Will Portis be the same in the NFC East?

[SkinsFTW]

Somehow I dont believe that the defenses in the NFC east are as strong now as the 80's and the skins still lead the league several times then. So why does this asshat believe that Portis will do bad? Oh, yeah hes a Eagles fan, lol. Portis will do fine. If he gets as many carries as Riggins and Byner did he will get more yards. I'm sure he wont average 5 yards per but he will surely average better than 3.5. And even if he does average 3.5 and we go and win the super bowl, who cares? Arent the Eagles the only NFC east team to lose the NFC championship game more times than they won it?

[bubba9497]

If you want to use YPA as a hint to how Portis will do in Gibbs offense then you need to look at individual RB stats each year, and compare the backs that more closely represent Portis skills.

Overall YPA is not a good indicator simply because Gibbs used several backs, and some where purely short yardage guys, which would pull the average down. With Portis we assume Gibbs will use him more as the feature back than the by committee apporach as he usually did in the past.

Running Backs YPA stats

1981

+----------------------+----+-----------------------+

| Name | G | RSH YARD AVG TD |

+----------------------+----+-----------------------+

| Rickey Claitt | 13 | 3 19 6.3 0 |

| Nick Giaquinto | 6 | 17 73 4.3 0 |

| Clarence Harmon | 5 | 1 4 4.0 0 |

| Wilbur Jackson | 5 | 46 183 4.0 0 |

| Terry Metcalf | 16 | 18 60 3.3 0 |

| John Riggins | 15 | 195 714 3.7 13 |

| Joe Washington | 14 | 210 916 4.4 4 |

| Otis Wonsley | 15 | 3 11 3.7 0 |

+----------------------+----+-----------------------+

1982

+----------------------+----+-----------------------+

| Name | G | RSH YARD AVG TD |

+----------------------+----+-----------------------+

| Nick Giaquinto | 7 | 1 5 5.0 0 |

| Clarence Harmon | 9 | 38 168 4.4 1 |

| Wilbur Jackson | 1 | 4 6 1.5 0 |

| John Riggins | 8 | 177 553 3.1 3 |

| Joe Washington | 7 | 44 190 4.3 1 |

| Otis Wonsley | 9 | 11 36 3.3 0 |

1983

+----------------------+----+-----------------------+

| Name | G | RSH YARD AVG TD |

+----------------------+----+-----------------------+

| Reggie Evans | 16 | 16 11 0.7 4 |

| Nick Giaquinto | 16 | 14 53 3.8 1 |

| John Riggins | 15 | 375 1347 3.6 24 |

| Joe Washington | 15 | 145 772 5.3 0 |

| Otis Wonsley | 16 | 25 88 3.5 0 |

+----------------------+----+-----------------------+

1984

+----------------------+----+-----------------------+

| Name | G | RSH YARD AVG TD |

+----------------------+----+-----------------------+

| Keith Griffin | 16 | 97 408 4.2 0 |

| Rick Kane | 12 | 17 43 2.5 0 |

| Jeff Moore | 7 | 3 13 4.3 0 |

| John Riggins | 14 | 327 1239 3.8 14 |

| Joe Washington | 7 | 56 192 3.4 1 |

| Otis Wonsley | 16 | 18 38 2.1 4 |

+----------------------+----+-----------------------+

1985

+----------------------+----+-----------------------+

| Name | G | RSH YARD AVG TD |

+----------------------+----+-----------------------+

| Reggie Branch | 8 | 0 0 0.0 0 |

| Keith Griffin | 16 | 102 473 4.6 3 |

| Ken Jenkins | 13 | 2 39 19.5 0 |

| Rick Kane | 16 | 11 44 4.0 0 |

| Michael Morton | 1 | 0 0 0.0 0 |

| John Riggins | 12 | 176 677 3.8 8 |

| George Rogers | 15 | 231 1093 4.7 7 |

| Otis Wonsley | 16 | 4 8 2.0 0 |

+----------------------+----+-----------------------+

1986

+----------------------+----+-----------------------+

| Name | G | RSH YARD AVG TD |

+----------------------+----+-----------------------+

| Rick Badanjek | 6 | 0 0 0.0 0 |

| Reggie Branch | 1 | 0 0 0.0 0 |

| Kelvin Bryant | 10 | 69 258 3.7 4 |

| Keith Griffin | 16 | 62 197 3.2 0 |

| Ken Jenkins | 12 | 0 0 0.0 0 |

| George Rogers | 15 | 303 1203 4.0 18 |

+----------------------+----+-----------------------+

1987

+----------------------+----+-----------------------+

| Name | G | RSH YARD AVG TD |

+----------------------+----+-----------------------+

| Reggie Branch | 12 | 4 9 2.2 1 |

| Kelvin Bryant | 11 | 77 406 5.3 1 |

| Keith Griffin | 9 | 62 242 3.9 0 |

| George Rogers | 11 | 163 613 3.8 6 |

| Timmy Smith | 7 | 29 126 4.3 0 |

| Wayne Wilson | 2 | 18 55 3.1 2 |

+----------------------+----+-----------------------+

1988

+----------------------+----+-----------------------+

| Name | G | RSH YARD AVG TD |

+----------------------+----+-----------------------+

| Reggie Branch | 7 | 0 0 0.0 0 |

| Kelvin Bryant | 10 | 108 498 4.6 1 |

| Keith Griffin | 8 | 6 23 3.8 0 |

| Jamie Morris | 16 | 126 437 3.5 2 |

| Mike Oliphant | 8 | 8 30 3.8 0 |

| Timmy Smith | 14 | 155 470 3.0 3 |

+----------------------+----+-----------------------+

1989

+----------------------+----+-----------------------+

| Name | G | RSH YARD AVG TD |

+----------------------+----+-----------------------+

| Reggie Branch | 10 | 0 0 0.0 0 |

| Earnest Byner | 16 | 134 580 4.3 7 |

| Reggie Dupard | 7 | 12 48 4.0 0 |

| Jamie Morris | 12 | 124 336 2.7 2 |

| Gerald Riggs | 12 | 201 834 4.1 4 |

+----------------------+----+-----------------------+

1990

+----------------------+----+-----------------------+

| Name | G | RSH YARD AVG TD |

+----------------------+----+-----------------------+

| Kelvin Bryant | 15 | 6 24 4.0 0 |

| Earnest Byner | 16 | 297 1219 4.1 6 |

| Reggie Dupard | 7 | 19 85 4.5 0 |

| Brian Mitchell | 15 | 15 81 5.4 1 |

| Jamie Morris | 5 | 2 4 2.0 0 |

| Gerald Riggs | 10 | 123 475 3.9 6 |

| James Wilder | 1 | 0 0 0.0 0 |

+----------------------+----+-----------------------+

1991

+----------------------+----+-----------------------+

| Name | G | RSH YARD AVG TD |

+----------------------+----+-----------------------+

| Earnest Byner | 16 | 274 1048 3.8 5 |

| Ricky Ervins | 15 | 145 680 4.7 3 |

| Brian Mitchell | 16 | 3 14 4.7 0 |

| Gerald Riggs | 16 | 78 248 3.2 11 |

+----------------------+----+-----------------------+

1992

+----------------------+----+-----------------------+

| Name | G | RSH YARD AVG TD |

+----------------------+----+-----------------------+

| Earnest Byner | 16 | 262 998 3.8 6 |

| Ricky Ervins | 16 | 151 495 3.3 2 |

| Robert Green | 15 | 8 46 5.8 0 |

| Brian Mitchell | 16 | 6 70 11.7 0 |

+----------------------+----+-----------------------+

[artmonkfish]

Originally posted by Angus

Will the Portis of the AFC West be the same effective Portis in the NFC East?

Portis, we are told, rushed for more than 1,500 yards per season with Denver. In the AFC West he played six games each year against the Chargers (2), the Raiders (2), and the Chiefs (2), which collectively gave up 7,072 rushing yards last year.

While I am not arguing that the AFC West had good run defense at all, I do think that the 7072 yards combined given up is a TAD misleading.

WHO were they (Den, KC, Oak, SD) giving up these yards to? Mike Anderson, Larry Johnson, Ty Wheatley? Well, yeah, in small part. But who got the vast majority of the yards and td's?? Let's think about it.

Clinton Portis, Ladanian Tomlinson, and, uh, a guy called Priest Holmes. Those three backs in the same division will affect combined rushing yards given up in a season.

If the AFC West had Betts, Westbrook, Hambrick, and Tiki as starters, I doubt the 7072 number would have been reached, and it's not a reach to say that.

BOTTOM LINE: Portis is that good. And as others have said in this thread, the Eagles and Giants don't exactly instill fear, in terms of rush D. He should do at least 200 yards more on the ground than Tiki, plus several more touchdowns on the ground. 1400 - 1500 is easily within reach for Clinton -- yes, in the nfc east.

[TimFolk]

It depends, on how prepared Bugel has the lineman for the regular season. With Rasby and Sellers on the left side along with Samuels, I think he could get at least 10 yards on a counter to the left.

[rfdc]

Pocono said: Those stats are interesting Bubba. I mean you hear about the legend of the Hogs and Bugel but the yds per carry numbers over that span were clearly below average. Their average rank in yds per carry during those 12 years was 17th which is very close to bottom third when you consider there were fewer teams back then. I didn't figure it but it looks like the average per over that span is about the 3.9 yds per carry you averaged last year under Spurrier. Historically the average yds per carry in the NFL is a little over 4 per carry.

Here's what you may not know, cause I don't know old you are or what you may have seen during Gibbs I and the Hogs.

1. Many games the Skins were ahead or in "control" situations, which many teams hadn't seen "the way" Gibbs did it. So, say Clarence Harmon had 10 carries for 40 yards in a game. That's 4.0 right there. However, his carries were just breathers for John Riggins, who carried, say, 30 times for 140 yards. That's about 3.6 yards a carry.

2. That 140 yards may have broke down this way:

A. Riggins had 100 yards in the first half alone, with a touchdown in the first or second quarter, while passes off set the runs. The score for the team was about 24 - 10 0r 30 -10 Skins. In the early going of the 3rd qtr, Riggins or the Smurfs or an H-Back scores again. That opens the game up and Riggins sits. The other back has a good run, but by the 4th qtr late, the other team is trying desperately to just score a touchdown (or what Joe Gibbs used to call "points of pride" since they were definitely on the losing end at that time). This usually meant, the backup, or even Riggins was stymied with an all out "stop the run", because unlike a lot of teams that use mutiple shifts themselves, then complicate that, The Skins and Hogs didn't try to trick you. YOU KNEW WHAT THEY WANTED AND WOULD DO AND THEY MADE YOU STOP THEM OR PAY THE PRICE! So 3.6 yards against a defense that need to keep you from making 1 yard - FAILED!

In comparison, the 3.6 yards was the equivalent of about a 5.5 - 6 yard run today. Depends on the importance and the lead and how those yards were gained.

[TheREALJBird]

Clinton Portis will have just as much success in the NFC East....if not more. He is not your ordinary running back, he is a special type of running back, that, given the right personel and surroundings, can accomplish anything. I'll also say that the single season rushing record will be broken by him. If not this year, most definetly next.

"With the man in the White House?....Not likely!"

[Dallsux]

Originally posted by Angus

Will the Portis of the AFC West be the same effective Portis in the NFC East?

Portis, we are told, rushed for more than 1,500 yards per season with Denver. In the AFC West he played six games each year against the Chargers (2), the Raiders (2), and the Chiefs (2), which collectively gave up 7,072 rushing yards last year. In the NFC East in the coming season he will play six games against Philadelphia (2), Dallas (2), and the Giants (2), which together gave up 5,404 yards against the run (more than 1,600 yards less). Do you think he can do as well against these intra-division rivals as he did against the ones in the AFC West? Or better?

http://www.nfl.com/teams

I think he'll do equally well here as he did in Denver. We didn't exactly have the best running attack last season & because of Spurrier & his stupidity in the NFL, he never really relied on the run, especially against those teams & so, our numbers were always really bad against them last season. Now that we have Gibbs back, who knows that the running game is essential to winning games, that will change & with a back like Portis back there & the speed he possesses, I believe he will shock all 3 of those teams. I don't think they will expect the type of running game that will be coming at them this season! Go Portis!

[Jethrodsp]

All these darn stats are making my head spin.

Pocono:

Bugel's lines completely DOMINATED football games. Winning the LOS is vital to any team's success, hence our coach's 3 Super Bowl rings.

YPC stats are for morons. Watch the tape. Clinton is one of the most explosive backs in the NFL. If he can get past the second level of the Eagle's D, Brian Dawkins' jock will be seen lying in the middle of the field with his shoes not far from it while Clinton stands triumphantly in the end zone posing for all those Linc fans.

Hail Skins.

[Sebowski]

Originally posted by fwo40

Portis will not get 1500....I think a nice 1200 is in order. And to be honest...I'd be more happy with him just making clutch 1st down runs than worrying about his yardage.

Plus I think for all this talk about 3rd down backs, Gibbs will still get Portis some nice yards through the air.

1,200? Come on! Thats Curtis Martin/Eddie George numbers. We are talking about Clinton Portis!!!! He will get at least 1,600 yards rushing. 10 of his 13 games played last year went for over 100 yards, and one of those he get hurt in. If Portis plays a full schedule he will have at least 1,600 yards. I'm betting its around 1,800 for 16 games.

[China]

Originally posted by bubba9497

Apples and oranges. Riggins was a power back that grinded out yards, and also split time with Joe Washington in Gibbs first two years. Other backs in Gibbs tenure was by committee.

Portis is a speed back, when given an opening can take it to the end zone, something Gibbs never had before.

Portis's productivity will be measured by how well the OL plays. If Bugels gets them in Hog Shape... I say watch out.

I agree Portis will do well. I believe I posted earlier in this thread that I thought he'd get 1400+ yards. I think particularly since he is prone to breakaway runs he will get more yards than any previous Gibbs back. But again, I think he won't get much more than that because as you said and pointed out in one of your posts, Gibbs is prone to subsituting multiple backs, which will limit his total yards. Also, he will be facing tougher run defenses than he has previously. The team as a whole should have high numbers, just as when Riggs and Byner combined for over 1400 yards, plus additional yards by subs.

[Pocono]

The idea that the AFC West has bad #'s against the run because of the great backs that play there sort of takes a hit because both in 02 and 03 Denver was among the best against the run and in 02 Oak was #2 against the run even though they had 6 games against LT/PH/CP.

I think the big ? about Portis is not so much about the weak run D's just in the AFC west but that in his career he has faced top 25% run D's 5 times and bottom 25% run D's 13 times. In 02 he faced the 29th 30th 31st and 32nd team against the run and none of them were in the AFC West. In fact one of those teams that were awful V the run was coached by your new DC while he was with the Bills.

I think the most sobering thing about Portis' first 2 years is that stats-wise the only thing that makes his first 2 years different from the 2 years O Gary and M Anderson carried the load for Shanahan is basically the last game in 02 when he ran for 228 against the dead Arizona Cards who were among the worst against the run. If Portis had been given that day off his numbers would be slightly better than Gary's #'s and the next year they were slightly better than Anderson's #'s so when you adjust for the weaker AFC D's he faced numbers-wise there's not much difference. Today those other two backs aren't worth a pile of warm spit and Portis is the highest paid RB in football.

[skin_finatic]

Originally posted by Phat Hog

In a Gibbs system, he should have well over 1200 yards….

really..... average backs should run for 1200 yards! and this is no average back

[Dirk Diggler]

Yup Pocono,

Portis, Anderson, Gary. They are all the same. It's the system stupid! It's simply astounding that the Broncos could never fetch a top player or even a top pick for Anderson or Gary and believe me, they tried over the years. I guess it took an idiotic team like the Skins to come along and bail the Broncos out of their "Portis Blues" because man-o-man they were going nowhere fast with that dude in their backfield.

Throw away a game here and there and all those Denver backs are all the same...pure genius. That day off against Zona is what really would have leveled the playing field, right? I mean it wasn't enough that he got the first month off that season (and hardly touched the ball) as he was the backup to Anderson and Gary. Yeah, so let's take another game away from him and give the boy 11 starts instead of 12. Then we'll throw out all those AFC West Games. Before you know it, Portis won't have ANY LEGIT yards and I can just jump off a bridge and end my misery.

BTW, I love how Portis gets downgraded for playing in the AFC West but the other top backs like Tomlinson and Holmes get a pass. And Pocono, please enlighten us with your statistical breakdowns for all the other top backs, not just Portis - just to be fair. That is, after you're done playing with Peter King's balls.

[Streater101]

Originally posted by rfdc

Here's what you may not know, cause I don't know old you are or what you may have seen during Gibbs I and the Hogs.

1. Many games the Skins were ahead or in "control" situations, which many teams hadn't seen "the way" Gibbs did it. So, say Clarence Harmon had 10 carries for 40 yards in a game. That's 4.0 right there. However, his carries were just breathers for John Riggins, who carried, say, 30 times for 140 yards. That's about 3.6 yards a carry.

2. That 140 yards may have broke down this way:

A. Riggins had 100 yards in the first half alone, with a touchdown in the first or second quarter, while passes off set the runs. The score for the team was about 24 - 10 0r 30 -10 Skins. In the early going of the 3rd qtr, Riggins or the Smurfs or an H-Back scores again. That opens the game up and Riggins sits. The other back has a good run, but by the 4th qtr late, the other team is trying desperately to just score a touchdown (or what Joe Gibbs used to call "points of pride" since they were definitely on the losing end at that time). This usually meant, the backup, or even Riggins was stymied with an all out "stop the run", because unlike a lot of teams that use mutiple shifts themselves, then complicate that, The Skins and Hogs didn't try to trick you. YOU KNEW WHAT THEY WANTED AND WOULD DO AND THEY MADE YOU STOP THEM OR PAY THE PRICE! So 3.6 yards against a defense that need to keep you from making 1 yard - FAILED!

In comparison, the 3.6 yards was the equivalent of about a 5.5 - 6 yard run today. Depends on the importance and the lead and how those yards were gained.

That was beautiful. That is a GREAT example of how statistics can be hollow at times. People should pay a little more attention to his ability and less to statistics, siince they only present part of the story.

I've read so many threads like these where people are constantly trying to compare #'s to find reasons why someone will fail, or succeed while completely ignoring overall performance.

[Henry]

You know, I'd like to point out Anderson's 195 and 131 yard days against the Seahawks in 2000, two of his top four games that season. Seeing at the 6-10 Hawks were 22nd against the run at the time, let's not count those games either.

Last season, Portis broke 100 yards ten times in 13 games. That is about a consistant performance as anyone can hope for. In his one 'comparable' season, Anderson broke 100 yards in six of 14 games. Gary broke it four times in 12 games.

And of course Portis has had over 300 yard receiving in both of his seasons, while neither Gary nor Anderson ever broke 170.

[Pocono]

Originally posted by Dirk Diggler

Yup Pocono,

Portis, Anderson, Gary. They are all the same. It's the system stupid! It's simply astounding that the Broncos could never fetch a top player or even a top pick for Anderson or Gary and believe me, they tried over the years. I guess it took an idiotic team like the Skins to come along and bail the Broncos out of their "Portis Blues" because man-o-man they were going nowhere fast with that dude in their backfield.

Throw away a game here and there and all those Denver backs are all the same...pure genius. That day off against Zona is what really would have leveled the playing field, right? I mean it wasn't enough that he got the first month off that season (and hardly touched the ball) as he was the backup to Anderson and Gary. Yeah, so let's take another game away from him and give the boy 11 starts instead of 12. Then we'll throw out all those AFC West Games. Before you know it, Portis won't have ANY LEGIT yards and I can just jump off a bridge and end my misery.

BTW, I love how Portis gets downgraded for playing in the AFC West but the other top backs like Tomlinson and Holmes get a pass. And Pocono, please enlighten us with your statistical breakdowns for all the other top backs, not just Portis - just to be fair. That is, after you're done playing with Peter King's balls.

Dirk....Anderson only started 12 games in his huge year and Gary only started 11 in his big year. I realize Denver tried to trade these guys but you probably realize Gary tore his knee up in the first game of the season following his big year and also that Anderson was 27 when he was drafted and he had injury and drug problems that greatly diminished their trade values. I've seen a lot of Portis and he is very impressive and I really can't say I saw much of the other two in their big years but I think it's hard to not look good when you are getting 5 yds per carry.

But Dirk whether this turns out to be a great trade or one of the bonehead moves of all time I must implore you because of my strong beliefs not to jump off a bridge. Oh no I don't have strong beliefs against suicide that makes me ask you not to jump off a bridge...It's water pollution I'm worried about.

[Henry]

It's funny how wrong I was when I said Bugel may have lost his touch and tried to justify it with the anemic yds per carry average they had during his 4 years in SD. The truth is when you make a slight adjustment for personnel and add in the fact that D's really couldn't scheme to stop your run in the 80's because Gibbs would kill them with the pass the below average yds per sort of even out. Spurrier's O actually had a better yds per carry average over his 2 years than Gibbs had over his 12 and only in one year during Gibb's run did he surpass the 4.3 yds per carry that Spurrier's team acheived in 02. I think these numbers don't bode well for this magical improvement you all seem to expect in the OL.

I wish I had read this earlier.

Wow. Spoken like someone who watches the WCO too often.

You think ypc is an indicator of a team's success running the ball? Tell that to Riggins. You know, that guy who was inducted into the Hall of Fame a few years back. His career average was 3.9 ypc. How the heck did he sneak in?

Comparing Spurrier's career ypc to that of Gibbs is like comparing a third down back's ypc to that of a featured RB, such as ... oh, I don't know, let say Westbrook to Portis. The guy who only steps in during passing situations will OF COURSE have his ypc skewed higher because defenses are generally preparing for a pass when he gets the ball. Can you extrapolate this to the Gibbs/Spurrier comparison, or do I actually have to spell this out as well? Honestly, you were holding your own there pretty well for awhile, but this line of reasoning is bordering on the imbecilic..

Trust me, if you are seriously expecting Gibbs' rushing attack to look as anemic as that of Spurrier simply because you looked at one stat in a vacuum, you'd better stock up on the hard stuff because you're in for a long season.

[Flowtrain]

I guess the idea is that Portis will be set for a decline as he faces stiffer run Ds. It's a somewhat valid point considering, not just his former weak division, but the fact that his 2003 schedule overall featured only a few teams in the top 15 in run D.

The proposition begs the larger more specific question, how has Portis fared against better run Ds over the course of his career -- and is the difference so significant as to add any weight to this theory? I did a quick stat check (which could very well be off) and it showed the following over the past 2 years:

Top 15 run Ds: 71 yards per game

Bottom run Ds: 129 yards per game

These numbers are likely skewed for a variety of reasons including some early rookie outings. Also, you'd naturally expect to see a difference in YPG - although this gap is certainly larger than anticipated. Did Portis fatten his numbers somewhat on poor competition? The case can probably be made - or at least suggested. Or should his numbers be treated with a Parcells-like attitude: you are what you are? I mean, Portis' numbers are generally beyond reproach and he can only play the D his scheduled against. I'd lean toward the latter. But when it comes time to evaluate the multitude of factors influencing Portis's 2004 production, the one raised here probably carries enough merit to be cautiously sprinkled into the stew.

[Arsenic]

"I believe he will shock all 3 of those teams. I don't think they will expect the type of running game that will be coming at them this season! Go Portis!"

Hell Yeah.. DAMN I CAN'T WAIT!

[Henry]

Originally posted by Flowtrain

Top 15 run Ds: 71 yards per game

Bottom run Ds: 129 yards per game

Actually Flow, that is food for thought. Just to see what we're talking about I did a quick run down of games for the best back in the NFC East over the past two years: Tiki Barber. Tiki had a 1300+ yard season in 2002 and a 1200+ yard season in 2003. My quick numbers (which may be slightly off as well):

Top half run Ds: 73 yards per game

Bottom run Ds: 90 yards per game

What does this mean? Maybe it means a decent featured back should expect to make about 70 yards against top run defenses. Maybe it means Portis should expect to only gain 1200-1300 yards in the tougher NFC East. Or maybe it's just a weird coincidence.

[bubba9497]

HAHAHAHAHAHAHa

isn't it a giving all RBs have much better numbers against the bottom DLs than top DLs?

[Pocono]

I think you are going to find that all backs will get more yds V lesser run D's than against top run D's. What I think puts a red flag on Portis is that he has faced the poorest of the poor run D's an incredible number of times. He's started 26 games and 8 of them have been against the bottom 4 run D's in football that year. That's 30% of his starts have been V the bottom 12% of run D's. Another 5 starts have been against the next 4 lowest rated run D's which means half his starts have been against the bottom 25% of run D's that year.

Not only did Tiki Barber not face near that many bad run D's but Barber also faces the handicap of playing under Australian Rules football where you have to put the ball on the ground every 5 yds.......Hell I'm just gratified that one poster decided my argument belongs in the stew and I'm just glad that the crack pot is now in the crock pot.

[Henry]

Pocono, what I think puts a red flag on your arguement is that the amount of times a player has faced a good or bad run defense has nothing to do with that player's AVERAGE against a good or bad run defense. Portis fares as well against good run defenses as the best back in the NFC East and is far better against bad run defenses. What percentage of games who plays against what team doesn't change that.

If you are simply going to plug your fingers into your ears and repeat "Portis played a lot of games against the bottom 25% of run defenses!!!" as often as possible, this is going to be a very long and boring thread. That arguement has been addressed. Time to try something new.