Zampese, Joe Gibbs, Don Coryell, and Sid Gillman, and was only applied to Walsh through later misquotation of that story by some other writer(s). Anyway, I just like that, though 'West Coast Offense' obviously has become synonomous with the Walsh offense.

CNN/SI - Inside Game - Dr. Z - SI's Dr. Z: The real West Coast offense - Friday October 29, 1999 07:19 PM


Other useful quotations from another guy I don't love, but these points speak to my point above.

"Indeed, the West Coast offense that Walsh created has seen more spinoffs than "Happy Days," which spawned an entire subset of sitcoms. Even in a league where coaches insist there is nothing new under the sun, the West Coast scheme is arguably the most bastardized offense of the modern game, a blueprint smudged by years of alteration."

"Gruden prefers an I-formation or a one-back set to the standard split backfield that Walsh used and also relies on zone-blocking. In the classic West Coast offense, the blocking was primarily man-to-man, and the staple rushing play was the sweep."

ESPN.com: NFL - All roads lead to Walsh ... sort of

Excellent post, I agree.

[EternalEnigma21]

we'll see. Im not sure if it's his speed, or his open field elusiveness that's the issue. Maybe his weight had something to do with that, but who knows...

I think we have a shot at seeing some explosiveness this year, moreso than last, though.

[smoot27]

Originally Posted by EternalEnigma21

we'll see. Im not sure if it's his speed, or his open field elusiveness that's the issue. Maybe his weight had something to do with that, but who knows...

I think we have a shot at seeing some explosiveness this year, moreso than last, though.

He looked slower last year. But this year he shouldn't be as slow so hopefully he breaks a big long run for us this year.

[EternalEnigma21]

I've also seen him run right into tacklers, when they couldve been avoided in the secondary. a back as physical as he is should be able to break past a safety from time to time.

[SC Skins Fan]

Yeah, Portis has totally sucked ever since he came to Washington (SARCASM)

Yet another thread that makes a mockery of the tag line "Discussion for the Knowledgeable Fan"

[EternalEnigma21]

Originally Posted by SC Skins Fan

Yeah, Portis has totally sucked ever since he came to Washington (SARCASM)

Yet another thread that makes a mockery of the tag line "Discussion for the Knowledgeable Fan"

wow, im not sure anything here merited all that... thanks for your imput, though.

while i agree this isn't the "Thread of the Year", the running game in which portis thrived most was in denver, in a different scheme. I wasn't aware of the weight difference so i appreciated the read as a different take on our running game this coming year; focusing on the runner himself instead of just the change in offense.

sorry to have bothered you.

[Daseal]

I feel as if as Portis stays healthy, this scheme fits him much better. Something about the Gibbs system with portis seemed like shoving a round peg and a square hole. I love Portis, think he's a talented back. But we need to try to get him on the corner, and for christs sake -- the run game is now created with the passing game. Hopefully a WCO can help get the seemingly 32 people that were standing in the box every play to back out a bit.

[skinsfan69]

these off season threads are just too painful for me.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by skinsfan69

these off season threads are just too painful for me.

i'm with you.