Re: bigger role for Betts this year?
 

[quote=Mattyk72;563781]I know people hate this source but take it for what it is:

[URL="http://www.profootballtalk.com/2009/06/19/portis-becoming-a-major-problem-for-zorn/"]ProFootballTalk.com - Portis Becoming A Major Problem For Zorn[/URL]

My 2 cents, yeah CP can be a pain in the ass. It would be stupid to deny such at this point. But in the end the guy does go balls out on game day. Nobody can dispute that.

I don't see him blowing up into a major problem, but it's probably something to keep an eye on.

By the way, anyone else get a little kick out of Riggo calling someone else a headache? In many ways Riggo and CP are the same kind of guy. A bit of an enigma off the field, nothing but a baller on it.[/quote]

This was linked on that PFT post - pretty funny:

[url=http://misterirrelevant.com/index.php/2009/06/18/anatomy-of-a-rumor-brett-favre-is-totally-coming-to-the-redskins/]Anatomy of a Rumor: Favre-to-Redskins | Mr. Irrelevant[/url]

Anyway, I'm really disappointed if this is true about Portis. The guy is coming off a year where he was 4th in the league in rushing, despite an awful passing attack and a beat up O-line, and I'd say both of those areas are improved. So what the hell is his beef? I think at this point it's on Danny to get his pal Clinton in line here.

Re: bigger role for Betts this year?
 

First off, I think Portis is not going to be a major distraction. Zorn will play him because he knows, whether or not they get along, that Portis will give him the best chance to win and is what's best for their offense.

Second, I think Betts would be the starter and/or major contributor for any other team in the nfl. He's no hall-of-famer, but he's good. So yeah, playing him more would benefit the team in two ways - you would get another guy out there with fresh legs that would be able to exploit the defense in a different way (in part because of his perspective on the sidelines) and it would keep Portis healthier and less worn out.

And lastly, from what I've seen of Mason - he has great talent. He has great vision and makes great decisions on the field. To hell, with all of the naysayers that say that he was playing against inferior talent - a great move is a great move and great instincts are great instincts no matter who you're playing against.

Re: bigger role for Betts this year?
 

Zorn will still play Portis, of course. But I think it will be more on Zorns terms and Betts will see more time whether Portis likes it or not.

Re: bigger role for Betts this year?
 

[quote=warriorzpath;563799][B]First off, I think Portis is not going to be a major distraction.[/B] Zorn will play him because he knows, whether or not they get along, that Portis will give him the best chance to win and is what's best for their offense.

[B] Second, I think Betts would be the starter and/or major contributor for any other team in the nfl.[/B] He's no hall-of-famer, but he's good. So yeah, playing him more would benefit the team in two ways - you would get another guy out there with fresh legs that would be able to exploit the defense in a different way (in part because of his perspective on the sidelines) and it would keep Portis healthier and less worn out.

And lastly, from what I've seen of Mason - he has great talent. He has great vision and makes great decisions on the field. To hell, with all of the naysayers that say that he was playing against inferior talent - a great move is a great move and great instincts are great instincts no matter who you're playing against.[/quote]

To the first point in bold, I don't think that's accurate if the stories we're reading are true. If he's calling out the coach in front of others players, then it's already a major distraction. I see this issue being nipped in the bud sooner rather than later, but the way Portis is allegedly behaving is unacceptable.

I also disagree with the second point in bold. There a few teams he may start for, but not many. Off the top of my head, for sure in Seattle, Tampa Bay, and Cleveland, and maybe in Green Bay, Cincinnati, and Detroit. He'd get carries for the Pats as well, but they use so many RBs, no one is really the starter. Every other team in the league has at least one RB on their roster better than Betts, IMO.

Denver is one exception here, although given the success of rookie RBs lately, I think that job is already Moreno's to lose.

Re: bigger role for Betts this year?
 

[quote=GMScud;563804]To the first point in bold, I don't think that's accurate if the stories we're reading are true. If he's calling out the coach in front of others players, then it's already a major distraction. I see this issue being nipped in the bud sooner rather than later, but the way Portis is allegedly behaving is unacceptable.

I also disagree with the second point in bold. There a few teams he may start for, but not many. Off the top of my head, for sure in Seattle, Tampa Bay, and Cleveland, and maybe in Green Bay, Cincinnati, and Detroit. He'd get carries for the Pats as well, but they use so many RBs, no one is really the starter. Every other team in the league has at least one RB on their roster better than Betts, IMO.

Denver is one exception here, although given the success of rookie RBs lately, I think that job is already Moreno's to lose.[/quote]I don't know if Betts would be a featured runner [I]anywhere[/I]. I think he'd be the lead dog in Seattle, but they have the worst RB situation in the NFL. Arizona could use him as well. But that's about it. He'd be in a time share in Cleveland/Green Bay.

As for Moreno, I'm not sold on him as an NFL-quality runner coming out of college. Of course, I also decided--back in 2007--that Adrian Peterson would take two or three years to learn how to hit NFL-type holes. So given that assessment, he'll start looking like an NFL RB within a year or two ;)

Re: bigger role for Betts this year?
 

[quote=GMScud;563804]To the first point in bold, I don't think that's accurate if the stories we're reading are true. If he's calling out the coach in front of others players, then it's already a major distraction. I see this issue being nipped in the bud sooner rather than later, but the way Portis is allegedly behaving is unacceptable.

I also disagree with the second point in bold. There a few teams he may start for, but not many. Off the top of my head, for sure in Seattle, Tampa Bay, and Cleveland, and maybe in Green Bay, Cincinnati, and Detroit. He'd get carries for the Pats as well, but they use so many RBs, no one is really the starter. Every other team in the league has at least one RB on their roster better than Betts, IMO.

Denver is one exception here, although given the success of rookie RBs lately, I think that job is already Moreno's to lose.[/quote]

Whether Portis's behavior is unacceptable is really not the issue; it's a question of how it's affecting the team. Timing is everything and it's very early in the season to make a judgment of what kind of distraction this is - if at all. For anyone knows, the report can be exagerated and be made more out of it than what actually happened. My opinion simply is - it's going to be resolved one way or another because Zorn knows the team is better with Portis than without him.

As for Betts, there's not what if's or any of that - he has already proven when he was given the chance that he could be as productive as any starter in the league.

Re: bigger role for Betts this year?
 

I like Betts, but the talk of him being better than Portis is HOGwash.

Betts in 2006 was good, but a product of a suddenly dominant offensive line. I bet he would do absolutely nothing if he started now. We're lucky to have Portis, who plays his heart out and can block like crazy! Portis is our 6th lineman. I'd love a new young scat back like Sproles to back him up, but I'm fine with Betts for now. I'm hopeful for Aldridge and Dorsey.

Quote from 12/2006:
"Ladell Betts is what he is. Right now he's running like a man on a mission. I believe the [B][I]credit really lays with the offensive line, who suddenly has turned into one of the best in all of football[/I][/B]. They have been mowing down defensive lines and creating holes that monster trucks could drive through. [...] With all due respect to Betts, if Portis was running behind this offensive line right now, he'd be challenging for a rushing title."

redskinshogheaven.com/2006/12/5-questions-behind-enemy-lines.html

Re: bigger role for Betts this year?
 

This is only news because the Redskins Insider Jason Ried has nothing more to talk about. Portis and Zorn are both men and they will work it out. Zorn knows he needs Portis to make his west coast offense effective. This is a non issue only Jason Reid needs something to write about that will draw ratings. Betts will see more time in the offense only if he is producing if not than maybe another RB will get some reps. Jason Reid i dont trust a word that comes out of his YAP.

Re: bigger role for Betts this year?
 

[quote=Mattyk72;561658]I hope so...

[url=http://voices.washingtonpost.com/redskinsinsider/smith-offense-up-to-speed----a.html]Redskins Insider - Smith: Offense Up To Speed -- And Watch Betts[/url]

"The guy that's been standing out to me is Ladell Betts," Smith said of the running back who serves as Clinton Portis's backup. "To me, he's stepped his game up. He's preparing like he's a starter. He's taken a leadership role, which I'm not saying he wasn't a leader before, but I just think he's a very good player. He's jumped out to me.[/quote]

Betts had 5 100 yard games in a row... he can play. If you want to have a dominant running game ALL SEASON LONG, you need to employ a RB by committee approach. Portis can't get 375 carries again. Portis 15-20 carries a game Betts 10-15 and Rock should get some looks in the passing game. He can be a home run hitter if you give him the ball in space.

With all the complaints about the WR core, you'd think the Skins would use the RBs in the passing game a little more often. Maybe they should watch tape on Miami and San Diego. Both teams have shown you can move the ball up and down the field with well executed passing plays to the RBs.

Re: bigger role for Betts this year?
 

[quote=ethat001;563850]I like Betts, but the talk of him being better than Portis is HOGwash.

Betts in 2006 was good, but a product of a suddenly dominant offensive line. I bet he would do absolutely nothing if he started now. We're lucky to have Portis, who plays his heart out and can block like crazy! Portis is our 6th lineman. I'd love a new young scat back like Sproles to back him up, but I'm fine with Betts for now. I'm hopeful for Aldridge and Dorsey.

Quote from 12/2006:
"Ladell Betts is what he is. Right now he's running like a man on a mission. I believe the [B][I]credit really lays with the offensive line, who suddenly has turned into one of the best in all of football[/I][/B]. They have been mowing down defensive lines and creating holes that monster trucks could drive through. [...] With all due respect to Betts, if Portis was running behind this offensive line right now, he'd be challenging for a rushing title."

redskinshogheaven.com/2006/12/5-questions-behind-enemy-lines.html[/quote]

It works both ways. A good RB makes the O line look good and a good O line makes the RBs look good. Wasn't Collins under center for those games as well? I'd give him a lot of credit for the improved running game. When teams have to respect the pass, it opens up holes for the running attack.

Re: bigger role for Betts this year?
 

[quote=GTripp0012;563806]I don't know if Betts would be a featured runner [I]anywhere[/I]. I think he'd be the lead dog in Seattle, but they have the worst RB situation in the NFL. [B]Arizona could use him as well.[/B] But that's about it. He'd be in a time share in Cleveland/Green Bay.

As for Moreno, I'm not sold on him as an NFL-quality runner coming out of college. Of course, I also decided--back in 2007--that Adrian Peterson would take two or three years to learn how to hit NFL-type holes. So given that assessment, he'll start looking like an NFL RB within a year or two ;)[/quote]

Really? I think Tim Hightower is a very solid young back, plus they've got Beanie Wells now.