Portis and Betts: Should We Just Stick With Portis?

[12thMan]

I love the idea of having both Portis and Betts as a running back tandem. But it seems like before Portis can find his groove, we take him out for a spell and insert Ladell. I'm starting to wonder if the tag combo is more of disadvantage to a running back like Portis, who get's stronger as the game wears on.

I'd like to see Portis flat out get 25 carries per game. I think we'd get more production out of him. But that's why I'm not coaching the Skins, I guess.

[MTK]

I think it just depends on the game situations. Portis has been close to breaking out for a big game, but I don't think we'll see him getting 25+ carries a game anytime soon. I like that we can keep him fresh by getting Betts and even Sellers some meaningful carries.

[GTripp0012]

Getting stronger as the game goes on is a total myth. Makes no logical sense whatsoever.

Going into this year, Portis and Betts had similar career numbers. To date, it's clear that Portis is having the better season. So should he see more carries than Betts? Of course. But having an injured running back get 25 carries a game sounds like a bad idea.

I would throw more if our running game is going to get stuffed as much as it is.

[skinsfan_nn]

IMO if CP is healthy I would like to see him get 25+ carries per game, he is our #1 back. The more carries he gets, he gets into a nice groove.

With that said, lets stop fumbling the damn ball!

[MTK]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Getting stronger as the game goes on is a total myth. Makes no logical sense whatsoever.

Going into this year, Portis and Betts had similar career numbers. To date, it's clear that Portis is having the better season. So should he see more carries than Betts? Of course. But having an injured running back get 25 carries a game sounds like a bad idea.

I would throw more if our running game is going to get stuffed as much as it is.

Some backs do put up better numbers as the game wears on. Whether it's due to them getting in the groove or just taking them a while to get warmed up, I definitely think some backs just play better as the game wears on.

[Southpaw]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Going into this year, Portis and Betts had similar career numbers.

I guess if you're refering strictly to YPC, they have similar numbers, but Betts did it consistently, one time for half a season. With his production this season, last season is looking like a fluke. And he still can't find the endzone.

And I'm not sure how I feel about splitting carries. On one hand, it'll keep Portis fresh, which does seem to benefit him, but on the other hand, he's out of the game on some plays where his unique skills would be useful. It seems to be working for the moment, so I'll just go with the flow for now.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Some backs do put up better numbers as the game wears on. Whether it's due to them getting in the groove or just taking them a while to get warmed up, I definitely think some backs just play better as the game wears on.

Consistently though? I think some opponents may allow more YPC on the ground later than others, but I can't think of any backs who were definately better late than early.

A good back is a good back. Unless conditioning is an issue (which it never seems to be), I can't think of any explination for a runner actually being harder to tackle later in the game.

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Getting stronger as the game goes on is a total myth. Makes no logical sense whatsoever.

Going into this year, Portis and Betts had similar career numbers. To date, it's clear that Portis is having the better season. So should he see more carries than Betts? Of course. But having an injured running back get 25 carries a game sounds like a bad idea.

I would throw more if our running game is going to get stuffed as much as it is.

I wasn't speaking in literal physical terms. Stronger in football terms, meaning more effective and, yes, punishing tacklers along the way. So in that way, I absolutely think "stronger" has some merrit. But that's not my argument.

I would like to see Portis have a better shot at going over the century mark a little more often. That's my only point. I think he's a better back when he gets in the 95yd - 120yd range. And while splitting carries does indeed keep him fresh, I think it would be nice to see a break out game from him a few times this year.

[redsk1]

As mentioned before i think health concerns have a lot to do w/ it. In 2005 we ran portis to death. He can handle it when 100%. Its a long season and we have 2 great backs.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

I would like to see Portis have a better shot at going over the century mark a little more often. That's my only point. I think he's a better back when he gets in the 95yd - 120yd range. And while splitting carries does indeed keep him fresh, I think it would be nice to see a break out game from him a few times this year.

Isn't that backwards though? Is it worth it to run Portis 30 times to get to 100 yards when that is not our best offensive play.

If we can average 7 yards a play every time Campbell throws, and Portis averages between 3.5 and 4 yards a carry, should we really be running the ball more?

I guess it would be nice to see a breakout game from Portis, but not at the expense of total yards, points, or Portis' health.

I like him getting around 15-20 carries a week. Who cares how many 100 yard games he gets? Its an arbitrary number, just like 87 yard games.

[dmek25]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Getting stronger as the game goes on is a total myth. Makes no logical sense whatsoever.

Going into this year, Portis and Betts had similar career numbers. To date, it's clear that Portis is having the better season. So should he see more carries than Betts? Of course. But having an injured running back get 25 carries a game sounds like a bad idea.

I would throw more if our running game is going to get stuffed as much as it is.

what? Betts is as best a career back up. i totally agree with getting Portis the bulk of the carries. he has proven in his career that he can find the end zone. it does seem that when he starts getting into a groove, Betts comes in for him

[12thMan]

Originally Posted by GTripp0012

Isn't that backwards though? Is it worth it to run Portis 30 times to get to 100 yards when that is not our best offensive play.

If we can average 7 yards a play every time Campbell throws, and Portis averages between 3.5 and 4 yards a carry, should we really be running the ball more?

I guess it would be nice to see a breakout game from Portis, but not at the expense of total yards, points, or Portis' health.

I like him getting around 15-20 carries a week. Who cares how many 100 yard games he gets? Its an arbitrary number, just like 87 yard games.

What's backwards about that? More carries equal more yards; In a perfect world that is.

The crux of my argument is very simple, I simply think Clinton Portis is a home run type back. And the more touches he get's, the more likely we are to see to that.

I'm not arguing the merits of health, yards per pass, yard per offensive play, keeping him fresh, or anything else for that matter. I think the coaches are doing a fine job inter-changing both backs, by the way, and bringing JC along at the same time.

I think the more Portis carries the ball, the more likely we are to see that home run threat we're used to seeing and want to see.

[BleedBurgundy]

The only reason we average 7 yards per pass attempt (assuming that's true, i didn't verify...), is because every D that plays us is focused on stopping the run. If we through all of the time, you'd see our ypc go up and our yppa go down.

[Redskin Rich]

Originally Posted by dmek25

what? Betts is as best a career back up. i totally agree with getting Portis the bulk of the carries. he has proven in his career that he can find the end zone. it does seem that when he starts getting into a groove, Betts comes in for him

OK... I got a little inside scoop recently... a pretty good source..... I heard Portis is the one who usually takes himself out of the game.... that to me shows a lack of heart.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by 12thMan

What's backwards about that? More carries equal more yards; In a perfect world that is.

The crux of my argument is very simple, I simply think Clinton Portis is a home run type back. And the more touches he get's, the more likely we are to see to that.

I'm not arguing the merits of health, yards per pass, yard per offensive play, keeping him fresh, or anything else for that matter. I think the coaches are doing a fine job inter-changing both backs, by the way, and bringing JC along at the same time.

I think the more Portis carries the ball, the more likely we are to see that home run threat we're used to seeing and want to see.

But the goal isn't to get more yards for your RB? It's to get more total yards. If CPs aver per carry is low, aren't we hurting the team by giving him extra carries?

I think what you are getting at is that should we run enough with Portis, he may be able to break the big play. Or the "home-run" threat as you put it. This is accurate, but still it seems a little backwards to me. If Portis isn't producing big plays with 20 carries a game, why should we try to add another 5-10 carries? Sure, Portis gets more chances, but is that a good idea?

Actually, I kinda see what you and Matty are saying now, its all about giving him more shots to break the big one. That's fine, but I think the same concept should go for any player on our offense. If creating big plays is the goal, I think the best way to do that is to get the ball in space to Moss, Randle El, or Cooley.

Ok, so yeah, my misunderstanding, I apologize. I still disagree that its the best way to go about it, but it makes sense. More carries equals more shots to go for a long one. Of course he has the same shot of breaking the first one long as he does the 27th. So at some point, I think you just have to cut yourself off and start going with plays that will net more yardage.

If Portis was averaging 5.0 yards an attempt, this would be different. Because he gets stuffed so much due to some poor blocking, its a bad idea to try to pound the square Portis into a round hole until a big play happens.

But it's not the worst possible idea. That would be trying to throw it down the field over and over again until you punt or get intercepted.