Clinton Portis over Ladell Betts is a no brainer

Pages : 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7

djnemo65
12-25-2006, 01:58 AM
I'm just glad that Portis over Betts isn't a choice that we are required to make.

CanadianSkin
12-25-2006, 02:34 AM
Who cares about the fumble or anything else. I do not think there is a discussion at all when it comes to who our back is. Portis has shown (He does hold our team record for yards) that he can be a back in any system. He was injured this year and will come back next year healthy as ever. I am okay with Betts as a back up, but in no way shape or form would I ever consider getting rid of Portis for Betts. Portis is 25 and just getting into his prime. Betts is 27 and a career back up. Anyone who thinks we should get rid of Portis and rely soley on Betts is just crazy. They probably also think Brunell should be our starter again next year as well.

I am saying all this after Betts hass had 4-5 good games, but have felt this way since he has been on our team. I love what Clinton brings to this team in terms of leadership, heart, work ethic and skill. Portis is the man, and Betts is here to give him a break from time to time. End of discussion.

Pocket$ $traight
12-25-2006, 03:04 AM
Man, you guys kill me. I was watching the game and this is horrible, but when that happened, all I could think was "well, guaranteed the Warpath guys will be screaming about how Betts sucks and should be traded / cut now".

Betts has fumbled two times more than CP did last year (5), and has lost exactly as many as CP did (2). BFD. The replay was fairly clear, and I don't know how you defend against that, a guy had one half of his body wrapped and punched the ball out with the other hand, away from anyone on our team who could have fallen on it. It happens. SJax coughed up on a far less defensible carry and I doubt guys in St. Louis were calling for his head.

The fact is, had the defense been able to stop them ONCE out of like 5 or 6 crucial spots, that fumble would have been irrelevant and we would have won. Ladell played great and is not the scapegoat here. For once it wasn't the kicker, either.

This one is on Grilliamss and his guys.

Let's talk facts.

2005 - Betts 3 fumbles 3 lost 89 carries
2005 - Portis 3 fumbles 2 lost 352 carries

2006 - Betts 5 fumbles 2 lost 225 carries
2006 - Portis 0 fumbles 0 lost 127 carries

How the hell do you blame Gregg Williams for losing the game when all Betts had to do was hold onto the ball? By the way, who caused the fumble to set up the tying field goal? The D that you have maligned.

Don't come in here throwing a couple of ill researched stats around here and expect excuses to prove your point.

Bottom line. He holds onto that ball, we win. I am tired of excuses whether it is from fans or players.

At least we get a good draft pick next year....

Damn it!!!!!

dgack
12-25-2006, 03:40 AM
Let's talk facts.

2005 - Betts 3 fumbles 3 lost 89 carries
2005 - Portis 3 fumbles 2 lost 352 carries

2006 - Betts 5 fumbles 2 lost 225 carries
2006 - Portis 0 fumbles 0 lost 127 carries

How the hell do you blame Gregg Williams for losing the game when all Betts had to do was hold onto the ball? By the way, who caused the fumble to set up the tying field goal? The D that you have maligned.

Don't come in here throwing a couple of ill researched stats around here and expect excuses to prove your point.

Bottom line. He holds onto that ball, we win. I am tired of excuses whether it is from fans or players.

At least we get a good draft pick next year....

Damn it!!!!!

Okay then, let's talk facts, since all the other stats I posted are apparently not real facts, since you disagree with my conclusions.

Let's see... How do I blame Gregg Williams?

* 579 yards of offense allowed (Rams season high)
* 37 points allowed (2nd highest total Rams season, Detroit allowed 41)
* 25 first downs allowed
* 17 unanswered points allowed after holding a 14 point lead
* Allowed not only a 350 yard passer, but also an 150 yard rusher! Wow! Great defense!
* 1 OT period forced on the grace of an unlikely career long 52 yarder made by Suisham and an equally unlikely missed 41yarder by Jeff Wilkins.

Really, if you want to try and cast aspersions on my research, you ought to try bolstering your own arguments first. Of course the game would have been over had Betts held onto the ball. That's rather obvious. My point is that had the defense actually played like a pro football team rather than the Pop Warner crew we had out there today, Ladell's fumble would not have even occurred and if it did, it would not have cost us the game.

I love when a team plays poorly on one or both sides of the ball for an entire game and one guy takes the blame for making a mistake. How many blown plays did the secondary make today that lead DIRECTLY to points on the board for St. Louis? How many points did St. Louis score off Ladell's fumble, BTW?

Oh that's right, zero. Because our defense stopped them, right? Oh no, that's right, because a guy kicking 88% on the year missed a 40 yarder.

So, sure, Betts' fumble caused us to not ice the game. But it didn't put points on the board for St. Louis, and not because "that defense I've maligned" stopped them.

How close of a game would it have been without 129 yards and 2TD's from Betts today?

dgack
12-25-2006, 03:49 AM
And before you accuse me of not addressing your comparisons of Ladell to Clinton, all you've shown me is that Clinton is particularly good at not fumbling, not that Ladell is horrible. Read the other thread where I posted a long ass list of other pretty good NFL RB's who have coughed up the ball as much or more than Betts this season on similar amounts of carries.

You need to actually look at average carry/fumble numbers for the NFL if you think 2 fumbles lost is some amazingly bad stat line for a guy in the 230 carry tier.

dgack
12-25-2006, 03:51 AM
Oh wait, never mind, I just saw your alias and realized I must have offended you because I didn't praise Sean Taylor enough. My bad. He had another outstanding game in what was clearly a Pro Bowl season (damn conspiracy) and it was all Ladell's fault.

Forget I said anything, how could I have known to whom I was speaking???

SkinEmAll
12-25-2006, 03:53 AM
Our non existant defense gave up OVER 500 yds! Betts got mugged, he didnt LOSE the game. It was a great play by the defender. Fumble or no fumble it should not have come down to that play anyway. If Im not mistaken, thats the most yds our defense has given up since GW has been here and probaly for many yrs prior. Betts is a great, starting caliber RB. But his place here is at #2. It will be awesome to see CP run behind our line as they are obviously gelling as a unit and with the blocking schemes. We now have 2 RBs opponents have to respect and will give us even more threats next yr. Bottom line is our D once again did nothing to help us win. Yeah a Defensive stop in OT is nice, but when we score 31 pts, should we really be in OT?

dgack
12-25-2006, 03:59 AM
Yeah a Defensive stop in OT is nice, but when we score 31 pts, should we really be in OT?

Careful, you shouldn't "come in here throwing a couple of ill researched stats around" and "malign the D" like that. Someone's liable to talk facts with you and inform you of the error of your ways.

SkinEmAll
12-25-2006, 04:13 AM
yeah It appears that way, I mean cmon wheres all the 'Marry' Christmas spirit?

onlydarksets
12-25-2006, 06:00 AM
I think you guys are arguing over semantics. Betts blew a chance for the win, but he wasn't responsible for us losing the game. You really can't argue the first - he screwed up by not putting both hands on the ball. If he had had both hands on the ball and the defender still got it out, then I would say that Betts did everything he could have. However, he didn't cover up the ball when he felt contact, and that's basic skills in that situation (tied, driving for win). CP doesn't cough that one up, IMO.

That said, I agree that Betts didn't "cost us the game" in the greater sense. That's on the D.

EZ Archive Ads Plugin for vBulletin Copyright 2006 Computer Help Forum