|
Locker Room Main Forum Commanders Football & NFL discussion |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
12-08-2006, 03:34 PM | #76 |
Playmaker
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Arlington, VA
Age: 40
Posts: 3,109
|
Re: The Portis move in hindsight
|
Advertisements |
12-08-2006, 03:35 PM | #77 |
\m/
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: NY
Age: 52
Posts: 99,518
|
Re: The Portis move in hindsight
Are you seriously pinning that loss all on Betts?
|
12-08-2006, 03:37 PM | #78 | |
Playmaker
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Arlington, VA
Age: 40
Posts: 3,109
|
Re: The Portis move in hindsight
Quote:
|
|
12-08-2006, 03:39 PM | #79 |
Playmaker
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Arlington, VA
Age: 40
Posts: 3,109
|
Re: The Portis move in hindsight
No, but without that fumble they have a much better shot at winning. They were working their way to a drive that could have gotten them right back in it, however, the fumble killed that. The D should've played better, but that hurts...a WHOLE LOT. About as much as when Stephen Davis fumbled against the Boys a few years back...
|
12-08-2006, 03:42 PM | #80 | |
Playmaker
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 4,540
|
Re: The Portis move in hindsight
Quote:
While I echoed the sentiment of others, I also added some commentary that others hadn't - that w/the franchise tag Champ would have no choice in the matter until we negotiate. The Skins don't seem to like the franchise tag, but it has been used recently as a medium to buy time & trade disgruntled players. |
|
12-08-2006, 03:42 PM | #81 | |
Uncle Phil
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 45,256
|
Re: The Portis move in hindsight
Quote:
__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You |
|
12-08-2006, 03:43 PM | #82 | |
The Starter
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The ATX (formerly Balmer)
Posts: 1,125
|
Re: The Portis move in hindsight
Quote:
18-19. So I guess we can't win with Clinton Portis, either. Oh, and BTW, the Chargers have gone 48-44 with the greatest RB of our generation and possibly all-time. Thank you drive through. |
|
12-08-2006, 03:50 PM | #83 | |
Playmaker
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Arlington, VA
Age: 40
Posts: 3,109
|
Re: The Portis move in hindsight
Quote:
|
|
12-08-2006, 03:51 PM | #84 | |
The Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: So. MD
Age: 46
Posts: 1,319
|
Re: The Portis move in hindsight
Quote:
A lot of people around here like to see actual facts behind random off the wall comments, and I have no problem calling someone out when the comments are particularly silly. If all it takes for a statement to be true is for someone to make the claim, then the Redskins can win with me as the starting strong safety. By your logic, that statement is true because they don't have a winning record with Archuleta at strong safety. |
|
12-08-2006, 03:59 PM | #85 | |
The Starter
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The ATX (formerly Balmer)
Posts: 1,125
|
Re: The Portis move in hindsight
Quote:
Note that my argument for Betts' efficacy has always been about how many yards he puts up, not necessarily that we can "win games with him". You can't easily compare "game winning activities" with current statistics, so I prefer to compare using what stats we do have. Admittedly, those can still be used in questionable ways, but they're better than totally subjective comparisons. |
|
12-08-2006, 04:04 PM | #86 |
Impact Rookie
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Woodley Park, Washington DC
Age: 40
Posts: 937
|
Re: The Portis move in hindsight
You must also look at the fact that Bett's missed blocking assignments essentially led to two turnovers. Portis is the entire package, bett's brings some good things to the table, which explains why Portis is a probowl player, and bett's is a better than average backup, as of right now....
__________________
Dan Snyder is a Cancer, Joe Gibbs is the Cure |
12-08-2006, 04:11 PM | #87 | |
The Starter
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: So. MD
Age: 46
Posts: 1,319
|
Re: The Portis move in hindsight
Quote:
While his numbers do look decent based on the 20+ carry games he's had, I think the fact that he's only had a few 20+ carry games in five seasons says volumes more about Betts than the actual numbers in those handful of games. |
|
12-08-2006, 04:19 PM | #88 | |
The Starter
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: The ATX (formerly Balmer)
Posts: 1,125
|
Re: The Portis move in hindsight
Quote:
I certainly am not trying to make a case for Ladell > CP. Just pointing out that he could be a lot more effective for the Skinss than many of us think / expect. |
|
12-08-2006, 04:35 PM | #89 |
Living Legend
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 17,281
|
Re: The Portis move in hindsight
I'm not going to insult your football intelligence. But your comment makes no sense. One turnover does not win or loose a game. You should know that. What if Brandon Lloyd catches the damn ball that JC put right in his hands on the first play of the game? What if, what if, what if......... |
12-08-2006, 05:59 PM | #90 | |
Playmaker
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 2,836
|
Re: The Portis move in hindsight
Quote:
I love Portis, but I have wondered about that recently. Even if we couldn't have kept Bailey (and I disagree that we couldn't, it seems that was always more of a money issue) we could have gotten two first round picks for him plus kept that second round pick. Who knows how that would have worked out. However, I'm still glad to have Portis. |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|