![]() |
|
|||||||
| Locker Room Main Forum Commanders Football & NFL discussion |
![]() |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
|
#16 |
|
Assistant Regional Mod
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Carbondale CO
Age: 46
Posts: 2,958
|
Re: The New Running Game?
clarett was out of shape at the first combine, but at this years, he was quite the specemin of physical fitness. The weight he put on was muscle and he was pretty chiseled. It was just the extra weight that slowed him down. I'm just saying that portis is more of a speed back and if hes probably still suited to make people miss than he is to run through them. A little more muscle will help with the hits, but I'd rather see him bounce outside, lay down a move or two and break a long distance scoring run untouched, than try to be some kind of short yardage back. Thats what Rock and Ladell and all those rookies are there for.
|
|
|
|
| Advertisements |
|
|
#17 |
|
I like big (_|_)s.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Charlottesville, Virginia
Age: 44
Posts: 19,264
|
Re: The New Running Game?
Portis put on 10-15 lbs. of muscle but they said his speed and quickness were not affected. GOOD news for us.
__________________
Regret nothing. At one time it was exactly what you wanted. |
|
|
|
|
|
#18 | |
|
Uncle Phil
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 45,256
|
Re: The New Running Game?
Quote:
What I'm wondering though is will the Skins offensive linemen employ the highly controversial cut-blocking technique? I'm not advocating it per se, but it is legal so long as the defensive player isn't being hit from behind and you're not rolling up on his legs. So if the Redskins throw in a couple of cut blocks at the beginning of the year just the thought of it happening again is sure to slow defenders down (for fear of getting hurt). That's what seemed to help Denver runners a lot. Defenders would hesitate before pursuing the runner.
__________________
You're So Vain...You Probably Think This Sig Is About You |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#19 | |
|
Playmaker
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Ridgway, PA
Age: 47
Posts: 2,519
|
Re: The New Running Game?
Quote:
__________________
"I am the best at what I do, and what I do isn't very nice" - Sean Taylor |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#20 | |
|
Pro Bowl
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Washington, DC
Age: 38
Posts: 5,688
|
Re: The New Running Game?
Quote:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
#21 | |
|
Impact Rookie
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Crofton, MD
Age: 56
Posts: 907
|
Re: The New Running Game?
Quote:
As others have said, the big key to all of this working is the offensive line...and with Jansen back and Rabach at center noe, I think they'll be up to the challenge! I don't know how much new stuff we'll see in preseason though. I'm sure they'll try some things out, but I wouldn't be surprised to see them hold back until the regular season to unveil many of the new wrinkles. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#22 |
|
Camp Scrub
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Bmore
Age: 45
Posts: 51
|
Re: The New Running Game?
This is a great thread and subsequent discussion. One of the many reasons why I am both excited and optimistic about the forthcoming season is that the coaches realized their weaknesses (and strengths) and sought to change accordingly. That's what I admire most about Gibbs. He has all-world credentials yet is humble enough to recognize the importance of change in his system. (Mike Martz would be wise to come down from his high-chair and follow suit.) Who wouldn't be excited about an athletic line predicated on speed and finding pride in being mechanically sound with a tailback entering only his fourth year who seems hell bent on becoming the most well-rounded RB in the league. I sometimes still catch myself saying "I can't believe we actually have Clinton Portis, there's no way Denver will make this trade."
Props for posting this thread. |
|
|
|
|
|
#23 |
|
I like big (_|_)s.
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Charlottesville, Virginia
Age: 44
Posts: 19,264
|
Re: The New Running Game?
Also, I would be willing to bet we have the fastest skill players on any team, defensively AND offensively.
__________________
Regret nothing. At one time it was exactly what you wanted. |
|
|
|
![]() |
|
|