Bet on Betts Having a Career Year

[Morneblade]

When I use a word or a term, it means whatever I choose it to mean. I defined it for readers in the OP.

So I can use "career year" as getting 600 yards, when at one time I gained 1599? Can is use the word "Waffle" to mean that I'm like a 1970 Baracuda? Jesus, not only do you take liberties with math, now you're taking them with the english language.

You still havent said how he will do it. He wont get enough touches unless someone gets hurt. But that wasnt part of your OP. So, explain in detail how Betts will lead the team in total yards.

[Oldfan]

That is your opinion based on what?

I gave my reasons in the OP.

What numbers has Betts put up in any form of West Coast Offense? Fact is, Betts has never taken a snap in an NFL game playing in a WCO. There are zero stats to base your assumption on.

So what? You can't deal with the reasoning in the OP?

Portis however has shown during his time in Denver to be very effective in Shannahan's version of the WCO.

The WCO essentially deals with the passing game. Clinton did next to nothing in Denver's passing game.

[Oldfan]

granted it was a different coaching regime, but look at last year. betts was coming off a career year after taking over for the injured CP and how often did we use him?

You granted that it was a different regime, but you seem to argue that this regime will do the same.

If they do, I'm wrong, but I'm betting Jimmy Z will see it differently.

[turbodiesel#44]

I want to see a formation that utilizes both CP and Betts on the field at the same time. That would be a great change-up call and would confuse defenses. You could run or pass from there. You don't bench your second best WR, why do it to your #2 back when he is as talented as Betts? Hit 'em with both barrels once in a while.

[SonnyJ]

Has anyone ever seen Oldfan and McD5 in the same room? :laugh:

First, he seems to think that every defense plays a single defense where the LB mans up on the RB out of the backfield, as if zone coverage doesn't exist, or that defenses don't naturally try to attack the QB when the offense spreads the field (unless Brady or Manning are QB, but he's already said that Campbell is in no danger of being as proficient as those two), or that maybe the opposite is true and the RB reads the LB before releasing into a route. It also ignores the fact that offenses can pick up on this and just start attacking the spot vacated by the LB. This analysis was incredibly over-simplistic and would get killed by even a Pop Warner coach.

Next, he rails on others for not countering his point with facts and figures, though he unequivocally fails to explain a rational breakdown, other than a touch distribution of 65%-35% in favor of Portis (even though the burden of proof is clearly on the person making the assertion). He has nothing to base this on, of course, nor does he explain how Betts could incredibly average 2x/touch more than Portis (which he must do to beat him for combined yards with that touch distribution). All this while Betts stays under 1600 yds this season.

So, please, Oldfan, you should be able to work out the math on this. You can guesstimate the # of touches the Portis/Betts combo will get, based on past history here and for the WCO, in general. Nothing too precise, but I'm guessing in the neighborhood of 500. That would give (in your 65/35 scenario) Portis ~ 325 touches and Betts 175 touches. We know Betts has to avg 2x Portis per touch, and we'll say he gets 1500 combined yards. That puts Betts at about 8.6 yds/touch, which means Portis will have 4.3 yards/touch. Assuming no injuries and Betts not returning kicks, do you really want to go with that?

Lastly, he wants to apply his own definition of "career year" - and have everyone automatically know what he's talking about :laugh:. Here I just thought that it meant a player's best year of production.

I often take issue with Oldfan's posts, but his arguments are usually tighter than this.

[Morneblade]

OF, Will you please stop dancing around how you think Betts will total yardage leader? I know you probably dont have a real explaination on how he'll get such numbers without guys missing large amounts of time, so why just man up and admit it. There is a way, for Betts to lead the team in total yards and not have Portis miss time (or anyone else being hurt either). But I'm pretty sure that wasnt what you had in mind, and probably wont think of it.

Im off to work in a few. But I expect a breakdown on how you think Betts will lead the team in total yards when I get back. That gives you about 9 hours.

And try to make it reasonable, without distorting Math or the English language.

[Oldskool]

I gave my reasons in the OP.

I saw your reasons. They aren't logical at all. Nothing is based on past performance or anything stat wise. You might as well say that Betts will rush for 3000 yards and 30 TD's this year. Never mind that no one has done that or that there is no statistical basis for this.

So what? You can't deal with the reasoning in the OP?

First, OP means original poster. You started this thread, hence you are the OP.

If you are talking about the conversation that you and PlayAction had, then you are again doing speculation with no statistic foundation.

The WCO essentially deals with the passing game. Clinton did next to nothing in Denver's passing game.

Sure. Cos the 33 receptions, 364 yards and 11.0 YPC receiving and his ability to block had "next to nothing" to do with the passing game.

[Oldfan]

You cannot simply define a word or a term to mean what you wish it to mean.

'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less.'

Lewis Carroll

Your ignorance is astounding.

Are you getting frustrated with me? Aw...:laugh:

[Oldskool]

'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less.'

Lewis Carroll

Your ignorance is astounding.

Are you getting frustrated with me? Aw...:laugh:

You do realize that you just burned yourself? :laugh:

The only thing more frightening than your comedy routine is the overall lack of understanding of logic.

And no, I've actually dealt with worse than you here on the boards. It just seems that you are irredeemable.

But again unless you wish to discuss your assumptions on Betts, this conversation is now at an end.

[Oldfan]

You still havent said how he will do it. He wont get enough touches unless someone gets hurt. But that wasnt part of your OP. So, explain in detail how Betts will lead the team in total yards.

Read the OP post for the reasons supporting my opinion.

[Morneblade]

'When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said in rather a scornful tone, 'it means just what I choose it to mean - neither more nor less.'

Lewis Carroll

So, does that mean you'll be falling off a wall and not being put back together by all the kings horses and all the kings men? Sorry, but that was a simply retarted quote. Obviously you have no real response for it.

I see that you'll spar with Oldskool, but you still refuse to break down just how Betts will have his supposed "career year". I honestly at least expected you to try, but it looks like you just going ot avoid it as you normally do when pressed for something concrete. Sad really, I was kinda hoping to get a good laugh or 2 out of your attempt at an explaination. But I guess I'll have to amuse myself elsewhere without your "explaination". What's worse is that I was able to figure out a senario on how Betts could do it with zero injuries in the matter of about 30 seconds, and I'm not the one suggesting this. I'll let you burn some brain cells on that one.

[Oldfan]

I want to see a formation that utilizes both CP and Betts on the field at the same time. That would be a great change-up call and would confuse defenses. You could run or pass from there. You don't bench your second best WR, why do it to your #2 back when he is as talented as Betts? Hit 'em with both barrels once in a while.

Betts isn't as elusive as Westbrook, but I see him being used in much the same way.

[kuraitengai]

I hope Jim Zorn doesn't worry about Clinton's feelings in making his decisions.

If Ladell is on the field at least 35% to Portis's 65%, with Ladell catching more passes and Clinton getting more carries, the yards per catch average would likely make them very close in combined average.

i hope he wouldnt. but i dont see that happening.

i just meant that with the refocusing CP has done this offseason that he should be in better shape than betts. plus in terms of running, the offense should be more suited for CP. betts was more of a gibbs style runner in my opinion. i dont know how well betts will do in a WCO as far as running the ball. receiving he is suited for, but i dont see betts as a slasher type of runner.

[Morneblade]

Read the OP post for the reasons supporting my opinion.

:laugh:

That was funny.

Now, break down, in terms of overall touches, passing yards, rushing yards and other yards just how Betts is going to be the total yards leader. How many does he need to be the total yards leader? Will it actually top his "career" year of 1599? You know, that "math" thing. Just how do you see Betts doing it. Not some abiguious statements.

Untill you post his overall totals, rushing totals, passing totals and totals from other catagories and how he is going to get these touches you havent supported anything. :doh:

[Morneblade]

Betts isn't as elusive as Westbrook, but I see him being used in much the same way.

Betts wont be the focus of the offense like Wesbrook is. Westbrook is the srating RB that is also the main focus of the passing game. Betts is neither.

[Oldfan]

I saw your reasons. They aren't logical at all. Nothing is based on past performance or anything stat wise.

If it's not logical, debate it. A logical argument doesn't require stats.

First, OP means original poster.

It also means "original post." One can easily determine meaning from the context of the sentence.

Sure. Cos the 33 receptions, 364 yards and 11.0 YPC receiving and his ability to block had "next to nothing" to do with the passing game.

33 receptions is not much for a starting RB. Betts had, what, 54 in nine starts in 2006?

[elkabong82]

Portis will have 1000+ rushing yards and 200+ receiving minimum given wht he has done over his career. That's 1200 total yards minimum. It's very difficult to see Betts rushing for anything more than 500 yards this season, barring injury to CP. It's equally difficult to see Betts actually getting over 700 yards receiving to beat CP for most total yards. Betts is a back-up, so it's even that much more difficult to realistically see Betts actually having more total yards than Portis.

I smell a sig bet in the works. Betts for 1700+ lol.

[Oldfan]

i hope he wouldnt. but i dont see that happening.

i just meant that with the refocusing CP has done this offseason that he should be in better shape than betts. plus in terms of running, the offense should be more suited for CP. betts was more of a gibbs style runner in my opinion. i dont know how well betts will do in a WCO as far as running the ball. receiving he is suited for, but i dont see betts as a slasher type of runner.

The WCO refers more to the passing game philosophy. Our running game will be the same as it has been for the past couple of years. You saw Ladell running with zone blocking in 2006. It's my understanding that one cut and go runners thrive in zone blocking schemes.

[McD5]

Betts is the man.....no doubt about that.

He had bad coaching on so many levels....as did Portis...but I am hopeful that has changed.

I would agree on the combined yards leader this season.

And his cheap contract makes him the "best bang for the buck" player on the entire team.

Good thread Oldfan.

[Oldfan]

First, he seems to think that every defense plays a single defense where the LB mans up on the RB out of the backfield...

Quote me. What did I say to support your comment?

Next, he rails on others for not countering his point with facts and figures...

Quote me. What did I say?

Lastly, he wants to apply his own definition of "career year" - and have everyone automatically know what he's talking about.

Since I explained it in the OP, I would hope so.

[Oldfan]

Sorry, but that was a simply retarted quote.

I wouldn't ordinarily correct someone's spelling but...the one word you should know how to spell if you plan to use it in on someone in these threads is... R-E-T-A-R-D-E-D :laugh:

[Oldfan]

Now, break down, in terms of overall touches, passing yards, rushing yards and other yards just how Betts is going to be the total yards leader. How many does he need to be the total yards leader? Will it actually top his "career" year of 1599? You know, that "math" thing. Just how do you see Betts doing it. Not some abiguious statements.

Untill you post his overall totals, rushing totals, passing totals and totals from other catagories and how he is going to get these touches you havent supported anything. :doh:

Why would my projections support anything?

Realistically, Ladell's only competition for the combined yardage leadership is Clinton. If Zorn uses him mainly as a receiver, Betts can have less touches than Portis and still beat him on combined yardage.

[Oldfan]

Betts is the man.....no doubt about that.

He had bad coaching on so many levels....as did Portis...but I am hopeful that has changed.

I would agree on the combined yards leader this season.

And his cheap contract makes him the "best bang for the buck" player on the entire team.

Good thread Oldfan.

I knew I could count on you, McD5.

[Santana_Fan]

Only a C+?

[Oldfan]

Betts wont be the focus of the offense like Wesbrook is. Westbrook is the srating RB that is also the main focus of the passing game. Betts is neither.

You know, if you only misunderstood me now and then, I would write it off as simple misunderstandings. But, you routinely twist what I say into your ridiculous stawman arguments.

In debate, that's a sure sign of a loser. Did you know that?