Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins

You know the only stat that matters?


909997

Recommended Posts

When Clinton portis runs for 100+ yards the washington redskins are 15-2

Thats a pretty crazy stat

Our 07 season depends on how well portis does. It looks pretty good right now knowing al saunders history of RB's. If portis has 10+ 100 yard game, i really dont see why redskins cant win 10+ games.

AAGS196%7EClinton-Portis-05-06-Action-Posters.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When Clinton portis runs for 100+ yards the washington redskins are 15-2

Thats a pretty crazy stat

Our 07 season depends on how well portis does. It looks pretty good right now knowing al saunders history of RB's. If portis has 10+ 100 yard game, i really dont see why redskins cant win 10+ games.

AAGS196%7EClinton-Portis-05-06-Action-Posters.jpg

Actually you're half right IMO. It depends on how effective Campbell is. That's why Saunders and co. want Campbell's completion percentage in the 60's. If he is efficient it means we're forcing teams to play honest and not stack 8 in the box against us. Yes, Portis has to run well but he's only going to be as good as the rest of the offense b/c he won't gain 100+ yards if teams stack the box the entire game. I think it rests on Campbell more so than CP.

:2cents:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How much of that is backwards? If we're dominating a team enough that we can just pound the rock for our last possession or two, wouldn't that also lead to Portis getting 100+ yards on the day?

Having said that, I totally believe that when we can get Portis going in a rhythm and our O-line performing at a high level, our offense dominates games. I think our offense is going to rely (yet again) on how Portis performs this season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

How much of that is backwards? If we're dominating a team enough that we can just pound the rock for our last possession or two, wouldn't that also lead to Portis getting 100+ yards on the day?

Having said that, I totally believe that when we can get Portis going in a rhythm and our O-line performing at a high level, our offense dominates games. I think our offense is going to rely (yet again) on how Portis performs this season.

scores where we won with portis:

2006

jacksonville: no domination, we won in overtime

2005

bears: we won by 2 points

denver: we lost by 2 points

san fran: blowout

tampa: we lost by 1 point

st louis: we won by a decent margin, scored most points in 4th quarter

arizona: we won by 4 points

dallas: blowout

giants: close game until the end

philly: close game until the end

04

2 games we won by one possession, one was 1 possession, and the other was a blowout.

so hes got 3 blowout games with a bunch of yards, but most of the others were all pretty close games.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Redskins are also undefeated in games where Portis has scored 3 or more tds. Basically, if he runs for 100 yds and scores 3 tds, we are unstoppable. But definately if Campbell throws for 400+ yds. :dunce:
If the redskins score more than the other team, we win. :)
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really dislike when announcers boast stats like this.

Its not really a telling stat.

Does the team win because the player rushes for 100 yards or does the player get 100 yards because the team is winning and thus rushing more.

Which one causes which? Prob a little bit of both

A more telling stat would be first half yards but no one seems have those.

However the only stats that matters is points and the win loss record.

The redskins have 0 losses when they outscore their opponents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I really dislike when announcers boast stats like this.

Its not really a telling stat.

Does the team win because the player rushes for 100 yards or does the player get 100 yards because the team is winning and thus rushing more.

Which one causes which? Prob a little bit of both

Someone already addressed this in another post on this thread...it leans far more towards the Skins winning because of Portis' running, not the other way around.

A more telling stat would be first half yards but no one seems have those.

That only matters if the Skins are ahead at the half by a sizable margin...for instance, if the Skins are leading by three points at the half but win by 10 points, then Portis' 1st half rushing stats are irrelevant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I see what the original poster is trying to say here. This is a stat you see thrown around alot by announcers and analysts in the NFL...but here is some food for thought...

The simple idea is when a team runs for 100+ yards in a game, they win..

But..

Could it be..."When teams win, they get to run for more yards?"

Now I'm nop fool...I've been watching the Redskins and the entire NFL for 24 years and I DO understand how vital a running game is...but when a team, like the Skins for instance gets out to a big lead, they get to run the ball in the 3rd and 4th quarter to nurse their lead...they don't have to throw the ball much the rest of the way and sure enough, the RB goes over 100 yards.

Remember when we pounded the 49ers 2 years ago 52-17? We threw some bombs in the 1st half to GET our lead, then ran the 2nd half away on the ground.

When we beat Dallas in 05' 35-7...it was 3 Cooley TD receptions and a bomb to Moss down to the 1 yard line that got us the big lead...then we ran the ball down their throats in the 2nd half...you can't look at that game and say Portis' getting 100 yards or whatever he had got us the win...

Hey now, I want us to the have #1 rushing game in the league this year and I think we at least have a shot at having the top 2 or 3...but leads...BIG leads, are usually attained by passing the ball in the first half and gettting a play or two on defense and special teams.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When Clinton portis runs for 100+ yards the washington redskins are 15-2

This doesn't get me pumped up for this season. :whoknows:

After last pre-season, I'm not taking anyone's word for nothin'.

This is a bit weird for me, because I'm usually a glass-half-full kind of guy. I would love for Portis to set the league on fire this year, but while it's true that he's physically talented, so is everyone else in the league, and unfortunately everyone else has been practicing and playing while he's been out of commission.

I hope to be pleasantly surprised. I really do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When Clinton portis runs for 100+ yards the washington redskins are 15-2

Thats a pretty crazy stat

Our 07 season depends on how well portis does. It looks pretty good right now knowing al saunders history of RB's. If portis has 10+ 100 yard game, i really dont see why redskins cant win 10+ games.

AAGS196%7EClinton-Portis-05-06-Action-Posters.jpg

Can I hear an Amen!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The scary thing is that if 100 yards really means that we win because we were able to run like some claim then why didn't we win all the games when Betts got 100 yards? Actually we lost most of those games.

Is that really the difference between Brunell and Campbell, or Saunders/Gibbs offenses, or Betts fumbling?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The "100 yards = win" theory has many components to it. If you run well, you open up the play-action pass which leads to scores. Scores put you up on top, and you go back to running. It's cyclical. Running well basically means that your whole offense is going great, and that your defense is doing well, too, because you've built a lead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The scary thing is that if 100 yards really means that we win because we were able to run like some claim then why didn't we win all the games when Betts got 100 yards? Actually we lost most of those games.

Is that really the difference between Brunell and Campbell, or Saunders/Gibbs offenses, or Betts fumbling?

betts could only run outside the 30 yard lines. he was great until it came time to score, then he sucked big time. i calculated his vs portis averages during their 5 game stretches in 05/06 and portis was a beast in the redzone, whereas betts would average like 2.5 yards a carry and only a few TDs. betts couldnt score, and he had no breakaway advantages like portis had. scoring is what counts. portis had 1500+ and 11 TDs in 05, betts put up 4 TDs in 06. simple math, betts can rush for a lot of yards and not score at all. no scoring = no winning.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...