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

[quote=offiss;295423]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.[/quote]Well, we wouldn't have had the no. 4 rushing offense last year or no. 9 in 2005, that's for sure.

Does having the No. 4 rushing attack mean anything in the grand scheme of a 5-11 season? Of course not. Does having the No. 9 rushing attack mean anything in a 10-6 playoff season? Quite obviously, yes.

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

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;295426]Well, we wouldn't have had the no. 4 rushing offense last year or no. 9 in 2005, that's for sure.

Does having the No. 4 rushing attack mean anything in the grand scheme of a 5-11 season? Of course not. Does having the No. 9 rushing attack mean anything in a 10-6 playoff season? Quite obviously, yes.[/QUOTE]

Absolutly, and who was responsible for most of that rushing attack last season? Betts! Funny we were at 9th with Portis, and 4th mostly without Portis.

In the grand scheme of things it wasen't Portis who delivered a playoff berth, it was the defense hands down! That is the difference between the 2 seasons, not Portis!

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

[quote=offiss;295427]Absolutly, and who was responsible for most of that rushing attack last season? Betts! Funny we were at 9th with Portis, and 4th mostly without Portis.

In the grand scheme of things it wasen't Portis who delivered a playoff berth, it was the defense hands down! That is the difference between the 2 seasons, not Portis![/quote]Well the defense was certainly the problem this year, but it's not like they didn't cost us a few games last year. It was inconsistent in 2005 (which beats completely crappy).

Our offense was very consistent for most of 2005 and was every bit as good as the defense. People remember the playoff games. People don't remember the games that we lost because our opponents scored way above their season average PPG.

Portis wasn't anymore responsible for the above average offense in 2005 than Brunell or Moss, but he was certainly every bit as important as either.

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

[quote=offiss;295427]Absolutly, and who was responsible for most of that rushing attack last season? Betts! Funny we were at 9th with Portis, and 4th mostly without Portis.[/quote]

Mostly without Portis? CP was playing on an injured shoulder for only eight games last season, and produced almost 50% of the yards a healthy Betts produced in 16 games. He also produces five more rushing touchdowns than Betts, and [B]six[/B] less fumbles. Please expand on the "Mostly without Portis" comment, because your baseless and outright false statements are getting tough to follow.

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

[QUOTE=Southpaw;295466]Mostly without Portis? CP was playing on an injured shoulder for only eight games last season, and produced almost 50% of the yards a healthy Betts produced in 16 games. He also produces five more rushing touchdowns than Betts, and [B]six[/B] less fumbles. Please expand on the "Mostly without Portis" comment, because your baseless and outright false statements are getting tough to follow.[/QUOTE]

That's probably just your inability to comprehend.

Either Portis played or he didn't? On one had you say Portis got half the carries, on the other hand your insinuating that Betts had all the carries. The fact is if the season was split as you say 8 for Portis, which means that would leave 8 for betts, [at this point you may get out a calculater and check the math if your having trouble following] then who had more yards? I believe it was Betts. Didn't Betts almost set a Skins record when he took over full time for most consecutive 100 yard games? Didn't I see Portis doing damage control saying he wants to be able to run downhill just like betts was? We didn't run downhill with portis because he can't. He's to slow to the hole, Betts on the other hand hits the hole with everthing he has, unlike Portis who hesitates looking for a big gap, because he knows he ain't knocking anyone backwards. If you think the coaches didn't notice the difference in the running game in it's consistancy with Betts in there your sadly mistaken, you do not make the type of commitment to a back when you have a huge money in another back in Portis if you didn't see something better in Betts, and that something better is his ability to move the chains and get the tough yards, which is more important than the occasional big run.

Betts in 7 starts had 1,154 rushing yards on 245 carries, a 4.7 yards-per-carry average

In 9 starts Portis had 127 carries for 523yds for a 4.1 avg.

Who was more effective? Obviously Betts!

And for the record Betts 4.7 avg. is more than any average that Portis has had since he's arrived in DC, 4.3 was the best Portis could deliver. So if you want to cry injury go ahead I am sure there was a span in Portis's tenure here that he was healthy and couldn't touch maybe the most important stat of all for a RB, YARDS PER CARRY!

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

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;295431]Well the defense was certainly the problem this year, but it's not like they didn't cost us a few games last year. It was inconsistent in 2005 (which beats completely crappy).

Our offense was very consistent for most of 2005 and was every bit as good as the defense. People remember the playoff games. People don't remember the games that we lost because our opponents scored way above their season average PPG.

Portis wasn't anymore responsible for the above average offense in 2005 than Brunell or Moss, but he was certainly every bit as important as either.[/QUOTE]

I really have to say you must have been watching a different team than I.

How you can knock our defense in 2005 is beyond me, for a defense to just flat out carry that team into the playoffs and win a playoff game for us was above and beyond what we could have hoped for. Couple that with the fact that the offense left them on the field all year makes thier accomplishment even more impresive. The problem last year was the defenses inability to bail out the offense which put a big spot light on our problems offensively and we could no longer hide Brunell, that is why the teachers pet fianlly got the hook, the defense stopped winning games for him, and Brunell wasen't about to start winning games! He's all about not losing them!

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

[QUOTE=offiss;295686]And for the record Betts 4.7 avg. is more than any average that Portis has had since he's arrived in DC, 4.3 was the best Portis could deliver. So if you want to cry injury go ahead I am sure there was a span in Portis's tenure here that he was healthy and couldn't touch maybe the most important stat of all for a RB, YARDS PER CARRY![/QUOTE]

Do you really believe that? YPC is the most important stat? Especially in a ball control offense?

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

Also Offiss, what about all the fumbles that have plagued Betts? How about the one that cost us the game towards the end of last year.

Sorry to ruin your hard-on for Betts but Portis is better talented too. That is an ex-factor. He isn't just a straight N-S runner, but he can be if he wants to. Also Al was using him wrong in the beginning of the season and when Gibbs took control towards the end of the season he called the runs that Betts had.

Perhaps if Gibbs took control earlier Portis would have had monster numbers too.

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

Just for the record:

Steven Jackson's career YPC = 4.4

Clinton Portis YPC = 4.7

I guess the numbers don't lie

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

Skins need to have a balanced offense this year: 1500 yards for Portis and 1500 yards for Betts!

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

[quote=Mattyk72;295717]Just for the record:

Steven Jackson's career YPC = 4.4

Clinton Portis YPC = 4.7

I guess the numbers don't lie[/quote]I would say that's too close to have a definative YPC winner.

They are both good backs. The Redskins would be in good shape with either of them. We have one.

We're fine at the RB position.

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

[quote=offiss;295692]I really have to say you must have been watching a different team than I.

How you can knock our defense in 2005 is beyond me, for a defense to just flat out carry that team into the playoffs and win a playoff game for us was above and beyond what we could have hoped for. Couple that with the fact that the offense left them on the field all year makes thier accomplishment even more impresive. The problem last year was the defenses inability to bail out the offense which put a big spot light on our problems offensively and we could no longer hide Brunell, that is why the teachers pet fianlly got the hook, the defense stopped winning games for him, and Brunell wasen't about to start winning games! He's all about not losing them![/quote]Week 6 @ KC: 28 points allowed
Week 8 @ NY: 36 points allowed
Week 10 @ Tampa Bay: 36 points allowed

There were clearly signs of an impending defensive collapse even in the 2005 season. No one could have predicted the sheer magnitude of the turnovers we didn't force this year, but the yardage and point totals were nothing that couldn't have been predicted.

If you believe the offense was so bad, you have a lot of explaining to do to justify how we won 4 more games in 2005 than 2004 with a considerably worse defense.

I think you are assuming the 04 and 05 defenses to be equals in the same manner you assumed all Denver backs to be equals and all of our opponents to be equals. The 2004 defense was as dominant as they come. The 2005 defense was not a dominating defensive team. They were good, but flawed. They did a very nice job against TB in the playoff game, but carried the team is a bit much. They were one Edell Sheppard catch away from being the goats.

The offense improved immensely in 2005 because Brunell, Portis, and the offensive line all improved immensely AND we traded for Moss. That's an very potent team who led us to a lot of victories all year. They were far more consistent than the defense was. It's unfortunate that come playoff time when we had to play the best defenses, our offense was banged up, but injuries determine the team best fit to play for the championship, and we clearly got the shaft in that respect.

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

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;295756]Week 6 @ KC: 28 points allowed
Week 8 @ NY: 36 points allowed
Week 10 @ Tampa Bay: 36 points allowed

There were clearly signs of an impending defensive collapse even in the 2005 season. No one could have predicted the sheer magnitude of the turnovers we didn't force this year, but the yardage and point totals were nothing that couldn't have been predicted.

If you believe the offense was so bad, you have a lot of explaining to do to justify how we won 4 more games in 2005 than 2004 with a considerably worse defense.

I think you are assuming the 04 and 05 defenses to be equals in the same manner you assumed all Denver backs to be equals and all of our opponents to be equals. The 2004 defense was as dominant as they come. The 2005 defense was not a dominating defensive team. They were good, but flawed. They did a very nice job against TB in the playoff game, but carried the team is a bit much. They were one Edell Sheppard catch away from being the goats.

The offense improved immensely in 2005 because Brunell, Portis, and the offensive line all improved immensely AND we traded for Moss. That's an very potent team who led us to a lot of victories all year. They were far more consistent than the defense was. It's unfortunate that come playoff time when we had to play the best defenses, our offense was banged up, but injuries determine the team best fit to play for the championship, and we clearly got the shaft in that respect.[/QUOTE]

The "impending defensive collapse" is dead on. Even when we weren't giving up a whole lot of points to opponents in '05, at times, you could start to see cracks in the run defense. I think we even had a poll about the most surprising things in the first part of that season -- giving up an unusual amount of rushing yards was one of the choices.

It was only a matter of time before that time-bomb on the front four went off. Detonation followed a year later.

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

[QUOTE=SmootSmack;295704]Do you really believe that? YPC is the most important stat? Especially in a ball control offense?[/QUOTE]

As you know I really am not a big stat guy, because circumstances can dictate them. Let's say a RB averages 100 yds per game, and has a 5.0 average well that seems great, but if he's a back who carries the ball 30 times a game and accumulates most of his yards on maybe 2 runs, that's not good, that will leave the defense on the field an awful lot. But a back who never runs over 20 yds on 1 carry but consistantly gets you 4 to 5 yards per carry he's far more valuable, which is what Betts does better than Portis.

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

[QUOTE=Mattyk72;295717]Just for the record:

Steven Jackson's career YPC = 4.4

Clinton Portis YPC = 4.7

I guess the numbers don't lie[/QUOTE]


Your more the welcome to believe, that even for 1 minute Portis is better than Jackson, you probably should be in the front office with that evaluation, you can help push the Briggs trade threw.

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

[QUOTE=GTripp0012;295756]Week 6 @ KC: 28 points allowed
Week 8 @ NY: 36 points allowed
Week 10 @ Tampa Bay: 36 points allowed

There were clearly signs of an impending defensive collapse even in the 2005 season. No one could have predicted the sheer magnitude of the turnovers we didn't force this year, but the yardage and point totals were nothing that couldn't have been predicted.

If you believe the offense was so bad, you have a lot of explaining to do to justify how we won 4 more games in 2005 than 2004 with a considerably worse defense.

I think you are assuming the 04 and 05 defenses to be equals in the same manner you assumed all Denver backs to be equals and all of our opponents to be equals. The 2004 defense was as dominant as they come. The 2005 defense was not a dominating defensive team. They were good, but flawed. They did a very nice job against TB in the playoff game, but carried the team is a bit much. They were one Edell Sheppard catch away from being the goats.

The offense improved immensely in 2005 because Brunell, Portis, and the offensive line all improved immensely AND we traded for Moss. That's an very potent team who led us to a lot of victories all year. They were far more consistent than the defense was. It's unfortunate that come playoff time when we had to play the best defenses, our offense was banged up, but injuries determine the team best fit to play for the championship, and we clearly got the shaft in that respect.[/QUOTE]

Stooooooooooop already, how many points did they score the last 3 games we played? I think our defense almost outscored them. If you think for 1 second that our defense didn't have to carry that team your just simply lost on this subject.

Take a look at who we didn't have against Tampa, Sean Taylor, was KC the most prolific offense in the league? Yes! And we mailed one in against the giants, and how many points did the offense score in that game? 0

And you fail to mention the fact that the offense was constantly 3 and out wearing the defense down all season long, why do you think all the talk was we were out of gas heading into the Seattle game? In the 3 most important games of the year what did the offense do? Nothing! Our defense either scored, or set up a short field for a TD against Philli to get into the playoffs, as well as Tampa in the playoffs, and if Rogers makes an INT against seattle they may have won another, no thanks to the offense!

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

[quote=offiss;295790]Your more the welcome to believe, that even for 1 minute Portis is better than Jackson, you probably should be in the front office with that evaluation, you can help push the Briggs trade threw.[/quote]

I guess Scouts Inc. is wrong too?

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

Not to take anything away from Stephen Jackson because he's a fine back, but my guess is that if we had Jackson, Offiss would be making the case for Portis. For some people the grass is always greener on the other side

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

[quote=offiss;295686]That's probably just your inability to comprehend.

And for the record Betts 4.7 avg. is more than any average that Portis has had since he's arrived in DC, 4.3 was the best Portis could deliver. So if you want to cry injury go ahead I am sure there was a span in Portis's tenure here that he was healthy and couldn't touch maybe the most important stat of all for a RB, YARDS PER CARRY![/quote]

The only thing I'm unable to comprehend is how one person can keep a thread going four pages longer that it should have, without a legitimate argument or single [I]fact[/I] to back up his statements.

Yards per carry is the "most important stat" for a running back, but when Matty points out that Portis' YPC is better that Jackson's, it's not about YPC anymore. Make up your mind. And the only reasons I can see that you've given for Betts being better than Portis is he's cheaper and he hits the hole faster(false). Why no responses to the question of Betts fumblitis or the fact that last season was the first time he's made it through a full season without an injury in his five year career?

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

Since we're on the topic of YPC it's interesting if you take a closer look at [URL="http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/302176/gamelogs/2006"]Betts' numbers from last year[/URL].

In September he averaged 5.3 ypc, with those numbers inflated quite a bit by a huge day against a weak Houston D.

In October and November he averaged 3.7 and 3.9 respectively.

In December he averaged 5.0. That was around the same time when the offensive line really hit their stride.

So how much of Bett's success was due to him, or the offensive line coming together and really playing well?? Mark me down for the offensive line.

There's a reason why people say it all starts up front.

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

it all starts up front? what a grand idea

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

[QUOTE=Mattyk72;295816]So how much of Bett's success was due to him, or the offensive line coming together and really playing well?? Mark me down for the offensive line.

There's a reason why people say it all starts up front.[/QUOTE]

So would it stand to reason that Betts is expendable after all?

I mean, if the offensive line truly deserves the credit, then just about any running back will do, right?

Mark me down as getting as much as we can for Betts. Suitable back-up running backs can be found just about anywhere.

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

As I said in another thread I'm in favor of as little change as possible this offseason.

I wouldn't deal Betts because I like the idea of having a strong 1-2 punch in the backfield, and dealing a guy like Betts who passed up the chance to hit it big in free agency doesn't send a great message to the rest of the team.

It does all start up front, but Betts isn't void of talent either. He's a quality back and a great #2 to have.

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

[quote=Beemnseven;295772]The "impending defensive collapse" is dead on. Even when we weren't giving up a whole lot of points to opponents in '05, at times, you could start to see cracks in the run defense. I think we even had a poll about the most surprising things in the first part of that season -- giving up an unusual amount of rushing yards was one of the choices.

It was only a matter of time before that time-bomb on the front four went off. Detonation followed a year later.[/quote]

OUr D fell off slightly in 05 from 04, but as was pointed out earlier, the D was carrying the team into the playoffs. The d got better as the year went on in 05. The defensive collapse of 06 seemed to be a combination of several problems all hitting us at once, injuries, coaching disagreements & deflated team chemistry to name a few. That unit looked ill all year long save for a couple of games. The fact that they couldn't buy a turnover only made it worse. I can't see a repeat of that this year.

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

[QUOTE=Mattyk72;295833]As I said in another thread I'm in favor of as little change as possible this offseason.

I wouldn't deal Betts because I like the idea of having a strong 1-2 punch in the backfield, and dealing a guy like Betts who passed up the chance to hit it big in free agency doesn't send a great message to the rest of the team.

It does all start up front, but Betts isn't void of talent either. He's a quality back and a great #2 to have.[/QUOTE]

I like Betts a lot, thinks Portis-Betts would be a great duo, and I also don't want much change, but I would trade Betts [U][I]if[/I][/U] we got a 1st rounder for him. I just think we can get more value out of trading him and drafting a defensive player than holding on to him.

I know the 2-back system is gaining popularity, but no team with a RB as good as Portis has such a system. Most teams with a 2-back system have 2 mediocre RBs who can't carry the load by themselves. Moreover, the teams that did have two quality backs last season, are turning to a feature back system. The Bears let go of Jones, Rhodes might not return to the Colts, Dillon is done with the Pats, and Barber is done with the Giants. So, I honestly think the 2-back system is a flash in the pan fad that gained popularity with the Bears-Colts SB, but one that will fade in time.

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

[quote=Mattyk72;295833]As I said in another thread I'm in favor of as little change as possible this offseason.

I wouldn't deal Betts because I like the idea of having a strong 1-2 punch in the backfield, and dealing a guy like Betts who passed up the chance to hit it big in free agency doesn't send a great message to the rest of the team.

It does all start up front, but Betts isn't void of talent either. He's a quality back and a great #2 to have.[/quote]

I don't know a livin ass that gives a damn about Jackson! He doesn't play for us, WHO CARES!

We have the two backs we NEED, they are gonna be hell FOR ANY TEAM TO DEAL WITH....... PERIOD

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

[quote=Sheriff Gonna Getcha;295893]I like Betts a lot, thinks Portis-Betts would be a great duo, and I also don't want much change, but I would trade Betts [U][I]if[/I][/U] we got a 1st rounder for him. I just think we can get more value out of trading him and drafting a defensive player than holding on to him.

I know the 2-back system is gaining popularity, but no team with a RB as good as Portis has such a system. Most teams with a 2-back system have 2 mediocre RBs who can't carry the load by themselves. Moreover, the teams that did have two quality backs last season, are turning to a feature back system. The Bears let go of Jones, Rhodes might not return to the Colts, Dillon is done with the Pats, and Barber is done with the Giants. So, I honestly think the 2-back system is a flash in the pan fad that gained popularity with the Bears-Colts SB, but one that will fade in time.[/quote]

I think people talking about it will fade w/time. IN reality it's nothing new. Until sometime in the 80s, fullbacks used to run the ball regularly & a lot of teams had a 3rd down back. Now the fullbacks mainly block, but teams give the extra carries to the 2nd string rb.

I"m glad we have 2 tough backs, just hope that Betts won't fumble at crucial times like late last year.

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

[QUOTE=Mattyk72;295816]Since we're on the topic of YPC it's interesting if you take a closer look at [URL="http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/302176/gamelogs/2006"]Betts' numbers from last year[/URL].

In September he averaged 5.3 ypc, with those numbers inflated quite a bit by a huge day against a weak Houston D.

In October and November he averaged 3.7 and 3.9 respectively.

In December he averaged 5.0. That was around the same time when the offensive line really hit their stride.

So how much of Bett's success was due to him, or the offensive line coming together and really playing well?? Mark me down for the offensive line.

There's a reason why people say it all starts up front.[/QUOTE]

Nice post! Thanks for breaking it down. That really seems to validate the notion that our O-line was the big reason why we were running the ball so well late in the season.

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

[quote=Mattyk72;295816]Since we're on the topic of YPC it's interesting if you take a closer look at [URL="http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/302176/gamelogs/2006"]Betts' numbers from last year[/URL].

In September he averaged 5.3 ypc, with those numbers inflated quite a bit by a huge day against a weak Houston D.

In October and November he averaged 3.7 and 3.9 respectively.

In December he averaged 5.0. That was around the same time when the offensive line really hit their stride.

So how much of Bett's success was due to him, or the offensive line coming together and really playing well?? Mark me down for the offensive line.

There's a reason why people say it all starts up front.[/quote]Great post, Matty.

The other reason that "it all starts up front" is that on every NFL snap, every player on both sides of the ball is affected by what is going on in the trenches. That can not be said for any other position. No receiver cares what the QB is doing on a running play, but the lineman are important on 99% of plays.

Therefore, if you have a bad offense, you can always improve your line.

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

[QUOTE=Mattyk72;295816]Since we're on the topic of YPC it's interesting if you take a closer look at [URL="http://www.nfl.com/players/playerpage/302176/gamelogs/2006"]Betts' numbers from last year[/URL].

In September he averaged 5.3 ypc, with those numbers inflated quite a bit by a huge day against a weak Houston D.

In October and November he averaged 3.7 and 3.9 respectively.

In December he averaged 5.0. That was around the same time when the offensive line really hit their stride.

So how much of Bett's success was due to him, or the offensive line coming together and really playing well?? Mark me down for the offensive line.

There's a reason why people say it all starts up front.[/QUOTE]

Well if thats the case we didn't need a 52 million dollar back did we?

OK I had about enough of this nonesense, let's get this straight if Betts averages more yards per carry it's the line, but Portis running behind the same line for 2 seasons who can't match Betts YPC is a superstar.

I totally agree with you Matty that is why you don't give up a ton to get a back, because you can win championships with adequet backs and great O-lines, why you ask, BECAUSE IT ALL STARTS UPFRONT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

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

no we dont have to shop betts.i dont see us trading either one of our running backs.

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

Watch the games and look for holes. Not to take away too much from Betts (who is a good back), but by the end of last season he was running through holes big enough to drive a truck through (particularly on draw plays, which seemed to be a favorite play). In looking at the 2005 games with Portis, I didn't see many big holes. Sorry, but Portis is a superior back.

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

from the way gibbs was talkin on the official sight neither running backs are going anywhere.