The-Hogs.net - Washington Football Discussion, Redskins to Commanders Era

He's currently leading the league in attempts, hopefully he drops from that position drastically. Let's get Betts some more touches.

Portis is tough, but I'm worried he's being overused and he may not be able to last the whole season. They should be mixing in Betts a bit more to take some of the load off of Portis. Betts is definitely good enough to carry more of the workload.

CP is not one to be shy and not say anything if he's being overused. He will speak up, no worries there I think. But I do agree that we need Betts to take some of those carries, share the load.

Chris Luva Luva wrote:He's currently leading the league in attempts, hopefully he drops from that position drastically. Let's get Betts some more touches.

I got in trouble for saying that. Haha.

grampi wrote:Portis is tough, but I'm worried he's being overused and he may not be able to last the whole season. They should be mixing in Betts a bit more to take some of the load off of Portis. Betts is definitely good enough to carry more of the workload.

I believe Portis has the power to take himself out when he's tired, overworked or just needs a breather. We've seen him numerous times head to the sidelines and signal for Betts to come in. So I don't see it as the coaches are overworking Portis, he can pull himself out of the game at anytime.

The other side of the argument that could be made is that Portis wants to play and get his carries, so the coaches need to be the ones to pull the reigns back. Maybe so, but until there's evidence Portis is slowing or can't take the load, I see no reason to limit him. Betts is still in there getting carries.

SkinsFreak wrote:

grampi wrote:Portis is tough, but I'm worried he's being overused and he may not be able to last the whole season. They should be mixing in Betts a bit more to take some of the load off of Portis. Betts is definitely good enough to carry more of the workload.

I believe Portis has the power to take himself out when he's tired, overworked or just needs a breather. We've seen him numerous times head to the sidelines and signal for Betts to come in. So I don't see it as the coaches are overworking Portis, he can pull himself out of the game at anytime.

The other side of the argument that could be made is that Portis wants to play and get his carries, so the coaches need to be the ones to pull the reigns back. Maybe so, but until there's evidence Portis is slowing or can't take the load, I see no reason to limit him. Betts is still in there getting carries.

That's the coaches job to think in the long term. Whoever is allowing this amount of carries is not thinking in the long term. Betts has shown that he's an adequate fill-in (I do NOT think they're interchageable). With the amount of runs in this offense so far, we need more coarries for the #2 back. CP runs big, but the body can only take so much, and I want CP here as long as possible.

The problem is, in the NFL everyone is replaceable. There are great young backs coming out every year. If Portis gets used up, you just replace him with a younger model. It's cruel, but that's the reality of it.

JSPB22 wrote:The problem is, in the NFL everyone is replaceable. There are great young backs coming out every year. If Portis gets used up, you just replace him with a younger model. It's cruel, but that's the reality of it.

That's exactly right. It's the nature of the business. I'm not sure what good Portis does standing on the sidelines. As I said, he knows when he needs a break and has said numerous times that he has no problem with Betts coming in when Portis is winded and needs a breather.

Other than the 8 games Portis missed for his hand injury, he has only missed 4 games throughout is entire career. Portis is tough as nails and shows no signs of slowing down at this point. In fact, he's having his best year to date. Limiting one of your best players in the hopes that he'll be around in five years is not a sound philosophy employed in todays game. If his play time is limited, then ultimately his numbers will suffer and folks will want a new RB for greater production.

Betts has shown that he's an adequate fill-in (I do NOT think they're interchageable).

I keep reading this, yet I don't understand what it means. Can you please elaborate on what "interchangeable" means?

He's saying they're not equivalent, but Betts is good enough to spell Portis.

JSPB22 wrote:The problem is, in the NFL everyone is replaceable. There are great young backs coming out every year. If Portis gets used up, you just replace him with a younger model. It's cruel, but that's the reality of it.

That's a blanket statement that is true in the most blandly vanilla explanations. I highly doubt Jim Brown, Barry Sanders, Thurman Thomas, OJ, and Walter Payton were replaced satisfactorily when they were "used up." If that was the case, why would CP be getting paid more than Betts and Rock? I mean, if they're all the same, why differentiate salaries?


Interchangeable backs:

CP and Betts have different strengths. They do not perform the same. Betts is a straight forward hit the hole guy. CP is more agile and is also a significantly better blocking back than Betts. Last week, CP showed his receiving skills as well.

VetSkinsFan wrote:

JSPB22 wrote:The problem is, in the NFL everyone is replaceable. There are great young backs coming out every year. If Portis gets used up, you just replace him with a younger model. It's cruel, but that's the reality of it.

That's a blanket statement that is true in the most blandly vanilla explanations. I highly doubt Jim Brown, Barry Sanders, Thurman Thomas, OJ, and Walter Payton were replaced satisfactorily when they were "used up." If that was the case, why would CP be getting paid more than Betts and Rock? I mean, if they're all the same, why differentiate salaries?

Not all the same, but replaceable, nonetheless. Were their replacements as good? Not by a long shot. Were they replaced? The very next season. And there is an Adrian Peterson or a Felix Jones in every draft; that new, young running back who is going to break the old records some time in the future.

JSPB22 wrote:

VetSkinsFan wrote:

JSPB22 wrote:The problem is, in the NFL everyone is replaceable. There are great young backs coming out every year. If Portis gets used up, you just replace him with a younger model. It's cruel, but that's the reality of it.

That's a blanket statement that is true in the most blandly vanilla explanations. I highly doubt Jim Brown, Barry Sanders, Thurman Thomas, OJ, and Walter Payton were replaced satisfactorily when they were "used up." If that was the case, why would CP be getting paid more than Betts and Rock? I mean, if they're all the same, why differentiate salaries?

Not all the same, but replaceable, nonetheless. Were their replacements as good? Not by a long shot. Were they replaced? The very next season. And there is an Adrian Peterson or a Felix Jones in every draft; that new, young running back who is going to break the old records some time in the future.

But just because there is an Adrian Peterson in the draft, don't mean you will have the draft pick to get him. You might just end up with a dud instead of a stud.

But beyond that, is CP's charactor. That's not so easily replaced. When our guys watch him on film and see how hard he fights, he's a big mentor. And just when football is no fun anymore and the guys hate to show up for work, here comes Dr. Doitchbig. After all, we aren't winning because of our draft picks, we are winning because of all the ups and downs these guys have been through, and they have come together to play as a team.

I'm not knocking Clinton at all, I think he is a great back. Washington has had many great backs through the years. Stephen Davis broke Riggins' records, and CP broke SD's. It's just the way of life in the NFL. You can't save someone in hopes that he will have more years with the team. The lucky ones will have long, fruitful careers, the others won't. You play for today, and hope for the best.

JSPB22 wrote:

VetSkinsFan wrote:

JSPB22 wrote:The problem is, in the NFL everyone is replaceable. There are great young backs coming out every year. If Portis gets used up, you just replace him with a younger model. It's cruel, but that's the reality of it.

That's a blanket statement that is true in the most blandly vanilla explanations. I highly doubt Jim Brown, Barry Sanders, Thurman Thomas, OJ, and Walter Payton were replaced satisfactorily when they were "used up." If that was the case, why would CP be getting paid more than Betts and Rock? I mean, if they're all the same, why differentiate salaries?

Not all the same, but replaceable, nonetheless. Were their replacements as good? Not by a long shot. Were they replaced? The very next season. And there is an Adrian Peterson or a Felix Jones in every draft; that new, young running back who is going to break the old records some time in the future.

I'm glad our talent scouts don't think this way... Let's replace Barry Sanders with Trung Canidate. They both stand behind the QB before the play starts, so they must be able to do the same thing...

...and since we're on the subject, let's replace JC with Derek Anderson or Tyler Thigpen. They're both players, so it shouldn't matter about individual talents. After all, everyone's replaceable.

...in addition to that, why not replace Moss with Pinkston, Gardner or any no name receiver. Since they're all replaceable, it shouldn't really matter.

JSPB22 wrote:I'm not knocking Clinton at all, I think he is a great back. Washington has had many great backs through the years. Stephen Davis broke Riggins' records, and CP broke SD's. It's just the way of life in the NFL. You can't save someone in hopes that he will have more years with the team. The lucky ones will have long, fruitful careers, the others won't. You play for today, and hope for the best.

You can be smart about it and not run them into the ground when you have a competent back up right behind him.

VetSkinsFan wrote:Interchangeable backs:

CP and Betts have different strengths. They do not perform the same. Betts is a straight forward hit the hole guy. CP is more agile and is also a significantly better blocking back than Betts. Last week, CP showed his receiving skills as well.

VSF -
Agree on the first part of your post. CP is a special back, maybe not on the level of a Brown or a Sanders, but certainly a cut above most of the starting RB's on NFL rosters today.

If I may speak to CP vs. Ladell: Their running styles seem similar to me. Both are one cut and go guys. CP probably has more straightaway speed than LB, and he certainly is a better blocker. Catching passes I don't know that either is great, perhaps CP has softer hands but I don't see either one being used extensively in Zorn's version of the WCO.

BigRedskinDaddy wrote:

VetSkinsFan wrote:Interchangeable backs:

CP and Betts have different strengths. They do not perform the same. Betts is a straight forward hit the hole guy. CP is more agile and is also a significantly better blocking back than Betts. Last week, CP showed his receiving skills as well.

VSF -
Agree on the first part of your post. CP is a special back, maybe not on the level of a Brown or a Sanders, but certainly a cut above most of the starting RB's on NFL rosters today.

If I may speak to CP vs. Ladell: Their running styles seem similar to me. Both are one cut and go guys. CP probably has more straightaway speed than LB, and he certainly is a better blocker. Catching passes I don't know that either is great, perhaps CP has softer hands but I don't see either one being used extensively in Zorn's version of the WCO.

CP is a special back, maybe not on the level of a Brown or a Sanders,

I made the connection since they are all replaceable, then it shouldn't matter who's names I plug in there. I took some of the games best and related to the norm and even below average. After all if they are simply "replaceable," should it matter who's names are in there?

CP vs Betts: I see CP with more agility and more ability to cut and make people miss. He also is more likely to run someone over than Betts. Betts impressed me when he started for CP, but I still attribute his success to a good line (which we also have now) and how fast Betts hits the hole.

VetSkinsFan wrote:

JSPB22 wrote:

VetSkinsFan wrote:

JSPB22 wrote:The problem is, in the NFL everyone is replaceable. There are great young backs coming out every year. If Portis gets used up, you just replace him with a younger model. It's cruel, but that's the reality of it.

That's a blanket statement that is true in the most blandly vanilla explanations. I highly doubt Jim Brown, Barry Sanders, Thurman Thomas, OJ, and Walter Payton were replaced satisfactorily when they were "used up." If that was the case, why would CP be getting paid more than Betts and Rock? I mean, if they're all the same, why differentiate salaries?

Not all the same, but replaceable, nonetheless. Were their replacements as good? Not by a long shot. Were they replaced? The very next season. And there is an Adrian Peterson or a Felix Jones in every draft; that new, young running back who is going to break the old records some time in the future.

I'm glad our talent scouts don't think this way...

I can guarantee you that they do. That's their job; to find replacement talent for today's players. I'm not saying I necessarily like the system, but it is what it is.

Portis is a BANGER?

He Listens to heavy metal

Sweet!

BnGhog wrote:Portis is a BANGER?

He's actually a sausage.