Basically, it all starts with Portis

[jrocx69]

i just notice portis run downhill so much (when he does have a hole) that he falls on his own. he's just not the player we were hoping him to be. if we start betts i bet he gets more 100 yard games with this team than portis. Does anyone else see that?... Portis always falls on his own face first when he could have gotten serveral more yards. Its like he runs completely downhill to where it benefits the other teams.

[That Guy]

Originally Posted by jrocx69

i just notice portis run downhill so much (when he does have a hole) that he falls on his own. he's just not the player we were hoping him to be. if we start betts i bet he gets more 100 yard games with this team than portis. Does anyone else see that?... Portis always falls on his own face first when he could have gotten serveral more yards. Its like he runs completely downhill to where it benefits the other teams.

betts doesn't break as many tackles, he's not as fast and he fumbles more. Its not like betts is 260lbs or anything.

[offiss]

Originally Posted by jrocx69

i just notice portis run downhill so much (when he does have a hole) that he falls on his own. he's just not the player we were hoping him to be. if we start betts i bet he gets more 100 yard games with this team than portis. Does anyone else see that?... Portis always falls on his own face first when he could have gotten serveral more yards. Its like he runs completely downhill to where it benefits the other teams.

Palease! I saw it before we traded for him, I alway's maintained if Betts was in Denver he would have put up the same numbers as Portis, and he runs much harder, his one draw back is his ability to stay healthy.

Bottom line we gave up a ton for a third down change of pace type back, when the holes get big enough for Clinton to run through they will be big enough for just about any other back as well.

Our talent is so overvalued and overpaid it's ridiculous, Lavar, Samuels, Portis, Brunell, any idea what a real GM could do with the money from those salaries? We could have monster players where we need them, offensive, and defensive linemen, instead our top 2 picks spend most of their time on the bench, and as for the rest of the big time surprises Gibbs said where coming out of this draft? Yea right! And that's why Gibbs likes to overpay for established talent no eye for unestablished talent, Taylor was a no brainer, Cooley was a very good job on his part, and that's about it in 2 drafts, Rogers is a quality pick, but we could have done a whole lot to help the overall team by dealing down, instead we gave away next years draft for a QB. I love to hear gibbs justify his signing of estabished talent with the old the draft is a crap shoot, and then give up next years draft for a position which is the biggest crap shoot of all QB! Yes the draft is a crap shoot for those who don't know what they are doing.

[backrow]

Originally Posted by jrocx69

i just notice portis run downhill so much (when he does have a hole) that he falls on his own. he's just not the player we were hoping him to be. if we start betts i bet he gets more 100 yard games with this team than portis. Does anyone else see that?... Portis always falls on his own face first when he could have gotten serveral more yards. Its like he runs completely downhill to where it benefits the other teams.

L. Betts wears girls p@6%!#$. Every nick, every hit, he gets hurt.

Anyone else notice we lost the second half kick-off because of L. Betts?

[Southpaw]

Originally Posted by jrocx69

if we start betts i bet he gets more 100 yard games with this team than portis.

Betts is a change of pace back. Nothing more. He's a poor mans Steven Davis. And by that I mean he has a similar running style, but Davis could hold onto the ball a lot better, and he could actually run people over. Whenever someone takes Betts head on, it looks like they're tackling a pillow. He actually got tackled one time Sunday by his friggin shirt-tail. It irritates me when people try to claim that he's a "power back". If he was a starter in the NFL, his career would be very similar to Troy Hambrick's.

Not to say that he doesn't have success in his current role, but that's because he's such a different runner than Portis. Teams gameplan for Portis, and when Betts comes in, he's able to take advantage because he runs completely different. But to claim that Betts is a better back than Portis, in any offense, is ridiculous.

[jdlea]

If Ladell Betts carried the load the Skins could easily be the Miami Dolphins from last season. Betts comes in and has maybe 2 good runs a game and you think he should start? He had that one game against the Vikes though. Okay, so that effectively makes him Ki Jana Carter. Betts can't carry the load. And there's no real point in arguing about it because he never will. Unless Portis goes down.

As for everyone being overrated on Washington...I wish we would cut them then. So all of you could see how a great a team full of Lemar Marshalls is.

[skindogger47]

Regardless, Clinton Portis definately doesn't have very good balance. At least Betts keeps his feet moving and can get the extra few yards after contact. It seems to me like Clinton hasn't been the same back since the Meadowlands game last year when he fumbled. Now he seems to just not want to turn it over and grind out the yards, which sucks. He is a bad ass blocker though, though you wouldn't know it watching Sunday's game. Betts sucks at blocking and is a pretty bad receiver as well. He is a better between the tackles runner, though, which seems to be the only way Gibbs will run it.

[Southpaw]

Originally Posted by skindogger47

Regardless, Clinton Portis definately doesn't have very good balance. At least Betts keeps his feet moving and can get the extra few yards after contact.

Are we talking about Ladell Betts? The Ladell Betts that I watch on Sundays has good vision, but he is definitely not the hard runner everyone claims he is. Stephen Davis, LaDanian Tomlinson, Ricky Willaims, Steven Jackson, they are hard runners. Backs that can run guys over, drag defenders with them, and move piles. Anyone that is dragged down from behind, by a safety with one hand on his shirt-tail is automatically disqualified. I swear, if Betts ever had a decent amount of carries at Soldier Field in November or December, the wind would tackle him more times than the Bears would.

[That Guy]

sounds like you should get a job a GM, since everyone else (besides you) is obviously an idiot.

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by That Guy

sounds like you should get a job a GM, since everyone else (besides you) is obviously an idiot.

While he may not have any business being a GM, his post was exactly right. We overpay, give up draft picks, have no depth on the D-line, and if one player goes down, there's no one who can adequately replace him -- see Boschetti, Killings, and Aki Jones. Gibbs, Snyder, and Cerrato cannot escape blame for that.

[Hog1]

Originally Posted by Beemnseven

While he may not have any business being a GM, his post was exactly right. We overpay, give up draft picks, have no depth on the D-line, and if one player goes down, there's no one who can adequately replace him -- see Boschetti, Killings, and Aki Jones. Gibbs, Snyder, and Cerrato cannot escape blame for that.

I get your point..................but, If he doesn't have any business being GM, it would tend to discount the accuracy of his argument.
In a perfect world some of these things may be true. However, when Gibbs and his team took the skins, as we all know, the team had been in COMPLETE disarray for some time. When you must make radical player changes immediately, and the timing is not of your choosing, you make the best deal you can. It may not be the deal you want. Being in a weak bargaining position, makes it impossible to drive a really good deal, so you do the best you can.
Additionally, it is real easy to blow up a speculative, foundationless commentary when the author has no skin on the table.

[offiss]

Originally Posted by Hog1

I get your point..................but, If he doesn't have any business being GM, it would tend to discount the accuracy of his argument.
In a perfect world some of these things may be true. However, when Gibbs and his team took the skins, as we all know, the team had been in COMPLETE disarray for some time. When you must make radical player changes immediately, and the timing is not of your choosing, you make the best deal you can. It may not be the deal you want. Being in a weak bargaining position, makes it impossible to drive a really good deal, so you do the best you can.
Additionally, it is real easy to blow up a speculative, foundationless commentary when the author has no skin on the table.

Relying on another posters ignorant comment as the basis to discredit a post you don't agree with is as baseless as it gets, why don't you go ahead and explain how we are better off for having all 4 of those players, all 4 of which I said we shouldn't either extend their contracts, or trade for, before their signings became reality, now my evaluation of these players are starting to become more and more apparent, and yet so long as they play for the skins they are somehow better than what they really are because their redskins.


You make it sound as if we were pigeonholed into the Portis trade, or the Brunell trade, or resigning Samuels, what about Lavar?

Portis- 50.mil
Lavar- 68mil
Samuels- 47mil
Brunell- 43mil

Thats 208 million dollar's between 4 players, I want to hear which individual believes that these are deal's that are, decent, or even liveable, those salaries are disgusting for what they bring to the table, DISGUSTING!

No 208 million minus those 4 wouldn't go towards vastly improving our team? NOOOOOOOOO?

Further more if you can't get the deal you want don't go out and break the bank to do so.

[FirstandTen]

Were not the only team making mistakes. Here's a list of the top 25 player salaries in 2004.

Manning, Peyton $ 35,037,700 Indianapolis Colts
2 Pennington, Chad $ 19,004,000 New York Jets
3 Kearse, Jevon $ 16,536,500 Philadelphia Eagles
4 Tomlinson, LaDainian $ 16,000,000 San Diego Chargers
5 Wistrom, Grant $ 15,503,200 Seattle Seahawks
6 Portis, Clinton $ 13,380,000 Washington Redskins
7 Tait, John $ 13,085,000 Chicago Bears
8 Vick, Michael $ 12,502,400 Atlanta Falcons
9 Winfield, Antoine $ 12,500,000 Minnesota Vikings
10 Arrington, LaVar $ 11,835,000 Washington Redskins
11 Walker, Gary $ 11,804,000 Houston Texans
12 Clifton, Chad $ 11,536,500 Green Bay Packers
13 Woody, Damien $ 11,504,000 Detroit Lions
14 McNabb, Donovan $ 11,002,300 Philadelphia Eagles
15 Springs, Shawn $ 10,910,000 Washington Redskins
16 Ogden, Jonathan $ 10,660,299 Baltimore Ravens
17 Harrison, Marvin $ 10,560,165 Indianapolis Colts
18 Wade, Todd $ 10,539,800 Houston Texans
19 McAlister, Chris $ 10,534,906 Baltimore Ravens
20 Robertson, Dewayne $ 10,516,250 New York Jets
21 Ogunleye, Adewale $ 10,455,000 Chicago Bears
22 Rogers, Shaun $ 9,480,000 Detroit Lions
23 Bulger, Marc $ 9,459,200 St. Louis Rams
24 Brunell, Mark $ 9,364,300 Washington Redskins
25 Gallery, Robert $ 9,300,016 Oakland Raiders

[Southpaw]

Originally Posted by offiss

Portis- 50.mil
Lavar- 68mil
Samuels- 47mil
Brunell- 43mil

Thats 208 million dollar's between 4 players, I want to hear which individual believes that these are deal's that are, decent, or even liveable, those salaries are disgusting for what they bring to the table, DISGUSTING!

No 208 million minus those 4 wouldn't go towards vastly improving our team? NOOOOOOOOO?

So you're suggesting we could've taken all that money and done what with it? If Snyder had not spent the money on those players, he would've done the exact same thing, but with different players. So instead of paying our current stars, three of which are in the prime of their careers, we'd have 100 million plus locked up in the 2005 versions of Deion Sanders, Bruce Smith, and Jeff George.

Every team in the league pays big bucks to it's stars. If you want a team with a bunch of low payed nobodies, become an Arizona Cardinals fan.

[Hog1]

Originally Posted by offiss

Relying on another posters ignorant comment as the basis to discredit a post you don't agree with is as baseless as it gets, why don't you go ahead and explain how we are better off for having all 4 of those players, all 4 of which I said we shouldn't either extend their contracts, or trade for, before their signings became reality, now my evaluation of these players are starting to become more and more apparent, and yet so long as they play for the skins they are somehow better than what they really are because their redskins.


You make it sound as if we were pigeonholed into the Portis trade, or the Brunell trade, or resigning Samuels, what about Lavar?

Portis- 50.mil
Lavar- 68mil
Samuels- 47mil
Brunell- 43mil

Thats 208 million dollar's between 4 players, I want to hear which individual believes that these are deal's that are, decent, or even liveable, those salaries are disgusting for what they bring to the table, DISGUSTING!

No 208 million minus those 4 wouldn't go towards vastly improving our team? NOOOOOOOOO?

Further more if you can't get the deal you want don't go out and break the bank to do so.

What you are trying to pass as an arguement is ABSURD! What NFL contract goes to completion without restructure? Who would you have replace Brunell, and for what price? Do you suggest he is not doing the job? What do you envision as a legitimate, realistic salary for a starting NFL QB? More importantly, WHAT could POSSIBLY make you BELIEVE YOUR opinion is anything more than that????? I ask this question because I CANNOT POSSIBLY imagine!