![]() |
|
|||||||
| Locker Room Main Forum Commanders Football & NFL discussion |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
#31 |
|
Special Teams
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 380
|
Re: T.J. Duckett watch
Obviously, I don't have all the information the coaches have, but big picture, I'd go with TJ over Betts.
My feeling is the size and proven success in short yardage is something that fits better with Portis than having two, relatively undersized RBs. In fact, if we had Duckett on the field during the 3rd and 1 right before the 2 minute, I don't think the game goes to OT.
__________________
"Lighten up, Sandy Baby." |
|
|
|
| Advertisements |
|
|
#32 |
|
MVP
Join Date: May 2005
Location: washington, D.C.
Posts: 11,460
|
Re: T.J. Duckett watch
|
|
|
|
|
|
#33 | |
|
MVP
Join Date: May 2005
Location: washington, D.C.
Posts: 11,460
|
Re: T.J. Duckett watch
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#34 | |
|
Special Teams
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 380
|
Re: T.J. Duckett watch
Quote:
However, what isn't conjecture is: -We didn't make the 3rd down that would have essentially sealed the game. -We have been absolutely horrible in 3rd & 1 situations (3rd & 2 and 3rd & 3 have been shockingly bad as well) this year. -TJ is a proven dominator in short yardage situations. So while it is conjecture as to what would have happened, I don't think it is outrageous to suggest that the probability is that TJ has a better chance in 3rd and 1 than Betts does.
__________________
"Lighten up, Sandy Baby." |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#35 |
|
MVP
Join Date: May 2005
Location: washington, D.C.
Posts: 11,460
|
Re: T.J. Duckett watch
Agreed, agreed.
I don't think it was wildly speculative, I was just trying to use a $50 word
|
|
|
|
![]() |
|
|