Will Portis be ready to go?

[dgack]

Originally Posted by Southpaw

Why do these ridiculous comments still come out of peoples mouths? Obviously Gibbs thought Portis was suited for his power offense, considering what he gave up to get him. And he's a much better player that even I assumed if he's able to break the Redskins all time rushing record, running in a system that's not tailored for him.

Portis will be back healthy and productive next year. And people might want to slow down with the Betts lovefest, because there's a good chance he won't be here.

What's ridiculous about the very provable fact that RB's who take too many carries wear down quicker? Is there really a counter-argument to the notion that smaller backs who take a lot of physical punishment are prone to injury and decline faster?

I *love* CP and don't regret the Champ deal one bit, but it's a pretty well established fact that as seasonal carries exceed 300, RB's start to really do lasting damage to their bodies. Add to that the pretty common-sense idea that taking lots of punishment is more likely to hurt a guy than running out of bounds (what, you thought Emmitt played for 75 years because he ate right in the offseason?), and it's a no-brainer.

Just look at 2005's top RB's by rushes:

1. S Alexander 370
2. E James 360
3. T Barber 357
4. C Portis 352
5. L Tomlinson 339

Who's still in great health and running at the top of their game? Just the guy at #5 who makes guys miss and avoids contact.

The NFL stats are littered with backs who were run too hard and simply broke down the next year or two as a result. The most prolific and steady runners are the ones whose rushes stayed around 300 rushes per season, OR in the case of inside, "pound-em" runners like Bettis, a lot fewer carries per season and an extended career. But I can't think of too many backs who survive very long taking 340 - 350 carries a year, year after year, especially in a power running offense.