RIDETHEWALRUS Posted December 5, 2005 Share Posted December 5, 2005 Teams gameplan for Portis, not for Rock. You'll see this on most teams, alot of times the backups have higher ypcs I think that is the main reason Rock was able to do so well. When teams see him on the field they lay off the run a little bit. I do like Rock though. I would prefer him as our #2 back over Ladell. I just can't stand gus who are always injured. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
panel Posted December 5, 2005 Share Posted December 5, 2005 yo, here is another thing that I noticed, our O-line looks Great when rock is in, they look inept when Portis is in. I don't think this is because they do better for Rock than they do for portic, but Rock uses his lineman the way a Gibbs back should, and uses those holes. Rocks skill fit the Gibbs system perfectly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Califan007 The Constipated Posted December 5, 2005 Share Posted December 5, 2005 Read my initial post. The concept isn't really that hard to grasp if you actually read it. It's about Portis's running style on certain plays. Um, I think if your goal was to discuss Portis' running style on certain plays, naming your thread "Portis Vs. Rock" was a huge freakin' mistake...especially if you're gonna act shocked that people might actually start comparting Portis Vs. Rock. Maybe next time try naming your thread "Portis' Running Style" if, indeed, discussing Portis' running style is what you want people to focus on. Just a tip, son. Write it down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted December 5, 2005 Share Posted December 5, 2005 Then you run into the issue of teams knowing what plays you're running when that back is in the game. Can't do that. I don't think we'd be telegraphing our plays if we were to use Portis and Rock as "specialists", because each of them can do what the other does, fairly well. I don't think Rock pass blocks as well as Portis, but he's not exactly chopped liver, either. Portis isn't as good as Rock at getting through small holes and getting one or two yards when you need them. But again, he's not exactly bad, either. Both of them can catch out of the backfield, although I'd say Portis is better. Rock doesn't make as many people miss in space. As was demonstrated yesterday, sometimes he doesn't win footraces. To me, Portis should be in there on "normal" plays, Rock on short yardage and red zone plays. But neither one really limits our play selection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sowers Posted December 5, 2005 Share Posted December 5, 2005 I think a lot of this happens because running backs take such a beating its always in the back of their mind not to get hit hard, Portis is just slightly scared to hit the hole because of the duration he would like his career to be. Rock has nothing to lose, and everything to gain so he hits the hole like a bat out of hell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGreek1973 Posted December 5, 2005 Share Posted December 5, 2005 OK its like this:This is Rock, good speed, low to the ground, changes directions well. Overall good This is Clinton Portis, all around awesome, better than the rest. Faster than Rock, more proven aswell. I hope that clear it up a bit I still love the rock more cause he's an underdog Rock If you put it this way...I will take the Bimmer. You take those two cars in a nice mountain road Bimmer wins hands down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheGreek1973 Posted December 5, 2005 Share Posted December 5, 2005 I like Rock to but I'm still slightly bitter about the fumble against KC. I know it was a long time ago but I hate fumbles so incredibly much. Man I hate to ask you how you feel about the TWO fumbles Portis lost against Oakland. We were suppose to play close/lose to KC not to Oakland however. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blondie Posted December 5, 2005 Share Posted December 5, 2005 Rock doesn't make as many people miss in space. As was demonstrated yesterday, sometimes he doesn't win footraces. Rock was also running all over the field on special teams. Blondie Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
herrmag Posted December 5, 2005 Author Share Posted December 5, 2005 Um, I think if your goal was to discuss Portis' running style on certain plays, naming your thread "Portis Vs. Rock" was a huge freakin' mistake...especially if you're gonna act shocked that people might actually start comparting Portis Vs. Rock. Maybe next time try naming your thread "Portis' Running Style" if, indeed, discussing Portis' running style is what you want people to focus on.Just a tip, son. Write it down. :doh: Uh, yeah, I'll be sure to go grab a pen, old man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Art McDonough Posted December 5, 2005 Share Posted December 5, 2005 Who was it who said "if you have two starting QB's you have no starting QB's" meaning of course if there isn't a clear distinction between the better player, you have a problem? I feel that way about our three RB's. Portis gains way too many yards in spurts and not consistently throughout the game. He also has "happy feet" and hits the line with all the force of a (choose your own metaphor). Yesterday may have been somewhat of an exception but look at the Rams' run defense. Betts is injury prone and Cartright is inconsistent. I'd trade 'em all three to Seattle for that beast up there (what's his name?) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FBChick Posted December 5, 2005 Share Posted December 5, 2005 I like Rock.. I really do. His play on Special Teams alone is worth keeping him around for years to come and the fact that he can come in and have a game like yesterday makes him even more valuable. But the fact is, his two big runs came from simply taking the defense by surprise. Just watch the numbers His two big runs (three if you count the one negated by the holding penalty) came on his first three runs, where he was simply coming in to spell Portis for a single play. The defense didn't even line up in a run heavy package, which allowed the O-line to simply maul what they had up front. But once Rock came in as the every down back (and STL finally caught on that he could and would run) his numbers went back down to 5, 13, 3,1,8,1,7. Still good running, but about on par for what Portis was doing that day. The difference being, Portis turned a 47 yard run into a TD, even when everyone was gunning for him. And watch Portis on short yardage situations, he actually does lower the head and hit the hole. It's the stretch plays when he dances.. because that's what he is suppose to do to find the big play. On the pulling plays, he hesitates so he doesn't over run his blockers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HateYanksDukeCowboys Posted December 5, 2005 Share Posted December 5, 2005 crazy right? i know his avg. is up, yes.......so i started to think about what bothers me with his running style. he either gets a 9 yard gain, or a 1 yard gain. the net avg. ends up looking halfway decent, but there are WAY too many 1 yard runs from this guy. Rock & Betts seem to fall forward for 3 yard gains, while Portis doesn't actually break any tackles. we brought in gerald riggs to to be THE GUY, but soon realized byner was the better back, and allocated riggs to goal-line duty. i say, make portis the 3rd down guy and put the positive yardage guys in there on 1st and 2nd down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted December 5, 2005 Share Posted December 5, 2005 But once Rock came in as the every down back (and STL finally caught on that he could and would run) his numbers went back down to 5, 13, 3,1,8,1,7. Still good running, but about on par for what Portis was doing that day. The difference being, Portis turned a 47 yard run into a TD, even when everyone was gunning for him. Your first sentance would also be correct if you replaced "once Rock came in as the every down back (and STL finally caught on that he could and would run)" with "late in the game, when everybody in the stadium knew that Joe Gibbs was going to run the ball untill it stopped working, and that even when it stopped working, he'd keep doing it, anyway, and if the Rams can't stop these runs then the game's over, " . . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deepo11 Posted December 5, 2005 Share Posted December 5, 2005 portis is just fine....there is no way we are making our $50MM running back a third down back.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinsfan080 Posted December 5, 2005 Share Posted December 5, 2005 This is laugh out loud funny.... if Betts/Rock were really THAT good, they wouldnt have been the guy here already, or gone somewhere else to be the guy. I love Rock, I love Betts, but one good game dosent mean anything. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raperry2 Posted December 5, 2005 Share Posted December 5, 2005 crazy right? i know his avg. is up, yes.......so i started to think about what bothers me with his running style. he either gets a 9 yard gain, or a 1 yard gain. the net avg. ends up looking halfway decent, but there are WAY too many 1 yard runs from this guy. Rock & Betts seem to fall forward for 3 yard gains, while Portis doesn't actually break any tackles.we brought in gerald riggs to to be THE GUY, but soon realized byner was the better back, and allocated riggs to goal-line duty. i say, make portis the 3rd down guy and put the positive yardage guys in there on 1st and 2nd down. with all DUE respect. D O N T P O S T A N O T H E R S T U P I D T H R E A D ! ! ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gortiz Posted December 5, 2005 Share Posted December 5, 2005 he either gets a 9 yard gain, or a 1 yard gain. QUOTE]okay, so thats a 5 yard per carry average, I'll take that everytime. Also, don't forget, he needs blocks, he needs good play calling, and he needs a passing game to be successful, there was only one Barry Sanders ... What would Alexander be with out that passing game? LT with out Gates and Brees? The Edge with out P-Man? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HateYanksDukeCowboys Posted December 5, 2005 Share Posted December 5, 2005 the two responders are failing to realize that snyder got this guy, NOT gibbs. and yes, it takes longer to bench a 50mm guy than it takes to bench a 500k guy. that's just reality............so please don't argue on the premise that he makes more $$$, b/c we all know that already. argue in the sense that portis breaks a lot of tackles. oh, wait....he DOESN'T. argue in the sense that he doesn't fumble. oh, wait, he DOES (a lot). argue in the sense that he catches all balls thrown his way. again, he doesn't. he does block well though. skinsfan 080, your logic is laughable, if not embarrassing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted December 5, 2005 Share Posted December 5, 2005 the two responders are failing to realize that snyder got this guy, NOT gibbs. and yes, it takes longer to bench a 50mm guy than it takes to bench a 500k guy. that's just reality............so please don't argue on the premise that he makes more $$$, b/c we all know that already.argue in the sense that portis breaks a lot of tackles. oh, wait....he DOESN'T. argue in the sense that he doesn't fumble. oh, wait, he DOES (a lot). argue in the sense that he catches all balls thrown his way. again, he doesn't. he does block well though. skinsfan 080, your logic is laughable, if not embarrassing. Snyder got that guy? Not Gibbs? You do know what assumptions do, correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HateYanksDukeCowboys Posted December 5, 2005 Share Posted December 5, 2005 Snyder got that guy? Not Gibbs? You do know what assumptions do, correct? have you not been paying attention to one thing daniel snyder has done since owning the redskins? that deal had snyder written all over it. i think i'd be correct to infer this, and to base my opinion on knowledge and experience. are you THAT gullible? back to the point at hand, i'm not even calling for Rock to be the starter necessarily. in my depth chart, betts would be the #1 guy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KDawg Posted December 5, 2005 Share Posted December 5, 2005 have you not been paying attention to one thing daniel snyder has done since owning the redskins? that deal had snyder written all over it. i think i'd be correct to infer this, and to base my opinion on knowledge and experience. are you THAT gullible?back to the point at hand, i'm not even calling for Rock to be the starter necessarily. in my depth chart, betts would be the #1 guy. Glad you're not our coach/GM then. Oh and yeah, I know what Dan Snyder has done as owner... He brought back Gibbs. What a prick, right? :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mooka Posted December 5, 2005 Share Posted December 5, 2005 the two responders are failing to realize that snyder got this guy, NOT gibbs. and yes, it takes longer to bench a 50mm guy than it takes to bench a 500k guy. that's just reality............so please don't argue on the premise that he makes more $$$, b/c we all know that already.argue in the sense that portis breaks a lot of tackles. oh, wait....he DOESN'T. argue in the sense that he doesn't fumble. oh, wait, he DOES (a lot). argue in the sense that he catches all balls thrown his way. again, he doesn't. he does block well though. First off, Portis does not fumble alot. Thats rediculous. Look at the numbers, Portis fumbles as many times as any other franchise back.Second, you don't think he's a good receiver out of the backfield yet you want him as the 3rd down back? That makes no sense. Third, you want Ladell starting? Great, for about 4 games till he wears down from carrying CP's workload. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HateYanksDukeCowboys Posted December 5, 2005 Share Posted December 5, 2005 First off, Portis does not fumble alot. Thats rediculous. Look at the numbers, Portis fumbles as many times as any other franchise back.Second, you don't think he's a good receiver out of the backfield yet you want him as the 3rd down back? That makes no sense. Third, you want Ladell starting? Great, for about 4 games till he wears down from carrying CP's workload. i'm sorry, but i keep re-reading your post and can't seem to find one good point made about portis. i.e.----something he really excels at as a RB. K-Dawg, feel free to jump in here. i DO agree in that Snyder was brilliant in bringing Gibbs back, i truly like him for that. Back to the point at hand, what is Portis really good at? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mooka Posted December 5, 2005 Share Posted December 5, 2005 Back to the point at hand, what is Portis really good at? http://www.extremeskins.com/forums/showthread.php?t=130500&page=5 post #72 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HateYanksDukeCowboys Posted December 5, 2005 Share Posted December 5, 2005 portis is definitely NOT the fastest back in the NFL..........if he were timed in the 100m he may be up there, but hopefully we all know that the first 10 yards of burst are what true football speed is. i would put each starting feature back in our division ABOVE portis in their 10 yard burstability. problem is, portis gets tackled long before he truly gets up to full speed. does anyone remember Carl Lewis? yes, he was the 84 & 88 gold medalist in the 100m dash, but at the 50m mark he was usually in the middle of the pack. why? he had longer legs than most of his competitors. so does portis. NFC East quickest backs: (only counting starters) 1. Julius Jones 2. Westbrook/Barber 3. Portis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.