|
Pages :
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
[ 8]
9
10
11
jdlea 12-11-2006, 05:09 PM I don't disagree with anything you're saying. In my own posts I've simply said that I think both of them are good, and that (IMO) I think we've been using Portis inefficiently, when we could be using Betts to do the same thing, freeing Clinton to be a game breaker. Not unlike the way the Saints use Deuce to crush the spirit of opposing teams and then Reggie scampers free for a huge, back-breaking play.
I have never addressed the idea of Betts starting over Portis because that's just stupid, but I do think they should both be used simultaneously. And I do think that though Betts has been banged up off and on over the course of his career, he has also been stuck on some crappy squads, much crappier than any Portis ever had to endure, and he didn't get many carries to work with, either. But this is just as much conjecture as any of the "Portis would have done X against Philly" threads, you can't compare conjecture ;)
My problem is the thread title is "Betts better than Portis?" I would have to say no. Based on their careers Clinton is far better. I think Clinton has made himself into a back that will fit into this system and is still a better back than Betts. However, I think they can both play. I just hate when people try to act like Betts is better than Portis.
budw38 12-11-2006, 05:11 PM Oh really? The fastest guy to 6000 yards ever isn't exactly burning up the NFL?! They announced that during the Texans game. The fastest player ever to 6000. He had 11 td's last year and 7 this year in 9 games, a couple of which he was used very little. Betts has 2 this year. That's a big dropoff. That's how much harder of a runner he is.
And also, I think Tomlinson is the best runner in the NFL and maybe the best back of all time. So, I don't think saying Portis isn't as good at getting to the end zone as Tomlinson isn't exactly an insult.
I never said CP was not a heck of a back , just seemed like the origanal point made was that Betts does not run hard . I do not see CP running harder , not saying he does not hit the hole hard , just the fact that Betts has been running as hard as he can . He may be the fastest to 6,000 yds , and thats great , but when I watch the games , he does not seem to take them over like LJ , LT or SA . Again , I'am not questioning him as far as talent , but I watched guys like Payton , Campbell and a few others who would get the ball over and over < without a passing game > and they got stronger and stronger and were almost unstoppable . I can't think of a game where CP constantly ran for 4-5 -6-7 yds all day long dragging defenders and running them over like the others do. Not saying he is not a great back , just not the as dominant as others . Seems like unless he rips off a 25 yd plus run he does not put up big stats . Just my opinion , I give him credit , he ran and blocked very well down the stretch last year , tougher than most his size ! He may have a monster year next year , I hope he gets 1,500 & 500 rec. next year . As far as the TD's , we have been poor on short ydg , take away the 3 td's vs SF last year , thats 8 tds , think he had 3 vs houston this year. Not sure about his td' s in Denver , don't care about Denver . Again nothing against Cp , but many rookies do not get a chance to start right away , and many never lucky enough to play for Gibbs & MS to start there carreer's .
dgack 12-11-2006, 05:15 PM Fair enough, the thread title is sensationalist / misleading. If it were titled, "Betts a better fit for Gibbs' gameplan than Portis?" it would be a bit more accurate.
jsarno 12-11-2006, 05:58 PM Fair enough, the thread title is sensationalist / misleading. If it were titled, "Betts a better fit for Gibbs' gameplan than Portis?" it would be a bit more accurate.
Then we would not have gotten 5 pages worth.
Why is it that some of people here choose to break down the smallest of details, but fail to see the big picture. Does it really matter what the thread is titled? If you read the first post, it clarifies.
It's like titling a porno, would you title one, the adventures of Sally, or Sally's anal adventure? (ok, sorry to all the young kids around here, just trying to prove a point). I guess I am just a salesman at heart.
SmootSmack 12-11-2006, 06:02 PM It would have gotten 5 pages regardless. We here can talk about anything. See Question 3
dall-assblows 12-11-2006, 06:06 PM you need 2 above average backs to be successful in this league.
or at least one really good one, and one average.
skins009 12-11-2006, 06:32 PM Anybody who thinks Betts is better than portis needs to have their head examined.
dgack 12-11-2006, 06:34 PM Anybody who thinks Betts is better than portis needs to have their head examined.
Thank God you enlightened us with a well-reasoned retort.
Longtimefan 12-11-2006, 07:33 PM So, after six pages, who is the better back, Betts or Portis?
itvnetop 12-11-2006, 08:27 PM this argument is null... we have both for the foreseeable future and we're going to use both equally in saunders' offense next year. both careers will be extended b/c of each other.
|