skinfan2k Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 So you're saying instead of spending time attempting to juke defender he is running straight to and through the hole? our offense is stingant when hes not in the game.. would u respect betts in the backfield... teams would blitz brunell and make betts beat them.. betts does not have the capability of taking over a game like portis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 Portis is the most important player on the team after Brunell. All of the other things this offense can do, including throwing deep to Moss, using Cooley short and hopefully using Lloyd and Randle El over the middle.........all of this is dependent upon the defense having to account for the threat that Portis presents on the ground Betts is a workhorse back. I think he could carry the ball 20-25 times a game for a stretch if the team need him to, however, he doesn't have breakaway ability. The offense with Betts becomes more limited and conservative as he is a between the tackles runner that does not really punish a shifting defense with the cutback runs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DWinzit Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 our offense is stingant when hes not in the game.. would u respect betts in the backfield... teams would blitz brunell and make betts beat them.. betts does not have the capability of taking over a game like portis First you must remember you have never seen Betts in a Saunders run offense. Second, you must remember our "new offense" has many more options and threats than last year. Teams will need to respect multiple receivers, trick play potential, Cooley etc... Betts is a good RB and will be in a scheme that works better for his style. Plus he has bettered himself in picking up rushers in pass protection. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
celder Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 haha u guys overrate betts... the guy can only run straight... he has no jukes moves.. teams would not respect our running game at all with betts Since watching Betts I have seen nothing but good things. I don't know why people don't give him the credit he deserves. I think he could be a big time player if he left the skins and was given a starting job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinfan2k Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 First you must remember you have never seen Betts in a Saunders run offense. Second, you must remember our "new offense" has many more options and threats than last year. Teams will need to respect multiple receivers, trick play potential, Cooley etc... Betts is a good RB and will be in a scheme that works better for his style. Plus he has bettered himself in picking up rushers in pass protection. maybe we are still gonna see a gibbbs offense.. don't expect to see a full throttle KC offense.. i thikn the offense will be similar to lsat year with a little more perks and wrinkles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DWinzit Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 I like Portis a lot, but my opinion is we're more screwed if Jansen or Samuels goes down than Portis. We don't have capable backup at OT!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 those factors still don't compensate for the fact that Portis is a proven 1,500 yard back who can cork the 65 yard touchdown run when given a seam. Betts is not that kind of big play back. he is actually a bigger threat down the field as a receiver, something I think you will see more often in 2006. in any case, I still believe that Betts' real value to the Redskins is as a change up to Portis and as a complementary player, not as a replacement or substitute for #26. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldskool Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 Clinton Portis is what moves the offense HOWEVER it would not cripple the team to lose him for the season. Remember that only recently Saunders was singing the praises of Betts and how he needs to get him more involved in the offense. I'm not saying that I'd like Betts as a starter for a year but with him and Cartwright as a tandem, we could still have a chance at the post season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DWinzit Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 those factors still don't compensate for the fact that Portis is a proven 1,500 yard back who can cork the 65 yard touchdown run when given a seam. Betts is not that kind of big play back. he is actually a bigger threat down the field as a receiver, something I think you will see more often in 2006.in any case, I still believe that Betts' real value to the Redskins is as a change up to Portis and as a complementary player, not as a replacement or substitute for #26. Certainly Betts roll is that of backup, changeup, relief RB and receiver in 2006! I don't know whether he could run for 1500 yards and don't wish to be forced to find out. But if Portis went down as suggested in an earlier reply, we should not throw in the towel, BETTS ISN"T BAD!!!(not shouting, just emphasising) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DWinzit Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 Clinton Portis is what moves the offense HOWEVER it would not cripple the team to lose him for the season. Remember that only recently Saunders was singing the praises of Betts and how he needs to get him more involved in the offense. I'm not saying that I'd like Betts as a starter for a year but with him and Cartwright as a tandem, we could still have a chance at the post season. Agreed 100% Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 I think the Redskins can still make the playoffs without Randy Thomas or even Jon Jansen. I don't think the team could make the playoffs without Portis. Not in the NFC East in 2006 where the worst team will probably finish at 7-9 or even 8-8. There are too many playmakers in the division to not be able to come in and score at least 20 points on a given opponent. Unfortunately, the old Cardinals are not in the East anymore providing us with 2 easy wins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldskool Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 I think the Redskins can still make the playoffs without Randy Thomas or even Jon Jansen. I don't think the team could make the playoffs without Portis. Sorry Bullldog but I have to disagree there. Remember its the O-line that makes the RB go to the next level, not the other way around. If Thomas or Jansen went down and we were forced to play 2nd stringers for the majority of the season, defenses in the NFC east would eat us alive. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DWinzit Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 Unfortunately, the old Cardinals are not in the East anymore providing us with 2 easy wins. :laugh: I can't tell you how many times I've thought this:laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 I think if we lost ONE of the OL we would survive. If we lost two then I would agree that all bets are off because you really can't scheme away from two vulnerable areas. Randy Thomas is a solid player but pressed for 16 games, I think there is enough depth here for the team to get enough out of a reserve for this offense to put up good numbers with the skill players we have. Jansen would be a bigger loss as he is a RT with a left throwing QB. This would be a big loss. On second thought, I would amend my earlier statement about Jansen. But either Thomas or Dockery could be replaced IMO and the team can still win games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CPstretch Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 the cardinals will no longer be a push over like they have been the past 20 years Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bulldog Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 just keep Matt Leinart away from Paris Hilton :laugh: :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DWinzit Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 Sorry Bullldog but I have to disagree there. Remember its the O-line that makes the RB go to the next level, not the other way around. If Thomas or Jansen went down and we were forced to play 2nd stringers for the majority of the season, defenses in the NFC east would eat us alive. One of the backups might be able to fill at gaurd, although certainly no Randy Thomas, but we're F'd if either tackle goes down for any length of time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldskool Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 I think if we lost ONE of the OL we would survive. If we lost two then I would agree that all bets are off because you really can't scheme away from two vulnerable areas.Randy Thomas is a solid player but pressed for 16 games, I think there is enough depth here for the team to get enough out of a reserve for this offense to put up good numbers with the skill players we have. Jansen would be a bigger loss as he is a RT with a left throwing QB. This would be a big loss. On second thought, I would amend my earlier statement about Jansen. But either Thomas or Dockery could be replaced IMO and the team can still win games. I think you have more faith in Mike Pucillo and Jonta Woodard than 98% of the posters have Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moondog Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 I agree with dwinzit but obviously, with any team, durability as a whole is essential...i think we'd be in better shape if one of our guards or rabach went down, then if portis went down. Either way, if it wasnt a season ender...we'd still have a shot at limping into the playoffs imo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LongLostSkin Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 Really I don't think that any one Redskins player could be deemed indispensable and I feel that is just a testament to how solidly built this team is, we have quality depth. Of course the loss of a stud player hurts, but I don't think it would de-rail our season by any stretch. We'd lose an important gamebreaking dynamic to the offense no doubt, but Betts is a capable backup and I'm still hoping Lumsden could be something special. With the best coaching staff in the league, I have complete faith that we would press on towards the playoffs.:allhail: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aussieskin Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 I dont believe that one player could make a difference like that on a team, IF CP goes down in the first game for the rest of the season, the skins will put him on IR and bring in another class RB to do the job, the other teams defences will have more than enuff problems trying to hold down the other offensive weapons, LB will become our new champion as he makes the yards on carries, CP is the main threat BUT the skins will still make the SB this season Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tritx3 Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 Portis Is The Redskins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Predator 26 Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 Al Saunders is very high on Betts! If Portis gets hurt, I think we'll be fine but I don't want to find out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BLEED-B&G Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 Portis is the #2 most important player on the team behind Brunell. From OTA interviews it's been said that Betts has been very impressive in the offseason. While it would be a major loss if CP went down (god forbid). We do have capable backups, with experience, in Betts and Rock. Brunell on the other hand is in front of a career #3 and an unproven rookie. Point being...losing brunell is more detrimental than losing portis Brunell numero uno Portis #2 #3 is a toss up between Walt Harris and Taylor Jacobs (and I know harris is gone jerkoff) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geneva Posted July 19, 2006 Share Posted July 19, 2006 The Redskins can still win it all if Portis is injured. Betts, Cartwright, Sellers and Manuel White Jr. are all very good backs. This is not an area that the Redskins are week in. If you want to think of problems if one or two players are injured take a good look at our O line......,and keep your fingers crossed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.