Skins Scanning Waiver Wire For Running Back?

Jake · Post by **Jake** » Sat Sep 04, 2004 1:01 pm

There are whispers emanating from Washington that tailback Clinton Portis isn't quite a perfect fit for the Joe Gibbs offense, which usually demands a power-type back. But a far bigger concern for the Redskins, who still figure to get about 1,400-1,500 yards from the third-year veteran obtained in the Champ Bailey trade, is the No. 2 tailback spot. None of the backups -- Ladell Betts (erroneously rumored to have been offered to Miami as part of a package Washington hoped would land Adewale Ogunleye), Sultan McCullough, Chad Morton or Rock Cartwright -- has been very impressive. Which explains why personnel chief Vinny Cerrato has been calling around checking on the status of veteran tailbacks who might be released this weekend. The 'Skins snooped around the possible availability of Garrison Hearst, with whom Cerrato is familiar from their stint together with the 49ers, but the Denver Broncos aren't likely to cut him now that Mike Anderson is sidelined for the season. Washington will take a long look at the waiver wire this weekend to see if there is a tailback better than the group it currently has behind Portis on the depth chart. One quickie on Anderson and Denver: The Broncos, given their depth at the position, can compensate for his season-long absence. Where the season-ending groin injury impacts Denver the most is that it kept the Broncos from dangling him in trade talks. There likely would have been a team or two, Miami primary among them, willing to part with a low-round pick for Anderson.

http://sports.espn.go.com/nfl/columns/s ... id=1873869

Of course this was written before last night's game so the chance of us looking at another RB may decrease.

Jeff Rhodes · Post by **Jeff Rhodes** » Sat Sep 04, 2004 1:36 pm

It's also written by Pasquarelli, which opens up the strong possibiilty that it's a bald-faced lie.

skinsfan#33 · Post by **skinsfan#33** » Sat Sep 04, 2004 2:12 pm

This guy can't :shock:

have a clue!

verm04 · Post by **verm04** » Sat Sep 04, 2004 5:18 pm

sigh.. lenny.. i will never understand his disdain for the skins. Che is right though, Gibbs only had pure power backs when he was in washington. yYou know..people like timmy smith and Ernit Byner. They really fit that Jamal lewis mold of Between the tackles grinders. I just guess sense not 1 of the 3 backups have looked anything other than horrible (cough) we will just have to sign another over priced vet :roll:

tx_skins_fan · Post by **tx_skins_fan** » Sat Sep 04, 2004 5:58 pm

Don't forget Joe Washington and Kelvin Bryant when you think about Gibbs' bruising backs!!

Deadskins · Post by **Deadskins** » Sat Sep 04, 2004 6:14 pm

And Ricky Ervins. That guy brought a load!

hkHog · Post by **hkHog** » Sat Sep 04, 2004 7:16 pm

Jeff Rhodes wrote:It's also written by Pasquarelli, which opens up the strong possibiilty that it's a bald-faced lie.

He just can't give up saying that the Portis trade was a bad idea. This may just be another cheap shot at the 'Skins, Danny, Gibbs (he claims to respect himand yet he is always his biggest doubter), and most of all Portis. He's just a worthless piece of whale blubber. He says the same thing over and over, no imagination!

Having said that, if we can land a nice back I would be all for it. Portis is amazing but he does get banged up. I just hate Pasquerelli so much, the way he writes a simple piece of news like this still shows his bias.

JPFair · Post by **JPFair** » Sat Sep 04, 2004 7:44 pm

That's, for lack of a better term, HOGWASH!!! Ther'es a reason why they haven't shown much of Clinton Portis. Trust me, when the regular season starts, Gibbs will be able to fit Portis right into the offense. It might not be what every one expects to see, but it'll be good. The press read way too much into the pre-season games.

1niksder · Post by **1niksder** » Sat Sep 04, 2004 8:08 pm

It's not like Portis was forced on Gibbs 2 weeks ago, and now Joe has to make adjustments to fit him in.
Portis has been apart of the whole Offenxive scheme since day 1. Everyone in the press is saying Portis is too small.. he won't fit into Joe's Counter Trey based offense.
Joe hasn't showed anything but the counter trey run out of about a million defferent sets, and it's been successful without Portis. Joe doesn't want anybody to see the counter with Portis so he only ran it we Portis a few times during pre-season. The different versions were ran quite alot after Portis was taken out of games to get the rest of the O use to running it but Portis won't have a problem finding the hold.
What I did notice was, the offense has been runnig a lot of sweeps during pre-season and I don't remember that being a staple of the Gibbs Offense.

Then again we are responding to something by Len Pastabelly which is a sure sign that we have to much time on our hands

tcwest10 · Post by **tcwest10** » Sat Sep 04, 2004 8:15 pm

Until the season begins, you will see Len doing what Len always does. In fact, since we had a really good start last season, you may see the Man of Fat stretch his nonsense well into the season. When we show that we have mastered the basics of football, he and others will be quick to jump on the band wagon, and those naysayers will simply disappear without so much as a "by your leave".

NC43Hog · Post by **NC43Hog** » Sat Sep 04, 2004 9:18 pm

I just choose to ignore LENNY. Who were we talking about again. :hmm:

welch · Post by **welch** » Sat Sep 04, 2004 10:19 pm

Right.

Len? Lennie?

And Gibbs has always fine-tuned his offense to fit his people. Was Byner as just like Riggins? If Gibbs only used big power backs, then Gerald Riggs would have started SB 26.

If Gibbs had had Larry Brown, then LB would have been the RB -- all 195 pounds of him.

(I'm looking for a copy of an old Post story that explains Brown. Amusing, because it was written about 1989 for fans too young to remember anyone before Riggo...)

NC43Hog · Post by **NC43Hog** » Sat Sep 04, 2004 10:26 pm

So Welch - you must know who my favorite Redskin is huh?

Too bad that makes me old. :cry:

skin_to_the_bone · Post by **skin_to_the_bone** » Sat Sep 04, 2004 10:31 pm

Fat Len is obviously jealous. It's a fact that when he tried out for football when he was a youngin'.....he couldn't play rb, because he clogged the wholes rather then run thruogh them. The fat b@st@rd would have made a great gatorade carrier, but somehow he got a writing gig with ESPN. Must be he threatened to eat them if he was passed up. Smart guys, he wouldn't have left any evidence. :lol:

Justice Hog · Post by **Justice Hog** » Sat Sep 04, 2004 10:44 pm

For anyone that has ever followed Joe Gibbs football...we all know that Joe Gibbs will develop an offense that will allow Portis to shine.

Now....if the Skins are looking at the waiver wire, I am hoping they are looking for DE Shawn Johnson of the Raiders.....but's that's now another thread entirely.

skin_to_the_bone · Post by **skin_to_the_bone** » Sat Sep 04, 2004 11:27 pm

Justice Hog wrote:For anyone that has ever followed Joe Gibbs football...we all know that Joe Gibbs will develop an offense that will allow Portis to shine.

That is dead balls accurate right there, Justice. Gibbs will develope something special around Portis that other backs could only dream about.

tcwest10 · Post by **tcwest10** » Sun Sep 05, 2004 6:22 pm

...or Buges will, anyway.

welch · Post by **welch** » Sun Sep 05, 2004 9:59 pm

NC43 write

So Welch - you must know who my favorite Redskin is huh?

Yep. And I remember (or think I ought to remember) agreeing with you that Larry Brown as well as Art Monk should be in the Hall of Fame.

Way back, about 1970, Jim Brown, probably the greatest runner of all time, said that Larry Brown was the only RB who interested him. "He's the only one who can do things I couldn't do", or words to that effect. Jim Brown had a giant shrug for OJ Simpson, who was Larry Brown's more famous contemporary.

It was our Brown's takeoff that fascinated Jim Brown. Larry Brown could take the handoff and get through a hole faster than anyone ever. I remember watching a game duing the SB 7 season: the announcers showed a Larry Brown run between center and guard, which he had been doing all game. The Redskins had an unimpressive OL then, a bunch who were more skilled at holding just enough to let Billy Kilmer throw to Charlie Taylor or Roy Jefferson. Larry Brown got through holes that didn't exist, because he took the ball and accelerated before the defense even blinked.

I remember that they timed the Redskins that year, and found that Charlie Taylor was the fastest over a full 100 yards, but that Brown beat everyone over the first 10 or 15.

Jim Brown could not accelerate like that, and he knew it, and he saw it in Larry Brown.

*

Oh, and let's add blocking, pass-receiving, and self-less play. Larry Brown was as good a blocker as Charlie Harraway, the upback -- Allen played the I-formation, mostly. He had hands like Taylor and Jerry Smith. And...

Well, the gist of the article, and I hope I can find it, is: why hope for "another Riggins"? Why not the best of all? Why not Larry Brown?

*

I'm sure that Gibbs has already made little adjustments to use all of Portis's skills.

skinsfaninroanoke · Post by **skinsfaninroanoke** » Sun Sep 05, 2004 10:29 pm

nik -

The counter trey, which is a major staple of the Gibbs offense, is by definition and action an off tackle power sweep.

I would expect to see that several times a game and that would be exactly what Portis could excel in

Imagine this scenario....

Portis sweeps right on a counter trey - the defense is in a pickle due to his field vision and cutting and speed - do they stretch it out to the sideline? If so - there will be a hole CP can cut back through and with the defense committing the manpower to stretch it that far - there won't be a lot of help in the secondary. Or - conversely - they don't stretch it out, and CP breaks it around the end, once again facing mostly only corners and safeties... once through them he will have open field.

If he has to break it to the sidelines, they may pin him, but as we saw in the falcons game when they ran the counter trey, it looked as if they were going to catch McCullough towards the sideline, but the OL sweeping extended their blocking until the Falcons didn't have enough men to block. McCullough broke it for 10 yards, even getting pinned to the sidelines.

Portis not only has better speed and better vision, he is more decisive and makes his moves faster and better than McCullough. He will often look cut off, only to cut diagonally back through a wall of people to gain 5 yards...

Then, when the run is faked on play action, if it has been extraordinarily effective, the passing game will have openings that won't be believed - this happened a lot in 92.

Portis is fine - they put him in there to get hits, get up to speed and to read defenses... most of his runs were gut type of runs, and his one real shot at the outside he broke it for what, 22 yards?

Relax - I was right about the offense clicking with less scrubs, and next Sunday, you will see all the starters in for the whole game - no interrupted rythym and no scrubs being indecisive or unsure.

This game plan worked fine before, won 3 of 4 Superbowls in 12 years and had only one losing season, and that one due to massive injuries that took out a good 1/2 of the starters on each side of the line if I remember correctly.

gundo · Post by **gundo** » Mon Sep 06, 2004 10:23 am

Every critic that says "Portis isn't the typical 'Gibbs' running back" needs to keep in mind that Portis is the RB that Gibbs WANTED. It's not like Portis is a remnant of the Spurrier era. Gibbs wanted a vet QB and a legit RB and got both. And don't forget that Betts and Rock are very capable of grinding in the 4th quarter if they are called upon to do so (even though I think Portis is capable for that role as well).

ChillWill · Post by **ChillWill** » Mon Sep 06, 2004 10:29 am

The Tampa Bay defense will destroy the counter tre. We better come with a new wrinkle. I'm a little concerned about this OL against this defense

Deadskins · Post by **Deadskins** » Mon Sep 06, 2004 11:00 am

I'm a little concerned about this OL against this defense

Don't be. Buges has our boys prepared.

skin_to_the_bone · Post by **skin_to_the_bone** » Mon Sep 06, 2004 11:11 am

Granted it will be "no day at the beach" for our O-line, but they'll be prepared to get the job done.

Redskin in Canada · Post by **Redskin in Canada** » Mon Sep 06, 2004 12:08 pm

These are my two-cents: My 2 cents

I agree that Tampa will be a good test. Joe already recognized that it is a good team. However,

Their defense is good but it is not what it used to be ...

Our offense will do more than run counter treys...

Our H-Back will thrive against them...

I can go to battle with Rock Cartwright. He will play his heart out for the tough yards.

welch · Post by **welch** » Mon Sep 06, 2004 1:08 pm

80 Wrote

The Tampa Bay defense will destroy the counter tre. We better come with a new wrinkle. I'm a little concerned about this OL against this defense

(a) I believe that Gibbs and Bugel have already seen that.

(b) There is much more to a Gibbs offense than conter-trey. Aside from the variations on pile-driver blocking, Gibbs always gas one of the best passing games. (Consider "Air Coryell".)

It will be fun. No boasting, no over-condidence: Gibbs tries to coach every game is if they were at the Super Bowl. "I don't care about the next game. I just want to win this one...who do we play next week?" That's a Gibb's-classic. Of course he knows everything about next week, but he HATES, if Joe Gibbs has a hating bone in his body, he hates to have his team look past an opponent.