Interesting tidbit about our running game

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by Ramseyfan

Portis was supposed to boost our offense. It is impossible to know what our current offense would look like without Portis (as he's in it).

All I was saying that it is unrealistic to expect Portis to take this team from what it was like in 2003 to a stellar Indy or Seattle-type offense. But, I guess unrealistic expectations are to be expected here in D.C.

Unrealistic expectations? By the latter half of his second season, this should be about the time that this offense takes its shape and starts guiding this team to wins. By this time, I don’t think it’s unrealistic with an improved offensive line for Portis to gouge out the tough yardage, to pound teams into submission, to protect fourth quarter leads, and put teams away.

But if you never expected that Ramseyfan, or thought that such scenarios were unrealistic, it follows that everything’s just peachy with your analysis of Portis. After a 6-10 season, and now, losers of 3 straight and falling in 6 of their last 8 performances, sorry if I don’t share your optimism.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

Unrealistic expectations? By the latter half of his second season, this should be about the time that this offense takes its shape and starts guiding this team to wins. By this time, I don’t think it’s unrealistic with an improved offensive line for Portis to gouge out the tough yardage, to pound teams into submission, to protect fourth quarter leads, and put teams away.

But if you never expected that Ramseyfan, or thought that such scenarios were unrealistic, it follows that everything’s just peachy with your analysis of Portis. After a 6-10 season, and now, losers of 3 straight and falling in 6 of their last 8 performances, sorry if I don’t share your optimism.

I think we did have a right to expect an improved offense. And, our our offense has improved over the last few years (as hard as that might be to believe), just not to the extent that we would like. Do you disagree?

My point was that you can't place all the blame for our offensive woes on Portis. I interpreted your previous posts as saying that Portis was supposed to revolutionize the offense and turn it into a Indy or Seattle type offense. I just don't believe that was a realistic expectation. There are 11 guys on the field on offense and Portis is just one of them.

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by Ramseyfan

I think we did have a right to expect an improved offense. And, our our offense has improved over the last few years (as hard as that might be to believe), just not to the extent that we would like. Do you disagree?

No, certainly the offense has improved, at least in the passing aspects. But now, we’re getting back to our 2004 ways. Teams are doubling Santana Moss, and the running game is not picking up the slack. In fact, it hasn’t even accomplished basic tasks that every quality team should expect – running out the clock, getting first downs near the end of the game to protect leads, giving your defense a chance to rest. None of this has happened when we needed it most. I just don’t think it’s too much to ask someone of his notoriety, considering what we parted with to bring him in here to accomplish those objectives. And I think it’s perfectly fair to criticize both he and the offensive line when they fail to do the things that could have prevented this current three-game slide.

No, it’s not all Clinton Portis’ fault. But judging from what I’ve seen so far, I think the trade was a raw deal, I think he was not worth the money, the cap implications, the excitement, and the second round pick to get him. I’m just not impressed.

[firstdown]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

No, certainly the offense has improved, at least in the passing aspects. But now, we’re getting back to our 2004 ways. Teams are doubling Santana Moss, and the running game is not picking up the slack. In fact, it hasn’t even accomplished basic tasks that every quality team should expect – running out the clock, getting first downs near the end of the game to protect leads, giving your defense a chance to rest. None of this has happened when we needed it most. I just don’t think it’s too much to ask someone of his notoriety, considering what we parted with to bring him in here to accomplish those objectives. And I think it’s perfectly fair to criticize both he and the offensive line when they fail to do the things that could have prevented this current three-game slide.

No, it’s not all Clinton Portis’ fault. But judging from what I’ve seen so far, I think the trade was a raw deal, I think he was not worth the money, the cap implications, the excitement, and the second round pick to get him. I’m just not impressed.

The problem with Portis is not with the trade but what we gave up to complete the deal. The same goes with the Brunell deal. It seems that our front ofice has zero skills in negotiating a deal. Denver wanted Bailey pretty bad and we still gave up some draft picks. Brunell which has done a great job this year was an over paid agging QB. We could have picked up both without giving up so much. Its like they go after players with an attitude of just get them no matter what it cost instead of thinking how can we get this player at the best price. We need a tough lawyer who can work these deals.