Gibbs should have played Portis

USS Redskin · Post by **USS Redskin** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 2:10 pm

This could end up being a playoff game - much like last seasons Week 2 match up was - The loser of that game, Dallas, missed the playoffs.
With the division so close, Portis has to play these games. The offense is not the same without him. The Skins cannot rely on a 36 yr old QB to win games without a solid running attack. Portis, as he proved in the 5 game stretch last year, is the Offense of the Skins.
Let him sit out against crap teams like The Texans - (though after last night, I wouldnt be so quick to pick a Skins victory) - They NEED him for big division games.
He seemed really suprised on Saturday that he wasnt playing - big mistake. Unless he was in traction, he should have been in there.

Cowboys06 · Post by **Cowboys06** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 2:16 pm

Look, no he shouldn't have. You don't milk the cow when it's dry. You can hurt him by playing him when he's not up to it.

americantrotter · Post by **americantrotter** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 2:19 pm

As bad as this team has played, we nee him healthy when other parts are clicking. Clinto doesnt play DB.

gilbertarenas · Post by **gilbertarenas** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 2:20 pm

Portis is going to be here for a while. The Redskins should care about his health in the long term. Maybe medical professionals know more than Clinton Portis and his Miami education. I really doubt Portis is going to make any breakthroughs with his brain.

die cowboys die · Post by **die cowboys die** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 2:22 pm

i don't see how playing jesus christ at running back would make a difference with brunell at QB. may as well let portis rest until brunell gets benched, don't want to risk further injury.

redskinz4ever · Post by **redskinz4ever** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 2:31 pm

my statement with this topic is "why did portis play agaisnt the vikings?" he should have taken another week off for the cowboy game and been 100 percent. :roll:

die cowboys die · Post by **die cowboys die** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 2:36 pm

redskinz4ever wrote:my statement with this topic is "why did portis play agaisnt the vikings?" he should have taken another week off for the cowboy game and been 100 percent.

seriously, he would've had to run for like 300 yards for us to even have had a chance- and that with dallas stacking the box the whole time because we have a quarterback coach actually lining up and trying to play QB.

Irn-Bru · Post by **Irn-Bru** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 2:42 pm

die cowboys die wrote:
redskinz4ever wrote:my statement with this topic is "why did portis play agaisnt the vikings?" he should have taken another week off for the cowboy game and been 100 percent.

seriously, he would've had to run for like 300 yards for us to even have had a chance- and that with dallas stacking the box the whole time because we have a quarterback coach actually lining up and trying to play QB.

Stop making every thread a Brunell thread.

UK Skins Fan · Post by **UK Skins Fan** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 2:47 pm

Portis isn't fit. End of story. If the offence was functioning properly, we have good enough reserve backs to dominate games. At this point, I think Shawn Springs is a bigger loss than Clinton.

cvillehog · Post by **cvillehog** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 2:56 pm

Irn-Bru wrote:
die cowboys die wrote:
redskinz4ever wrote:my statement with this topic is "why did portis play agaisnt the vikings?" he should have taken another week off for the cowboy game and been 100 percent.

seriously, he would've had to run for like 300 yards for us to even have had a chance- and that with dallas stacking the box the whole time because we have a quarterback coach actually lining up and trying to play QB.

Stop making every thread a Brunell thread.

You can't consider any part of the offense in a vacuum. DCD was rightly pointing out that it make no sense to spend time thinking about "what if" Portis played, and used the example of Brunell's play as supporting evidence.

RedskinsFreak · Post by **RedskinsFreak** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:01 pm

Did anyone hear Portis on the CSN post-game show? He said he felt Gibbs had made the "he won't play' decision very early in the week and then kept Portis out of practice (he sais he could have practiced) solely to keep the 'no practice, no game' routine intact.

Chris Luva Luva · Post by **Chris Luva Luva** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:02 pm

I dont think Portis would have made a big difference. Al is the opposite of Gibbs. He passes to open the run, Gibbs runs to open the pass.

die cowboys die · Post by **die cowboys die** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:22 pm

RedskinsFreak wrote:Did anyone hear Portis on the CSN post-game show? He said he felt Gibbs had made the "he won't play' decision very early in the week and then kept Portis out of practice (he sais he could have practiced) solely to keep the 'no practice, no game' routine intact.

geez... i really hope this is out of context or something, otherwise this is not a good conflict to be going on.

RedskinsFreak · Post by **RedskinsFreak** » Mon Sep 18, 2006 3:27 pm

die cowboys die wrote:
RedskinsFreak wrote:Did anyone hear Portis on the CSN post-game show? He said he felt Gibbs had made the "he won't play' decision very early in the week and then kept Portis out of practice (he sais he could have practiced) solely to keep the 'no practice, no game' routine intact.

geez... i really hope this is out of context or something, otherwise this is not a good conflict to be going on.

The wording may not be exactly accurate but the jist was just that.

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Tue Sep 19, 2006 12:04 am

RedskinsFreak wrote:
die cowboys die wrote:
RedskinsFreak wrote:Did anyone hear Portis on the CSN post-game show? He said he felt Gibbs had made the "he won't play' decision very early in the week and then kept Portis out of practice (he sais he could have practiced) solely to keep the 'no practice, no game' routine intact.

geez... i really hope this is out of context or something, otherwise this is not a good conflict to be going on.

The wording may not be exactly accurate but the jist was just that.

On Wednesday, he told me he didn't want me to play. He wanted me to rest and get this further healed and we would shoot for the season instead of week in and week out having to miss games."

link

RedskinsFreak · Post by **RedskinsFreak** » Tue Sep 19, 2006 9:38 am

1niksder wrote:On Wednesday, he told me he didn't want me to play. He wanted me to rest and get this further healed and we would shoot for the season instead of week in and week out having to miss games."

link

Sure, that's the day-after version -- and probably the more accurate one.

But Sunday night right after the game, his emotions were a little more raw and it sounded quite more antagonistic.

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Tue Sep 19, 2006 9:43 am

RedskinsFreak wrote:
1niksder wrote:On Wednesday, he told me he didn't want me to play. He wanted me to rest and get this further healed and we would shoot for the season instead of week in and week out having to miss games."

link

Sure, that's the day-after version -- and probably the more accurate one.

But Sunday night right after the game, his emotions were a little more raw and it sounded quite more antagonistic.

same article wrote:Portis was inactive against Dallas and said in an interview during the game that he had injured his rotator cuff against the Vikings.

TincoSkin · Post by **TincoSkin** » Tue Sep 19, 2006 3:43 pm

i cant belive USS redskin needed a cowgirls fan to set him straight