Re: If Chargers can get a 1st & 3rd for Turner, don't we have to shop Betts?
 

3rd down back?

:doh:

The guy has put up big time numbers in this league, you've really gotta be joking.

Re: If Chargers can get a 1st & 3rd for Turner, don't we have to shop Betts?
 

[QUOTE=offiss;295086]I wouldn't be so sure of that, one of the reasons for Betts success last season with the same line is the fact that he hit's the hole much faster than Portis, and he hit's it with more power and drive. Yes Portis is faster over all but that only helps after you have reached the secondary, it is better to be faster to the hole than in the secondary. Portis is exactly what I thought he was when we traded for him, he's a 3rd down change of pace type back who was made to look better than he really is in that denver system as were many backs. My biggest problem with Portis as a player is not the fact that he can't be a good back if used the way he's supposed to, the problem is we gave up a ton to get a guy who really isn't an everydown type back. So now he has added to much weight to try and handle the beating an every down back takes and it has taken away from his biggest attribute and that is his explosion.[/QUOTE]

Wow - a 1,500 yard back is just a "change of pace" back. Check back whenever you stop smoking whatever it is you're on.

Re: If Chargers can get a 1st & 3rd for Turner, don't we have to shop Betts?
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;295105]Wow - a 1,500 yard back is just a "change of pace" back. Check back whenever you stop smoking whatever it is you're on.[/quote]

yeah and pass that pipe over my way

Re: If Chargers can get a 1st & 3rd for Turner, don't we have to shop Betts?
 

[quote=offiss;295086]I wouldn't be so sure of that, one of the reasons for Betts success last season with the same line is the fact that he hit's the hole much faster than Portis, and he hit's it with more power and drive. Yes Portis is faster over all but that only helps after you have reached the secondary, it is better to be faster to the hole than in the secondary. Portis is exactly what I thought he was when we traded for him, he's a 3rd down change of pace type back who was made to look better than he really is in that denver system as were many backs. My biggest problem with Portis as a player is not the fact that he can't be a good back if used the way he's supposed to, the problem is we gave up a ton to get a guy who really isn't an everydown type back. So now he has added to much weight to try and handle the beating an every down back takes and it has taken away from his biggest attribute and that is his explosion.[/quote]

Umm, 1500+ yds and 11 TDs when healthy in '05, he led the NFC in rushing TDs when he went down last year... He's a top 5 back when healthy, and I don't think he gets enough credit for what he does without the ball. He is a devastating blocker. Does anyone remember when he put Shelton Quarles to sleep in that Bucs game in '05? The Redskins' all time single season rushing leader is a "3rd down change of pace back?" Sure.

Re: If Chargers can get a 1st & 3rd for Turner, don't we have to shop Betts?
 

You both get to wrapped up in numbers, well here's a number for you, Clinton went from 5.5 yards per carry in denver, to 3.8 with us, he had the lowest yards per carry out of any legitamate starter in 2004, which means any back in the league would have posted better numbers if he was force fed the ball enough times.

And don't forget he ran up huge numbers with the Broncos in 2003 against a horrible defense in the Chiefs, close to 400 yards I believe against 1 team and something like 6 or 7 rushing TD'S. he had 5 for us the whole year in 2004.

I will say it again CLINTON IS NOT A GREAT BACK! Just like I said Arrington was not a great LB. As time goes on it WILL become more and more apparent that he is what he is a change of pace back. He's still young and yet still he can't keep himself on the field, the guy isn't built for the pounding an everydown back get's unless he's running in space like he did in Denver, hence system back!

Re: If Chargers can get a 1st & 3rd for Turner, don't we have to shop Betts?
 

whatever

:doh:

Re: If Chargers can get a 1st & 3rd for Turner, don't we have to shop Betts?
 

[quote=offiss;295125]As time goes on it WILL become more and more apparent that he is what he is a change of pace back. He's still young and yet still he can't keep himself on the field, the guy isn't built for the pounding an everydown back get's unless he's running in space [B]like he did in Denver[/B], hence system back![/quote]

You know, if you take out the bolded part of your last paragraph, any right thinking fan, with a football IQ above [I]retarded [/I]would think you were talking about Betts.

Re: If Chargers can get a 1st & 3rd for Turner, don't we have to shop Betts?
 

[quote=offiss;295125]You both get to wrapped up in numbers, well here's a number for you, Clinton went from 5.5 yards per carry in denver, to 3.8 with us, he had the lowest yards per carry out of any legitamate starter in 2004, which means any back in the league would have posted better numbers if he was force fed the ball enough times.

And don't forget he ran up huge numbers with the Broncos in 2003 against a horrible defense in the Chiefs, close to 400 yards I believe against 1 team and something like 6 or 7 rushing TD'S. he had 5 for us the whole year in 2004.

I will say it again CLINTON IS NOT A GREAT BACK! Just like I said Arrington was not a great LB. As time goes on it WILL become more and more apparent that he is what he is a change of pace back. He's still young and yet still he can't keep himself on the field, the guy isn't built for the pounding an everydown back get's unless he's running in space like he did in Denver, hence system back![/quote]

Denver also had more outside runs designed for Clinton's breakaway speed. We tried to pound him between the tackles too much in '04. His yds/carry were up from 3.8 in '04 to 4.3 in '05 when we started to use more sweeps and other outside runs. He's a great blocker with good hands, blazing speed, and has over 1500 yds in 3 of his 5 season (over 1300 in 4 outta 5). He's way better than a change of pace back.

Re: If Chargers can get a 1st & 3rd for Turner, don't we have to shop Betts?
 

[QUOTE=GMScud;295137]Denver also had more outside runs designed for Clinton's breakaway speed. We tried to pound him between the tackles too much in '04. His yds/carry were up from 3.8 in '04 to 4.3 in '05 when we started to use more sweeps and other outside runs. He's a great blocker with good hands, blazing speed, and has over 1500 yds in 3 of his 5 season (over 1300 in 4 outta 5). He's way better than a change of pace back.[/QUOTE]

shhh - Don't talk about 05, when he put the team on his back and carried it into the playoffs. That would screw up Offiss' logic of "looking beyond the numbers". Oh wait, that assumes that Offiss uses [I]actual /I]logic and not drug induced fantasy logic. That's a pretty big assumption.

Re: If Chargers can get a 1st & 3rd for Turner, don't we have to shop Betts?
 

Y'all remember when Offiss said Portis would probably be the best running back Gibbs had ever coached? My how times have changed

Re: If Chargers can get a 1st & 3rd for Turner, don't we have to shop Betts?
 

[quote=offiss;295125]You both get to wrapped up in numbers, well here's a number for you, Clinton went from 5.5 yards per carry in denver, to 3.8 with us, he had the lowest yards per carry out of any legitamate starter in 2004, which means any back in the league would have posted better numbers if he was force fed the ball enough times.

And don't forget he ran up huge numbers with the Broncos in 2003 against a horrible defense in the Chiefs, close to 400 yards I believe against 1 team and something like 6 or 7 rushing TD'S. he had 5 for us the whole year in 2004.

I will say it again CLINTON IS NOT A GREAT BACK! Just like I said Arrington was not a great LB. As time goes on it WILL become more and more apparent that he is what he is a change of pace back. He's still young and yet still he can't keep himself on the field, the guy isn't built for the pounding an everydown back get's unless he's running in space like he did in Denver, hence system back![/quote]If you are trying to make an Anti-Clinton Portis argument, I'd leave Denver out of this.

As far as the 2004 argument goes, Offiss is correct. Despite the raw yardage totals being heavily in Portis' favor, Betts accrued more total value in 90 carries than Portis did in 350. Betts was more successful in crucial situations than Portis was that year, and ran up a higher YPC average. For whatever reason, Portis was an ineffective runner in 2004, racking up 1300 yards pretty much entirely due to the sheer number of carries he got that year. Bottom line is that if this was April 2005, Offiss would have a very convincing argument.

Well, I just checked my calender and it turns out that it is NOT April 2005. It is in fact April 2007. You know what this means, Offiss? It means we have two more years of data to analyze to see if this was a fluky year, or the start of a trend.

In 2005, Clinton Portis was unquestionably a top 10 runner in the NFL. Ladell Betts' year was pretty below average. Portis added 200 more yards to his season total in a nearly identical amount of carries. This blew up his yards per carry. It's actually very defenseable to say that Portis was better in 2005 than LaDainian Tomlinson. He was unbelieveable. Betts fell off the map.

In 2006, Portis put togehter a solid first half of the season at less than 100 percent. Betts rebounded from a bad 2005 to be one of the better RBs in the league. Had Portis stayed healthy, their numbers for the season likely would have been reversed.

Because of Portis' consistency these last two years, it makes no sense to dwell on the 2004 season. You can point to the 2004 season as a reason for concern, but to use it as the basis for prediction is--well, you'll see soon enough when your prediction misses by a hilarious amount.

Re: If Chargers can get a 1st & 3rd for Turner, don't we have to shop Betts?
 

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;295188]If you are trying to make an Anti-Clinton Portis argument, I'd leave Denver out of this.

As far as the 2004 argument goes, Offiss is correct. Despite the raw yardage totals being heavily in Portis' favor, Betts accrued more total value in 90 carries than Portis did in 350. Betts was more successful in crucial situations than Portis was that year, and ran up a higher YPC average. For whatever reason, Portis was an ineffective runner in 2004, racking up 1300 yards pretty much entirely due to the sheer number of carries he got that year. Bottom line is that if this was April 2005, Offiss would have a very convincing argument.

Well, I just checked my calender and it turns out that it is NOT April 2005. It is in fact April 2007. You know what this means, Offiss? It means we have two more years of data to analyze to see if this was a fluky year, or the start of a trend.

In 2005, Clinton Portis was unquestionably a top 10 runner in the NFL. Ladell Betts' year was pretty below average. Portis added 200 more yards to his season total in a nearly identical amount of carries. This blew up his yards per carry. It's actually very defenseable to say that Portis was better in 2005 than LaDainian Tomlinson. He was unbelieveable. Betts fell off the map.

In 2006, Portis put togehter a solid first half of the season at less than 100 percent. Betts rebounded from a bad 2005 to be one of the better RBs in the league. Had Portis stayed healthy, their numbers for the season likely would have been reversed.

Because of Portis' consistency these last two years, it makes no sense to dwell on the 2004 season. You can point to the 2004 season as a reason for concern, but to use it as the basis for prediction is--well, you'll see soon enough when your prediction misses by a hilarious amount.[/QUOTE]

What it comes down to is this, you either have the eye to see what this guy really is, or you don't. I recieved the same nonesense about Lavar when I said he wasen't that good, as well as Brunell, so we will just take the wait and see aproach.

And if you think the 2004 season is meaningless think again, there is a reason Portis bulked up, he didn't want to be battered like he was in 2004 where Gibbs ran him into the ground as if he were Riggins trying to justify the trade for him. Bottom line regardless it was and will always be a lowsey trade for us. Portis is under the gun this season because he will be compared to Betts under the same conditions so he better outplay him.

Re: If Chargers can get a 1st & 3rd for Turner, don't we have to shop Betts?
 

[QUOTE=JoeRedskin;295150]shhh - Don't talk about 05, when he put the team on his back and carried it into the playoffs. That would screw up Offiss' logic of "looking beyond the numbers". Oh wait, that assumes that Offiss uses [I]actual /I]logic and not drug induced fantasy logic. That's a pretty big assumption.[/QUOTE]

Just another idiotic post by big time Joe Redskin, as if our offense had anything to do with our making the playoffs let alone Portis becoming a one man show. It was all defense. But I guess your acid flashbacks have yet to cease.

Re: If Chargers can get a 1st & 3rd for Turner, don't we have to shop Betts?
 

[QUOTE=Southpaw;295128]You know, if you take out the bolded part of your last paragraph, any right thinking fan, with a football IQ above [I][B]retarded[/B] [/I]would think you were talking about Betts.[/QUOTE]

????????????

And if we lets say decieded to remove everything but the bolded part of your statement would we be talking about you?:towel:


And if my aunt had balls she be my uncle.

Re: If Chargers can get a 1st & 3rd for Turner, don't we have to shop Betts?
 

Yeah it was all defense, CP's 5 game streak of 100+ yards or more had nothing to do with the playoff run. :doh:

Re: If Chargers can get a 1st & 3rd for Turner, don't we have to shop Betts?
 

[QUOTE=offiss;295197]What it comes down to is this, you either have the eye to see what this guy really is, or you don't. I recieved the same nonesense about Lavar when I said he wasen't that good, as well as Brunell, so we will just take the wait and see aproach.

And if you think the 2004 season is meaningless think again, there is a reason Portis bulked up, he didn't want to be battered like he was in 2004 where Gibbs ran him into the ground as if he were Riggins trying to justify the trade for him. Bottom line regardless it was and will always be a lowsey trade for us. Portis is under the gun this season because he will be compared to Betts under the same conditions so he better outplay him.[/QUOTE]

"Lousy" "Lousy" "Lousy" "Lousy"

Learn how to ****ing spell Lousy. This is my new pet peeve

Re: If Chargers can get a 1st & 3rd for Turner, don't we have to shop Betts?
 

HAHAHAHAHA! Offiss, you gotta be kidding me bro. Portis? 3rd down back? Cant stay on the field? What are you smoking dude. I believe this was the first time he was injured in his career? He has always broke 1,000 yards in every season and the first 2 seasons with us he had 1300 then 1500? Broke our rushing record only SECOND season with us, and yes he is still young so what makes you think he'll regress so much? He was playing with an injured shoulder and he he could still pound it in goaline situations for 7 or 8 touchdowns? Your argument is ridiculous you have nothing backing up what your saying of portis being a 3rd down back and all that bullshit. To be honest, this was probably the dumbest response i have ever read on this websit

Re: If Chargers can get a 1st & 3rd for Turner, don't we have to shop Betts?
 

That was a lowsey post, Smootsmack.

Often times I understand where Offiss is coming from, and agree with him on a regular basis. But I can't do it for Portis. I agree he's a system back, but many backs in this league are. You build the offense to his strengths and he's a definite stud in this league. Worth the trade we gave, probably not, but champ didn't want to be here and Portis is awesome!

Re: If Chargers can get a 1st & 3rd for Turner, don't we have to shop Betts?
 

It seems like Portis is going to be "punished" for the rest of his career for having played in Denver. That's a real shame.

Re: If Chargers can get a 1st & 3rd for Turner, don't we have to shop Betts?
 

[QUOTE=SmootSmack;294814]If you're going to go putting stuff in bold font, you should at least know what you're talking about. Walker held out and essentially forced a trade, Vinatieri and EJ were both free agents who left their teams for better deals. That's not the same as trading a player. Maybe, just maybe you could make the argument that not re-signing a free agent is the same as "releasing" the player, but that would be stretching it.

I think we should leave our quarterback, running back and wide receiver situations alone. Not necessarily because I think Betts is great (he's decent) but because I think the unit as a whole would greatly benefit from all coming back together for another year.[/QUOTE]

Two things:

1) First off, I do know what I am talking about. I said in my earlier post, [I][B]"this is the NFL ladies and gents, people get traded and released after better seasons than Betts had last year."[/B][/I] My entire point was that a move of that mature would NOT be a precedent in NFL front office policy. Key words were "released" and "traded."

Javon Walker wanted a deal done b4 his breakout season, and when it came back that he was performing at a probowl level, he wanted a renewed contract b4 his last season. He never got it, then reported to camp and got hurt early in the season. After a great season, injury came, and then he was traded on draft day. Hmmm, a draft day trade, oh, how SO relevant, but it is often overlooked, by the eager to respond internet pundits.

2) Betts contract is made to be trade bait. 5 yrs 12 mill + 3 mil bonus. There are kickers and back up across the league that have WwaaaaayyyY better contract than than, especially after ther resigning. Albeit, we could use a good backup RB, we need more depth as a team via draft picks, which we seriously lack.

thats all. we both/all have points, but draft day will show up soon and we will either have our deal or out one 1st day pick.

My point is, when the draft comes, and we see ALL of the players pass us by, we are gonna be wishing we could get at leat one or two. Then the forums will pop up here, and I will be there to let everyone know that we'd be pissed after we couldn't pick anymore in the first day.

BUt we will see come draft day.

Re: If Chargers can get a 1st & 3rd for Turner, don't we have to shop Betts?
 

[QUOTE=SkinsFanSince91;295257]Two things:

1) First off, I do know what I am talking about. I said in my earlier post, [I][B]"this is the NFL ladies and gents, people get traded and released after better seasons than Betts had last year."[/B][/I] My entire point was that a move of that mature would NOT be a precedent in NFL front office policy. Key words were "released" and "traded."

Javon Walker wanted a deal done b4 his breakout season, and when it came back that he was performing at a probowl level, he wanted a renewed contract b4 his last season. He never got it, then reported to camp and got hurt early in the season. After a great season, injury came, and then he was traded on draft day. Hmmm, a draft day trade, oh, how SO relevant, but it is often overlooked, by the eager to respond internet pundits.

2) Betts contract is made to be trade bait. 5 yrs 12 mill + 3 mil bonus. There are kickers and back up across the league that have WwaaaaayyyY better contract than than, especially after ther resigning. Albeit, we could use a good backup RB, we need more depth as a team via draft picks, which we seriously lack.

thats all. we both/all have points, but draft day will show up soon and we will either have our deal or out one 1st day pick.

My point is, when the draft comes, and we see ALL of the players pass us by, we are gonna be wishing we could get at leat one or two. Then the forums will pop up here, and I will be there to let everyone know that we'd be pissed after we couldn't pick anymore in the first day.

BUt we will see come draft day.[/QUOTE]

Fine. I just thought it was wrong to lump Betts in the same sentence as guys like James and Vinatieri because the situations are not the same.

Moving on

Re: If Chargers can get a 1st & 3rd for Turner, don't we have to shop Betts?
 

[QUOTE=SkinsFanSince91;295257]Two things:

1) First off, I do know what I am talking about. I said in my earlier post, [I][B]"this is the NFL ladies and gents, people get traded and released after better seasons than Betts had last year."[/B][/I] My entire point was that a move of that mature would NOT be a precedent in NFL front office policy. Key words were "released" and "traded."

Javon Walker wanted a deal done b4 his breakout season, and when it came back that he was performing at a probowl level, he wanted a renewed contract b4 his last season. He never got it, then reported to camp and got hurt early in the season. After a great season, injury came, and then he was traded on draft day. Hmmm, a draft day trade, oh, how SO relevant, but it is often overlooked, by the eager to respond internet pundits.

2) Betts contract is made to be trade bait. 5 yrs 12 mill + 3 mil bonus. There are kickers and back up across the league that have WwaaaaayyyY better contract than than, especially after ther resigning. Albeit, we could use a good backup RB, we need more depth as a team via draft picks, which we seriously lack.

thats all. we both/all have points, but draft day will show up soon and we will either have our deal or out one 1st day pick.

My point is, when the draft comes, and we see ALL of the players pass us by, we are gonna be wishing we could get at leat one or two. Then the forums will pop up here, and I will be there to let everyone know that we'd be pissed after we couldn't pick anymore in the first day.

BUt we will see come draft day.[/QUOTE]

I agree that we should trade off a back for picks, but it aint Betts, I would think we could get something along the lines of the hershel Walker deal for a superstar like Portis.

Re: If Chargers can get a 1st & 3rd for Turner, don't we have to shop Betts?
 

the colts only got a 2nd and a 5th for marshall faulk

Re: If Chargers can get a 1st & 3rd for Turner, don't we have to shop Betts?
 

[quote=offiss;295197]What it comes down to is this, you either have the eye to see what this guy really is, or you don't. I recieved the same nonesense about Lavar when I said he wasen't that good, as well as Brunell, so we will just take the wait and see aproach.

And if you think the 2004 season is meaningless think again, there is a reason Portis bulked up, he didn't want to be battered like he was in 2004 where Gibbs ran him into the ground as if he were Riggins trying to justify the trade for him. Bottom line regardless it was and will always be a lowsey trade for us. Portis is under the gun this season because he will be compared to Betts under the same conditions so he better outplay him.[/quote]I'm guessing you don't have the mystical eye of running back evaluation then.

Explain why I should put more stock into 2004 when two more recent seasons argue that it was a fluke.

Re: If Chargers can get a 1st & 3rd for Turner, don't we have to shop Betts?
 

[quote=Daseal;295248]That was a lowsey post, Smootsmack.

Often times I understand where Offiss is coming from, and agree with him on a regular basis. But I can't do it for Portis. I agree he's a system back, but many backs in this league are. You build the offense to his strengths and he's a definite stud in this league. Worth the trade we gave, probably not, but champ didn't want to be here and Portis is awesome![/quote]If most RBs are system backs, then what does the term system back really mean?

I don't think "system back" has any meaning whatsoever.

I think that there are systems that are more RB friendly than others. Denver is the most obvious example. RB friendly sytems such as Denver will inflate a RB's raw numbers the same way a QB friendly system, such as the west coast, would inflate a QB's raw numbers. But this is a universial effect. If Portis is a better back than Betts here, he's a better back than Betts in ANY system. Every one of the 32 teams. Some systems are better for RBs than others. That means they are better for ALL RBs, not just a select few.

If a guy was a "system back", most certainly he would have weaknesses as a runner that a certain system would hide. But what weaknesses does a runner have? Take TJ Duckett for example. He tends to tiptoe into contact, and doesn't always drive his legs once he makes contact. Can someone give me an example of a running system that would hide this weakness?

System backs, as we believe them to be, simply do not exist.

Re: If Chargers can get a 1st & 3rd for Turner, don't we have to shop Betts?
 

I guess I don't get what a system back is, at least not the way some people use the term around here.

Portis has proven he is still a top back outside of Denver... so how does that make him a system back??

Re: If Chargers can get a 1st & 3rd for Turner, don't we have to shop Betts?
 

Portis should actually be the poster child for calling bs on the system back theory.

His raw numbers fell slightly from Denver because his current system isn't as friendly to RBs. That's to be expected.

But anyone expecting him to fall off the face of the earth once he left Denver now has to explain why he performed so well in 2005 and the first half of 2006. I'd be willing to bet that no one here can come up with a response that can just write off a year and a half of accomplishments.

2004 was a horrible year for Portis. But can anyone really explain why, and give a reason to expect 2004 to repeat itself? I doubt it.

Re: If Chargers can get a 1st & 3rd for Turner, don't we have to shop Betts?
 

[quote=Mattyk72;295280]I guess I don't get what a system back is, at least not the way some people use the term around here.

Portis has proven he is still a top back outside of Denver... so how does that make him a system back??[/quote]Additionally, I don't understand how people throw around the term "north-south runner". Seems that every back that's ever had success in this league knew that to gain yards, he'd have to get up the field. Seems to me that that would make him, by definition, a "north-south" runner.

Doesn't south imply running backwards?

The ultimate conclusion: Watching football discussion shows is bad for the american public.

Re: If Chargers can get a 1st & 3rd for Turner, don't we have to shop Betts?
 

Well, if he's a "system back" he's in the right system. Joe Gibbs did win Super Bowls with three different lead running backs after all

Re: If Chargers can get a 1st & 3rd for Turner, don't we have to shop Betts?
 

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;295277]I'm guessing you don't have the mystical eye of running back evaluation then.

Explain why I should put more stock into 2004 when two more recent seasons argue that it was a fluke.[/QUOTE]

I do, becuase if it were my call Stephen Jackson would be a Skin, and SJ is a much better back then Portis.

Funny all I here is how great Portis was last season, who was better him or Betts? You know Betts the RB I have been saying is better suited for Gibbs style of offense for 3 years now, almost everyone on this site was calling him a waste and a lowsy RB before Portis went down, and now he's so valuable he's untradable.

One more for the mystical eye, Adrian Peterson will be a better back than Portis!

Re: If Chargers can get a 1st & 3rd for Turner, don't we have to shop Betts?
 

Portis has topped 1500 yards 3 times in his career, Jackson just did it for the first time last year. I think Jackson has a little catching up to do. Just for kicks let's see who Scouts Inc. thinks is the better player:

Steven Jackson
2006 Scouting Report - Scouts Inc. [B]Grade:[/B] 76 | [URL="http://proxy.espn.go.com/nfl/features/scouting#key"]Key[/URL]
[B]Alert:[/B] None

[B]Comment:[/B]
Jackson has a very good combination of size, strength and foot quickness. He is a workhorse back who can wear down a defense over four quarters. He needs touches to get into the flow. He is powerful and elusive for his size. He can lower his pads and run defenders over or jump-cut and make someone miss. He runs with excellent balance and body control, rarely going down on first contact. He flashes a good stiff-arm and regularly falls forward after contact. He has excellent vision and flashes the speed to get the corner. He can drag defensive backs for extra yards when he gets outside. He has very good hands and is an above-average route runner. He is a load to bring down after the catch. But Jackson isn't very sudden or quick. He isn't very shifty and lacks a second gear to run away from a defense in the open field. He isn't quite quick enough to consistently separate in his routes. He could show more patience as a runner. He sometimes runs up the back of his linemen. He had some ball-security issues in 2005. He gets dinged up and misses time.

Clinton Portis
2006 Scouting Report - Scouts Inc. [B]Grade:[/B] 89 | [URL="http://proxy.espn.go.com/nfl/features/scouting#key"]Key[/URL]
[B]Alert:[/B] None

[B]Comment:[/B]
Portis has excellent foot quickness, change-of-direction skills and elusiveness. He shows excellent initial quickness in getting to and through the hole. He consistently makes a defender miss with his lateral quickness and jump-cut once he hits the hole. He is a very good zone runner. He has excellent vision, patience and great anticipation for where the hole will develop. He shows excellent start-stop quickness. He stays in balance when he cuts, has some wiggle and will bounce off tacklers. He flashes the ability to push the pile and make yards after contact. He has good receiving skills: decent hands and dangerous after-the-catch ability on screens and check-downs. He knows his blocking responsibilities and is at his best chipping and releasing into an underneath route. But Portis is undersized and tends to get a little nicked up. He doesn't have outstanding power or elite speed, though he sometimes can find an extra gear. He doesn't run a lot of routes or adjust especially well to bad passes. He is just an average blocker. He won't consistently pick up a blitzing linebacker.

Re: If Chargers can get a 1st & 3rd for Turner, don't we have to shop Betts?
 

[QUOTE=offiss;295321]I do, becuase if it were my call Stephen Jackson would be a Skin, and SJ is a much better back then Portis.

Funny all I here is how great Portis was last season, who was better him or Betts? You know Betts the RB I have been saying is better suited for Gibbs style of offense for 3 years now, almost everyone on this site was calling him a waste and a lowsy RB before Portis went down, and now he's so valuable he's untradable.

One more for the mystical eye, Adrian Peterson will be a better back than Portis![/QUOTE]


You also said Kevin Jones and Julius Jones would be better than CP, yet at the same time you said CP could be just what the Gibbs' offense needs-his best running back ever.

Betts is a fine RB, but he has to take care of his fumbling problem. And he needs to show that he can stay healthy...not only in a contract year for him.

I should just give up any hope that you'll ever learn how to spell "lousy" correctly shouldn't I?

Re: If Chargers can get a 1st & 3rd for Turner, don't we have to shop Betts?
 

[QUOTE=SmootSmack;295329]You also said Kevin Jones and Julius Jones would be better than CP, yet at the same time you said CP could be just what the Gibbs' offense needs-his best running back ever.

Betts is a fine RB, but he has to take care of his fumbling problem. And he needs to show that he can stay healthy...not only in a contract year for him.

I should just give up any hope that you'll ever learn how to spell "lousy" correctly shouldn't I?[/QUOTE]

Yes you should.:)

And please try to stop harping on one post after I screamed and yelled about how bad that deal for Portis was before we made it, you know just like I did with Brunell. Trying to find a silver lining in a black cloud to try and not believe that Gibbs is off his rocker is allowed once in a while. You might remember that I said Gibbs would have to change the style of his running game to do it in one of those posts as well, funny after a year and half why was Gibbs changing the line blocking for Portis if it is to be believed he was so great? Why has Portis constantly complained about how he is and has been used?

I still like Julies Jones he runs behind a worse line than Portis and still gets his yards, they infact remind me of each other, Portis a little faster, Jones runs a little harder.

As for Kevin Jones I really think he needs to get with a real team, I will judge no player with his kind of potential until he leaves detroit, kind of how tampa bay was for years back in the day.

The fact is I would take either one of those backs over Portis if I am allowed to take back the Bailey trade and trade Bailey off for what I believe we could have recieved was a couple of #1 picks, or at the very least a 1,2,and a 3, that trade would have given us 3 extra picks plus our #2 back, as well we wouldn't have 52 mil invested in one player who is now splitting time with his backup. And yes under those circumstances Stephen Jackson would be a Skin. Along with a lot of other talent to say the least!

As I have stated other times I wanted us to draft Portis with the 2nd round pick when he came out, I thought he would be a great change of pace back who could get you 15 quality carries per game, but he was over blown in that denver style of zone blocking which is perfect for him, he can't handle the work load of an everydown back in a coventional running attack he gets to beat up. Giving up all we gave up and could of had for Portis will never make sense, my biggest problem with Portis has alway's been what he cost us, I would be signing his praises as a player if he were our second rd choice and his contract was reasonable for his abilities, but thats obviously not the case.

Anyway have a blessed Easter SS, and you to matty!

Re: If Chargers can get a 1st & 3rd for Turner, don't we have to shop Betts?
 

this is where the comparisons stop...CLINTON PORTIS IS WAY BETTER THAN BETTS.....BETTS IS NOT MORE OF A JOE GIBBS BACK THAN PORTIS....GIVE CLINTON PORTIS THOSE HOLES BETTS GOT AND HE RUNS FOR 2000 YARDS..BY THE WAY DO YOU THINK THAT IN THE RAMS GAME, CLINTON GETS RUN DOWN AND STRIPPED???? NOPE HE DOESNT!.....with all that said i love betts because of his skills as a reciever and runner. but hes not clinton portis. if we could ever get an extra first round pick for betts i think its a must do....the reasoning is that running backs like betts are a dime a dozen man, they can be had in almost any round of the draft....guys like clinton are not, he is one of the fastest running backs in the nfl and his production matches or is better than most hall of famers through his first 5 years...you dont compare a guy like betts to portis, it just doesnt make sense.

Re: If Chargers can get a 1st & 3rd for Turner, don't we have to shop Betts?
 

[quote=offiss;295321]I do, becuase if it were my call Stephen Jackson would be a Skin, and SJ is a much better back then Portis.

Funny all I here is how great Portis was last season, who was better him or Betts? You know Betts the RB I have been saying is better suited for Gibbs style of offense for 3 years now, almost everyone on this site was calling him a waste and a lowsy RB before Portis went down, and now he's so valuable he's untradable.

One more for the mystical eye, Adrian Peterson will be a better back than Portis![/quote]Both Stephen Jackson and Adrian Peterson were higher rated than Portis was coming out of college. So if you think it takes some mystical eye to agree with the majority opinion, I really don't know what to tell you.

Portis and Betts are close in talent. Not so close that we can't see that Portis is better, but close.

I personally don't think Adrian Peterson will be as good at Portis. Adrian Peterson has a very undisciplined running style. At his prime, he probably won't be as good as Portis is now. I think it's going to take a few years for the team that drafts Peterson to see any return on him. He's overrated.

Jackson is probably a better back than Portis, but you're splitting hairs. It's really close and even though Denver was the one who received all the value, Portis was a much smarter pick than Jackson. Had we traded Champ and a 2nd rounder to move up and take Jackson, I really don't think our team would be too much different right now at all.

Re: If Chargers can get a 1st & 3rd for Turner, don't we have to shop Betts?
 

[quote=offiss;295376]I still like Julies Jones he runs behind a worse line than Portis and still gets his yards, they infact remind me of each other, Portis a little faster, Jones runs a little harder.

As for Kevin Jones I really think he needs to get with a real team, I will judge no player with his kind of potential until he leaves detroit, kind of how tampa bay was for years back in the day.

The fact is I would take either one of those backs over Portis if I am allowed to take back the Bailey trade and trade Bailey off for what I believe we could have recieved was a couple of #1 picks, or at the very least a 1,2,and a 3, that trade would have given us 3 extra picks plus our #2 back, as well we wouldn't have 52 mil invested in one player who is now splitting time with his backup. And yes under those circumstances Stephen Jackson would be a Skin. Along with a lot of other talent to say the least!
[/quote]However if we had Jones and Jones running the ball, we would be much worse off.

Re: If Chargers can get a 1st & 3rd for Turner, don't we have to shop Betts?
 

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;295389]Both Stephen Jackson and Adrian Peterson were higher rated than Portis was coming out of college. So if you think it takes some mystical eye to agree with the majority opinion, I really don't know what to tell you.

Portis and Betts are close in talent. Not so close that we can't see that Portis is better, but close.

I personally don't think Adrian Peterson will be as good at Portis. Adrian Peterson has a very undisciplined running style. At his prime, he probably won't be as good as Portis is now. I think it's going to take a few years for the team that drafts Peterson to see any return on him. He's overrated.

Jackson is probably a better back than Portis, but you're splitting hairs. It's really close and even though Denver was the one who received all the value, Portis was a much smarter pick than Jackson. Had we traded Champ and a 2nd rounder to move up and take Jackson, I really don't think our team would be too much different right now at all.[/QUOTE]



[QUOTE]QUOTE=GTripp0012;295389]Both Stephen Jackson and Adrian Peterson were higher rated than Portis was coming out of college. So if you think it takes some mystical eye to agree with the majority opinion, I really don't know what to tell you.
[/QUOTE]

I do know what to tell you though, if that is the case why not pick the higher rated back late in the first round in Jackson with one of the picks we would have recieved for Bailey? It would make sense to take the higher rated back wouldn't it? If he's higher rated in college it would make sense that he would be a better back in the pro's which it has. Further more he was more of the type of back to handle what Gibbs wanted to do in the running game and that's pound the ball. But apperantly Gibbs doesn't have the mystical eye because he didn't agree with majority opinion, like most of his personel moves. Kind of like when the majority said Brunell is washed up, or Campbell is a mid second round pick.

Re: If Chargers can get a 1st & 3rd for Turner, don't we have to shop Betts?
 

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;295390]However if we had Jones and Jones running the ball, we would be much worse off.[/QUOTE]

Worse than 5-11? Then if we had Jones and Jones Calvin Johnson would be a Skin. To bad.

I guess I don't know what we would do without Portis? Perhaps finish 4-12, or make the playoffs like J Jones did? What a coin flip.

Re: If Chargers can get a 1st & 3rd for Turner, don't we have to shop Betts?
 

[quote=offiss;295422]I do know what to tell you though, if that is the case why not pick the higher rated back late in the first round in Jackson with one of the picks we would have recieved for Bailey? It would make sense to take the higher rated back wouldn't it? If he's higher rated in college it would make sense that he would be a better back in the pro's which it has. Further more he was more of the type of back to handle what Gibbs wanted to do in the running game and that's pound the ball. But apperantly Gibbs doesn't have the mystical eye because he didn't agree with majority opinion, like most of his personel moves. Kind of like when the majority said Brunell is washed up, or Campbell is a mid second round pick.[/quote]Well, we very well could have traded up back into the first round to get Jackson. Would we be much different as a team now? Not really. Would we be better off in the distant future? Perhaps. Portis had more mileage on him than Jackson in 2004, but then again a lot can happen between now and the end of their respective careers. I wouldn't worry too much about a hypothetical situation of two years ago, especially one that would have changed our current situation as little as that one did.

One thing that had to factor into such a decision had it even been considered is the very real possibility that Stephen Jackson doesn't live up to his first round draft status. Anybody who compared Portis' production to Olandis Gary's or Quentin Griffin's could have seen that he was much more than a "system back" (a term with no real meaning). So he was not really a question mark at all, whereas Jackson was potentially following in the footsteps as guys like Trung Candidate and Curtis Enis.

We know now that the scouting projection to the NFL for Stephen Jackson was spot on. We didn't know that at the time. Considering the similarity in the production of the two backs over the last 3 years, I'd say we made the right decision at the time, and if we had honestly (hypothetically) considered both those options, we really didn't have a wrong move.

My previous post was not really enforcing the notion that it's always (or ever) smarter to pick the player who the scouting agencies love, just pointing out that its not really an outlandish statement to say the higher rated prospect will have a better career. As people around here have certainly realized by now, no one on this fourm thinks less of conventional football logic and player evaluation than me. I don't think of the Portis trade as an especially good nor bad move. I don't necessarily think that a trade up in the 2004 draft for Stephen Jackson would have been better, nor worse. I think it (should, at least) be obvious now that both backs would be playing the exact same role in the offense equally well.

Re: If Chargers can get a 1st & 3rd for Turner, don't we have to shop Betts?
 

Conventional logic also says that when a guy like Brunell gets to the age of 35, he's just too old to play, but thats simply just not reality. Campbell was a clearly undervalued prospect in NFL circles, and we took advantage of that. Conventional logic will be wrong more often then not, so I see no reason to trust anything it says. I can draw my own conclusions with varying degrees of effort.