Commanders Post at The Warpath - View Single Post

Schneed10 · 12-11-2006, 03:30 PM

Betts is a good runner and I'm glad we have him.

But Portis is a better blocker and Portis has a lot more breakaway speed. With all due respect to Betts, Portis would have gone for 171 yards against Philly very easily. Those were gaping holes he had to run through, and Portis has the speed and elusiveness to break those for a big TD run.

Portis and Betts are both value-adding players for us, even if they're splitting carries. They're both worth the $ we're paying them. We should be talking about shedding the fat - guys on the fringe like Wynn or Daniels.

12-11-2006, 03:30 PM	#65
Schneed10 A Dude Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Newtown Square, PA Age: 46 Posts: 12,458	Re: Betts better than Portis? Betts is a good runner and I'm glad we have him. But Portis is a better blocker and Portis has a lot more breakaway speed. With all due respect to Betts, Portis would have gone for 171 yards against Philly very easily. Those were gaping holes he had to run through, and Portis has the speed and elusiveness to break those for a big TD run. Portis and Betts are both value-adding players for us, even if they're splitting carries. They're both worth the $ we're paying them. We should be talking about shedding the fat - guys on the fringe like Wynn or Daniels. __________________ God made certain people to play football. He was one of them.