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

[Daseal]

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!

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Daseal

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!

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.