|
Southpaw 11-28-2005, 06:18 PM The defense still only allowed 17 points to a very good offensive team. I would not say the skins cannot rely on our d. The o does have to score some points.
The defense had a seven point lead with less than a quarter to go. I agree, there needs to be more production out of the offense as a whole, but the offense didn't let the Chargers march down the field, and tie the game, when they had been holding them in check for the previous three quarters.
Longtimefan 11-28-2005, 08:28 PM As i have said from day 1...the Portis trade was a disaster. I don't care about Bailey and i don't even care about the wasted 2nd round pick that we threw in for some reason. What i do care about is that Portis is a BAD FIT for Joe Gibbs offense. Putting a back like Portis in Joe Gibbs offense is like putting a square peg in a round hole...it's not working. If you think it is working then why do we line up in shot gun formation on 3rd and 2 at crucuial points in a game? Gibbs built a hall of fame coaching carreer with a power running game as the basis for everything. Portis is a pretty good player...he is just not the player the redskins needed. I have alwasy felt that the skins made that trade out of convenience...denver had a player who didn't want to be there and we had a player who didn't want to be here so lets get together and trade our headaches. And now the skins have 50 million invested in a running back who can not move the pile and play the smash mouth between the tackles football that Gibbs built his reputation playing. Is Gibbs play calling at the end of a game any different now than it was 15 years ago? The answer is no...15 years ago in the 4th quarter with a lead Gibbs called running plays and ran out the clock becasue he had the personel to get it done. This is not Portis's fault it's the redskins fault for bringing him here.
I can concur to a greater extent with the sentiments you share because they do have merit. How many games has Clinton been used to run out the clock and preserve wins in the 4th qtr.? & How many 100yd. games does he have against NFC East opponents?
dmek25 11-28-2005, 08:36 PM wasnt the portis trade a done deal before coach gibbs came back?
Sheriff Gonna Getcha 11-28-2005, 08:45 PM wasnt the portis trade a done deal before coach gibbs came back?
Nope, in fact it was supposedly orchestrated by Gibbs.
jdlea 11-28-2005, 08:45 PM Nah, Gibbs made the deal.
That Guy 11-28-2005, 08:59 PM If I implied that Clinton Portis is capable of genetic cloning, or applying a little “hocus-pocus” to give us Walter Jones and Peyton Manning, then I apologize for the confusion. I expected Portis to help lead this offense to levels among the Colts and Seahawks. If I’m guilty of great expectations, so be it.
great, but who's going to be the superstar QB to keep 6 or 7 guys deep so portis can run at will? or the best left LG/LT combo in the league for portis to run behind and get 3+ yards a clip at absolute will... brunell is about 20 pegs short of manning and dockery/samuels can't hold the jock strap of what the seahawks have. If you want a killer offense, get us a better QB and better line play.
Gmanc711 11-28-2005, 09:30 PM [QUOTE=skins052bgr8]Portis is not the problem, he is getting his yardage and moving the chains for the style back he is. He is not a bruiser up the middle 3rd and 2 type guy. That falls on Gibbs and the coaching staff.
Let me see
Tampa uses Alstott on short yardage not Cadillac or Pittman
Falcons use Duckett not Dunn
Giants use Short not Tiki
[QUOTE]
YES! YES! YES! Portis is not as good of a runner in short yardage situations, ESPECIALLY when teams are expecting it. We've seen that in every single game since Portis has been here. How many times have we seen 1st and goal on the 3, and we run two plays up the gut w/ Portis for absolutley jack-crap, and be forced to run a bootleg. The guy is just not that good in that type of a situation, so why do we continue to put him in the situation? Thats my problem. Portis, in my opinion, is a freaking awsome running back as a whole, but in that situation, I dont think hes that good. So my question is why is he in there then?
celts32 11-29-2005, 12:08 PM [QUOTE=skins052bgr8]Portis is not the problem, he is getting his yardage and moving the chains for the style back he is. He is not a bruiser up the middle 3rd and 2 type guy. That falls on Gibbs and the coaching staff.
Let me see
Tampa uses Alstott on short yardage not Cadillac or Pittman
Falcons use Duckett not Dunn
Giants use Short not Tiki
[QUOTE]
YES! YES! YES! Portis is not as good of a runner in short yardage situations, ESPECIALLY when teams are expecting it. We've seen that in every single game since Portis has been here. How many times have we seen 1st and goal on the 3, and we run two plays up the gut w/ Portis for absolutley jack-crap, and be forced to run a bootleg. The guy is just not that good in that type of a situation, so why do we continue to put him in the situation? Thats my problem. Portis, in my opinion, is a freaking awsome running back as a whole, but in that situation, I dont think hes that good. So my question is why is he in there then?
Your absolutely right. Portis is not the complete back to run this offense. Gibbs used to have backs he could use in every situation. Portis is not that back...it's not his fault but he's not. Gibbs made a mistake bringing him here and paying him 50 million to be the every down starter.
I have a hard time imagining the skins winning big in the next few years with Portis as the every down back. They either need to trade him for a better fit which may not be possible due to the cap, or bring in another back who runs the inside runs and short yardage stuff better. But if you go that route you are paying Portis 50 million to be a part time player. It's not a good situation but they need to do something by next season.
#56fanatic 11-29-2005, 12:15 PM [QUOTE=skins052bgr8]Portis is not the problem, he is getting his yardage and moving the chains for the style back he is. He is not a bruiser up the middle 3rd and 2 type guy. That falls on Gibbs and the coaching staff.
Let me see
Tampa uses Alstott on short yardage not Cadillac or Pittman
Falcons use Duckett not Dunn
Giants use Short not Tiki
[QUOTE]
YES! YES! YES! Portis is not as good of a runner in short yardage situations, ESPECIALLY when teams are expecting it. We've seen that in every single game since Portis has been here. How many times have we seen 1st and goal on the 3, and we run two plays up the gut w/ Portis for absolutley jack-crap, and be forced to run a bootleg. The guy is just not that good in that type of a situation, so why do we continue to put him in the situation? Thats my problem. Portis, in my opinion, is a freaking awsome running back as a whole, but in that situation, I dont think hes that good. So my question is why is he in there then?
I agree with your statement in regards to using a bigger, stronger back in those situations. However, where I disagree is that the running style for the teams you mentioned, tampa, falcons, giants, they all have a running attack that suits the back being used. Falcons use more stretch plays that allows Dunn to pick a hole and explode through it. As well as Tampa and the Giants. They put there backs in position that best fits their ability. We on the other hand continue to hand Portis the ball and say run up the gut, run behind Jansen or Samuels. The few plays we use that allows Portis to use his cutback ability or speed are very effective. The fact is we dont have enough of those plays in the book to use. I would like to see more of Nemo in the short yardage situations. we did draft him for that reason, and he has yet to see the field. But that goes with Joes thinking of not playing rookies. And playing Carlos is not his decision. GW makes ALL of the decisions regarding the defense and Joe makes them with regards to the offense.
mason4415 11-29-2005, 12:30 PM As far as I'm concerned, everyone on here who is hating on Clinton Portis knows absolutely nothing about football. Other than LT, I wouldn't want any other back in the league right now. Honestly. Do you think Alexander, James, or any other back in the league would be able to have success in our offense? Our quarterback is MARK BRUNELL! I guarantee you that if Clinton was on the Colts right now, that he would be having a better season than Edge. And if Edge was on our team, he would have a helluva time out-producing Portis at this point. On top of that, look at the Run Defenses we have gone against!!!
In fact, if we would've won 2 or 3 of the past 3 games, there wouldn't be a problem at all. The problem with this team has been COACHING! I love Gibbs, and I think he'll turn it around, but it's the coaching. Against the Raiders, a better pass defense than run defense, we try to pass when up 10 points! Against the Chargers, the NFL's number 1 rushing defense, and weak pass D, we try to run!!! It's not about being conservative or not running the clock, it's about playing to your opponents weaknesses and getting first downs!!!!!!
|