Who's better, Clinton Portis or Tatum Bell?

[SmootSmack]

Identity Theft is something we all need to be careful about. Someone's been using your username Offiss.

http://www.thewarpath.net/showpost.p...1&postcount=72

(no mention of Gibbs there, just how awful Brunell is)

http://www.thewarpath.net/showpost.p...9&postcount=18

"This garbage that all of sudden Brunell is a big time QB again is just that garbage, in almost 2 games he's had exactly 4 minutes of good QB play, in fact you can probably encorperate last season and find that after last years Dallas game he's had exactly 4 minutes of good QB play period."

http://www.thewarpath.net/showpost.p...4&postcount=98

"Anyone who wants to put there faith in Brunells miracle 4 minutes can, good luck if you think that will happen again, the real Brunell showed up for 56 minutes, and couldn't have recieved more luck in the final 4 minutes if he paid off the defense himself."

http://www.thewarpath.net/showpost.p...71&postcount=5

"I would like to take this time to reapologize to Brunell, YOU STILL STINK!"

Too lazy to look for other examples. I know you haven't been thrilled with Gibbs' playcalling and his use (or lack thereof) of Ramsey, the kid with the 200 IQ. But you have laid the blame on Brunell's feet many times. Basically saying that he's washed-up and could no longer be an effective starter.

But really, it's ok to admit you're wrong. You've been wrong before, for example As have I. I thought Ohalete was going to be a fixture on this team for many years and Bowen would be gone. Guess what. I was wrong. See, it's really not that hard to say. I don't come with "I've always maintained..." or "The problem wasn't Ohalete" or "What had happened was..." No, just "I was wrong"

You've been right before and you've been wrong before. And I will bet that in the future you'll be right some more times and you'll be wrong. It wouldn't hurt to just admit it once in a while

[MTK]

Originally Posted by TAFKAS

Identity Theft is something we all need to be careful about. Someone's been using your username Offiss.

http://www.thewarpath.net/showpost.p...1&postcount=72

(no mention of Gibbs there, just how awful Brunell is)

http://www.thewarpath.net/showpost.p...9&postcount=18

"This garbage that all of sudden Brunell is a big time QB again is just that garbage, in almost 2 games he's had exactly 4 minutes of good QB play, in fact you can probably encorperate last season and find that after last years Dallas game he's had exactly 4 minutes of good QB play period."

http://www.thewarpath.net/showpost.p...4&postcount=98

"Anyone who wants to put there faith in Brunells miracle 4 minutes can, good luck if you think that will happen again, the real Brunell showed up for 56 minutes, and couldn't have recieved more luck in the final 4 minutes if he paid off the defense himself."

http://www.thewarpath.net/showpost.p...71&postcount=5

"I would like to take this time to reapologize to Brunell, YOU STILL STINK!"

Too lazy to look for other examples. I know you haven't been thrilled with Gibbs' playcalling and his use (or lack thereof) of Ramsey, the kid with the 200 IQ. But you have laid the blame on Brunell's feet many times. Basically saying that he's washed-up and could no longer be an effective starter.

But really, it's ok to admit you're wrong. You've been wrong before, for example As have I. I thought Ohalete was going to be a fixture on this team for many years and Bowen would be gone. Guess what. I was wrong. See, it's really not that hard to say. I don't come with "I've always maintained..." or "The problem wasn't Ohalete" or "What had happened was..." No, just "I was wrong"

You've been right before and you've been wrong before. And I will bet that in the future you'll be right some more times and you'll be wrong. It wouldn't hurt to just admit it once in a while

pwned

[TheMalcolmConnection]

Damn TAFKAS you are so l33t.

[SmootSmack]

Originally Posted by TheMalcolmConnection

Damn TAFKAS you are so l33t.

:confused: um....thanks? Jeez, just when I was figuring out what "pwned" meant you crazy 80s born kids, come up with more crazy lingo.

[That Guy]

brunell could NOT have run it in, he was over 6 yards out an at least 2 faster LBs would have had a very good (unblocked) shot at knocking him out. I must have watched that replay about 10 times now.

and seriously, comparsions between a 4800yrd runner and a sub-700 yard runner after one good game is crazy... I mean, portis was gimped on the first play, couldn't rush to the outside (his strength) and had a 25+ yarder called back an still got 103 rushing and ~ 30 catching while throwing vicious blocks on linebackers.

Portis is a better leader, and blocker than bell for sure, and if he's a system back, how come he got 1300 last year and is on pace 1464 this year? (his "system back" counterpart is on pace for under 1200).

His contract is hefty, but bailey's is even worse, and i'm not sure there were any better offers on the table.

[BigSKINBauer]

excuse me: correction that would most correctly be 133"7" not 133t

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by BigSKINBauer

excuse me: correction that would most correctly be 133"7" not 133t

l33t is perfectly acceptable.

[BigSKINBauer]

Originally Posted by That Guy

l33t is perfectly acceptable.

I will brush up then but all i know is that

Portis is 1337/t"ER" than bell

[MTK]

I'm with Tafkas, I just figured out pwned, now what's this l33t??

Internet slang, I just can't keep up with you crazy kids! LOL

[skinsguy]

Originally Posted by That Guy

brunell could NOT have run it in, he was over 6 yards out an at least 2 faster LBs would have had a very good (unblocked) shot at knocking him out. I must have watched that replay about 10 times now.

and seriously, comparsions between a 4800yrd runner and a sub-700 yard runner after one good game is crazy... I mean, portis was gimped on the first play, couldn't rush to the outside (his strength) and had a 25+ yarder called back an still got 103 rushing and ~ 30 catching while throwing vicious blocks on linebackers.

Portis is a better leader, and blocker than bell for sure, and if he's a system back, how come he got 1300 last year and is on pace 1464 this year? (his "system back" counterpart is on pace for under 1200).

His contract is hefty, but bailey's is even worse, and i'm not sure there were any better offers on the table.

Exactly right Guy! Comparing the two is insane - and follows on the coat tails of what the media is going to say. i.e..... Len Pastabelly! So, I suppose that's good company, huh??! :vomit-smi

[wolfeskins]

portis.

[MTK]

Wolfeskins, the signature is amusing but it's gotta go my man.

[BigSKINBauer]

there are laws against those kind of signatures

[SUNRA]

Originally Posted by Southpaw

Tatum Bell isn't half the total package that Portis is. Portis is a pure runner that can block and catch. Bell is a basically scatback that can't run without a hole, that was lucky enough to be drafted by Denver. Not to take anything away from his ability, but Washington always has more trouble with shifty backs than they do with hard runners.

After reviewing the highlights of the game on Extremeskins I am convinced that we got more from Portis than we expected . I saw Portis knock Al Wilson on his ass on several play action passes. I also saw Portis run,catch and run some more. Aside from his efforts to get in the endzone, he has stepped up as a leader of this team. He was dejected after the loss because he knew the fumble was a key play that turned into points. I'm sticking with Clinton for the long haul.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Bell hasn't been a factor in 20 of the 21 games that the Broncos have played since he was drafted. It's a tad early to try to compare Bell to Portis. Denver's "system" does make backs look better than they really are, but Portis is the real deal.