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

[MTK]

Originally Posted by offiss

Your more the welcome to believe, that even for 1 minute Portis is better than Jackson, you probably should be in the front office with that evaluation, you can help push the Briggs trade threw.

I guess Scouts Inc. is wrong too?

[SmootSmack]

Not to take anything away from Stephen Jackson because he's a fine back, but my guess is that if we had Jackson, Offiss would be making the case for Portis. For some people the grass is always greener on the other side

[brent]

Skins need to have a balanced offense this year: 1500 yards for Portis and 1500 yards for Betts!

[MTK]

Since we're on the topic of YPC it's interesting if you take a closer look at Betts' numbers from last year.

In September he averaged 5.3 ypc, with those numbers inflated quite a bit by a huge day against a weak Houston D.

In October and November he averaged 3.7 and 3.9 respectively.

In December he averaged 5.0. That was around the same time when the offensive line really hit their stride.

So how much of Bett's success was due to him, or the offensive line coming together and really playing well?? Mark me down for the offensive line.

There's a reason why people say it all starts up front.

[Beemnseven]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

So how much of Bett's success was due to him, or the offensive line coming together and really playing well?? Mark me down for the offensive line.

There's a reason why people say it all starts up front.

So would it stand to reason that Betts is expendable after all?

I mean, if the offensive line truly deserves the credit, then just about any running back will do, right?

Mark me down as getting as much as we can for Betts. Suitable back-up running backs can be found just about anywhere.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Since we're on the topic of YPC it's interesting if you take a closer look at Betts' numbers from last year.

In September he averaged 5.3 ypc, with those numbers inflated quite a bit by a huge day against a weak Houston D.

In October and November he averaged 3.7 and 3.9 respectively.

In December he averaged 5.0. That was around the same time when the offensive line really hit their stride.

So how much of Bett's success was due to him, or the offensive line coming together and really playing well?? Mark me down for the offensive line.

There's a reason why people say it all starts up front.

Nice post! Thanks for breaking it down. That really seems to validate the notion that our O-line was the big reason why we were running the ball so well late in the season.

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Since we're on the topic of YPC it's interesting if you take a closer look at Betts' numbers from last year.

In September he averaged 5.3 ypc, with those numbers inflated quite a bit by a huge day against a weak Houston D.

In October and November he averaged 3.7 and 3.9 respectively.

In December he averaged 5.0. That was around the same time when the offensive line really hit their stride.

So how much of Bett's success was due to him, or the offensive line coming together and really playing well?? Mark me down for the offensive line.

There's a reason why people say it all starts up front.

Great post, Matty.

The other reason that "it all starts up front" is that on every NFL snap, every player on both sides of the ball is affected by what is going on in the trenches. That can not be said for any other position. No receiver cares what the QB is doing on a running play, but the lineman are important on 99% of plays.

Therefore, if you have a bad offense, you can always improve your line.

[offiss]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Since we're on the topic of YPC it's interesting if you take a closer look at Betts' numbers from last year.

In September he averaged 5.3 ypc, with those numbers inflated quite a bit by a huge day against a weak Houston D.

In October and November he averaged 3.7 and 3.9 respectively.

In December he averaged 5.0. That was around the same time when the offensive line really hit their stride.

So how much of Bett's success was due to him, or the offensive line coming together and really playing well?? Mark me down for the offensive line.

There's a reason why people say it all starts up front.

Well if thats the case we didn't need a 52 million dollar back did we?

OK I had about enough of this nonesense, let's get this straight if Betts averages more yards per carry it's the line, but Portis running behind the same line for 2 seasons who can't match Betts YPC is a superstar.

I totally agree with you Matty that is why you don't give up a ton to get a back, because you can win championships with adequet backs and great O-lines, why you ask, BECAUSE IT ALL STARTS UPFRONT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[dmek25]

it all starts up front? what a grand idea

[MTK]

As I said in another thread I'm in favor of as little change as possible this offseason.

I wouldn't deal Betts because I like the idea of having a strong 1-2 punch in the backfield, and dealing a guy like Betts who passed up the chance to hit it big in free agency doesn't send a great message to the rest of the team.

It does all start up front, but Betts isn't void of talent either. He's a quality back and a great #2 to have.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

As I said in another thread I'm in favor of as little change as possible this offseason.

I wouldn't deal Betts because I like the idea of having a strong 1-2 punch in the backfield, and dealing a guy like Betts who passed up the chance to hit it big in free agency doesn't send a great message to the rest of the team.

It does all start up front, but Betts isn't void of talent either. He's a quality back and a great #2 to have.

I like Betts a lot, thinks Portis-Betts would be a great duo, and I also don't want much change, but I would trade Betts if we got a 1st rounder for him. I just think we can get more value out of trading him and drafting a defensive player than holding on to him.

I know the 2-back system is gaining popularity, but no team with a RB as good as Portis has such a system. Most teams with a 2-back system have 2 mediocre RBs who can't carry the load by themselves. Moreover, the teams that did have two quality backs last season, are turning to a feature back system. The Bears let go of Jones, Rhodes might not return to the Colts, Dillon is done with the Pats, and Barber is done with the Giants. So, I honestly think the 2-back system is a flash in the pan fad that gained popularity with the Bears-Colts SB, but one that will fade in time.

[freddyg12]

Originally Posted by Sheriff Gonna Getcha

I like Betts a lot, thinks Portis-Betts would be a great duo, and I also don't want much change, but I would trade Betts if we got a 1st rounder for him. I just think we can get more value out of trading him and drafting a defensive player than holding on to him.

I know the 2-back system is gaining popularity, but no team with a RB as good as Portis has such a system. Most teams with a 2-back system have 2 mediocre RBs who can't carry the load by themselves. Moreover, the teams that did have two quality backs last season, are turning to a feature back system. The Bears let go of Jones, Rhodes might not return to the Colts, Dillon is done with the Pats, and Barber is done with the Giants. So, I honestly think the 2-back system is a flash in the pan fad that gained popularity with the Bears-Colts SB, but one that will fade in time.

I think people talking about it will fade w/time. IN reality it's nothing new. Until sometime in the 80s, fullbacks used to run the ball regularly & a lot of teams had a 3rd down back. Now the fullbacks mainly block, but teams give the extra carries to the 2nd string rb.

I"m glad we have 2 tough backs, just hope that Betts won't fumble at crucial times like late last year.

[skinsfan_nn]

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

As I said in another thread I'm in favor of as little change as possible this offseason.

I wouldn't deal Betts because I like the idea of having a strong 1-2 punch in the backfield, and dealing a guy like Betts who passed up the chance to hit it big in free agency doesn't send a great message to the rest of the team.

It does all start up front, but Betts isn't void of talent either. He's a quality back and a great #2 to have.

I don't know a livin ass that gives a damn about Jackson! He doesn't play for us, WHO CARES!

We have the two backs we NEED, they are gonna be hell FOR ANY TEAM TO DEAL WITH....... PERIOD

[rvd420]

no we dont have to shop betts.i dont see us trading either one of our running backs.

[Sheriff Gonna Getcha]

Watch the games and look for holes. Not to take away too much from Betts (who is a good back), but by the end of last season he was running through holes big enough to drive a truck through (particularly on draw plays, which seemed to be a favorite play). In looking at the 2005 games with Portis, I didn't see many big holes. Sorry, but Portis is a superior back.