Portis article on ESPN "in"
 

anybody have access to the "in" portion of espn.com that can post the article about Portis not being a good fit? Thanks

from ESPN Insider and Pro Football Weekly
 

There are some who are whispering that RB Clinton Portis – a home-run back in a grind-it-out offense – is not a great fit in the Redskins' system, but it could be a matter of patience. Because the Redskins trap and pull more than the Broncos, Portis consistently has found himself on the heels of his blockers.

I don't buy into the claim that Portis is not a good fit for the 'Skins offense because Portis is no faster than Canidate and our whole offense is in Chapter 1 of its history, the line will begin blocking better once it gets its timing down.

i think alot of it is just timeing,they'll get it worked out

[QUOTE=wolfeskins]i think alot of it is just timeing,they'll get it worked out[/QUOTE]
I think he needs to learn when to be patient and when to explode. In all seriousness, I think his first run from scrimmage probably hurt his learning curve (in much the same way ST's preseason may have hurt his). I have noticed that Portis' patience has improved over the past couple of weeks, though.

I think portis is actually slower than canidate straight ahead. in and out of their cuts is a whole diffrent story

[QUOTE=smootsmack]There are some who are whispering that RB Clinton Portis – a home-run back in a grind-it-out offense – is not a great fit in the Redskins' system, but it could be a matter of patience. Because the Redskins trap and pull more than the Broncos, Portis consistently has found himself on the heels of his blockers.[/QUOTE]
Yes. In fact, if you go back and look at the games, the simple fact is that the holes have not been opening. When you see the G/T pulling and attempting to open a big hole on the other side of the line, there ends up just a mass of bodies where a hole should be. John Riggins could not have run through the stuff I am seeing there. Either these blocking schemes will start to work in the next couple games, or you will start to see new ones. It will depend on where the problem is - either the OL is not doing everything as they should, or the defenses have a strategy to beat it. I don't know enough to be able to see the answer, but I'm sure the coaches do. If these articles were correct, Joe Washington would have failed miserably here. He didn't.

Ok, he may not be a....ahem...."good fit" for this offense the way it was with Riggins, Riggs, etc., but the thing these critics always seem to ignore is that Gibbs is the master of adjusting to maximize his players talents. It takes time, and it's just taking a little longer to come together because it's new for everyone. Yes, the holes just aren't there yet either, but they will be.
Gibbs hand-picked Portis to be his RB knowing that he wasn't a big power back, so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt that he knows what he's doing.

Thanks SMoot.

Off hand, does anyone know how much Timmy Smith weighed?
I know Riggo, Byner, Riggs were all big boys but I don't think all of the skins rb's were that big. The Hogs were the key and when this line gets healthy and learns each others tendencies, we'll see a more effective Portis.

[QUOTE=redwagonskins]Thanks SMoot.

Off hand, does anyone know how much Timmy Smith weighed?
I know Riggo, Byner, Riggs were all big boys but I don't think all of the skins rb's were that big. The Hogs were the key and when this line gets healthy and learns each others tendencies, we'll see a more effective Portis.[/QUOTE]

Not sure about Timmy Smith, but Byner wasn't all that big -- he was 5'10" and around 220 -- pretty average.

[QUOTE=Hogskin]Yes. In fact, if you go back and look at the games, the simple fact is that the holes have not been opening. When you see the G/T pulling and attempting to open a big hole on the other side of the line, there ends up just a mass of bodies where a hole should be. John Riggins could not have run through the stuff I am seeing there. Either these blocking schemes will start to work in the next couple games, or you will start to see new ones. It will depend on where the problem is - either the OL is not doing everything as they should, or the defenses have a strategy to beat it. I don't know enough to be able to see the answer, but I'm sure the coaches do. If these articles were correct, Joe Washington would have failed miserably here. He didn't.[/QUOTE]

I do think we need more quick hitting plays than counters and traps and stuff like that. But having said that, Portis needs to be more patient on those trap plays to open up. Alot of the time I see him with his hand on the blockers back and not letting the play and blocks develop in front of him. Penetration has blown up some of our blocking schemes, especially in pulling.

Portis puts his hand on the back of his blockers so he stays patient, it's so he stays behind his block.

Right now the line and Portis both need to step up their games. I think he's on the brink of busting out, let's just hope it's sooner rather than later.

[QUOTE=Mattyk72]Portis puts his hand on the back of his blockers so he stays patient, it's so he stays behind his block.

Right now the line and Portis both need to step up their games. I think he's on the brink of busting out, let's just hope it's sooner rather than later.[/QUOTE]

Yes, I agree, Matty. And I expect it to be "sooner", because it is obvious this week he is not happy with his performance and is VERY anxious to turn it around.

But I really think for Portis to shine, he DOES need the quick hitters as someone mentioned, OR pitchouts and screens. We have seen virtually NONE of these latter 2 plays. They are tailor-made for Portis, and I keep expecting to see them. They will eventually show up. However, Baltimore may not be a good team to bring those plays out against. I would hope to see some quick hitters against this very fast, pursuing defense. The counters could also be more effective against this defense than in the first 4 weeks.

And since I've gone farther out on the "strategy" tangent, I'll mention that there have been several reports of the Redskins doing a LOT of practicing no-huddle this week. I bet we will see MUCH more of it than in the Cleveland game where it was pretty effective.

I was reading somewhere that we actually are running some zone blocking similar to what Denver does and we only ran a handful of counters last week.

I don't think the problem lies in the type of plays or schemes we're running, it's just everyone trying to get on the same page to execute the plays to their potential.

We've seen some flashes, they just need consistency.

Well, you could be right, but I sure have seen very few running plays where a tackle or guard or both were not pulling out and going across center to block on the run side. These plays take a couple more seconds to develop, and Portis has to wait for blocking. Portis' elite skills are in the open field where his jukes, quickness, speed, and general elusiveness are most effective. He is one of the quickest RB's to the hole in all of the NFL, and this type of play does not utilize that skill. I still think it is only a matter of time until the offense is tailored to Portis.

Another tangent: In posts during the preseason, many here were saying we had the best, or one of the best, WR groups in the NFL. I disagreed, and still do. But we DO have one of the best downfield blocking WR teams in the NFL. Gardner, Coles, and especially Thrash, are EXCELLENT. And TE/HB Cooley is quickly developing. Once they start breaking Portis free through the line, LOOK OUT!!!!