what if we did not release stephen davis

bertoskins · 05-05-2004, 12:46 AM

no offense to portis
but if we don;t release davis las two seasons then

cb - bailey and springs
fs- bowen and taylor
lb-washington, barrow, and arrington
dt- noble,............and co

we have unbelievable backfield
hard fitting lb's
and just ave line

Paintrain · 05-05-2004, 12:56 AM

:confused:

Quote:

Originally Posted by bertoskins

no offense to portis
but if we don;t release davis las two seasons then

cb - bailey and springs
fs- bowen and taylor
lb-washington, barrow, and arrington
dt- noble,............and co

we have unbelievable backfield
hard fitting lb's
and just ave line

:confused:

SKINSnCANES · 05-05-2004, 01:29 AM

Bailey would still not be here. He didnt want to be a Redskin anymore. We would have just traded for a different player, and I cnat name to many other players that id rather have then CP. Bailey was tired of how things worked here and wanted out, so we got a great back in return. If we kept Bailey we wouldnt have gone after Springs, we would still have Smoot. Im not sure whawt Noble has to do with anything, he had a near career threating injury, I was at the game and I dont remember that happening because stephen davis wasnt there. and the linebackers would be the same either way.

Daseal · 05-05-2004, 07:01 AM

Skins hit the nail on the head, Bailey wanted out. He wouldn't still be around.

As far as Stephen Davis, WHO CARES? He lacks the big play ability that's exciting to watch. I think Carolina should be running DeShaun and tossing Davis's ass on the bench.

bedlamVR · 05-05-2004, 07:43 AM

i think watching the Panthers in the superbowl summed things up to me . Davis has some amazing career stats but he doesn't turn games he gets most of his yards in third and forth quaters against worn out defences. He can seal a game for you put it away through ball control offence but he is not the back you need to win close gems or come back from deficits. In the superbowl injury not withstanding Foster played a much bigger part of the Pantehrs offence.

I cannot see Davis would have remained here as his sal cap hit was far too harsh and his was at odds with the front office.

I agree with Skins Bailey would still not have been here but if you want to continue the arguement Bailey and Davis would be eating up serious cap so ther is no way we could have Springs, Arrington, Coles and Washington as well unless we were filling out the rest of the roaster with scrubs.

BrudLee · 05-05-2004, 07:44 AM

Stephen Davis is a very good back on the downside of his career. Clinton Portis is a great back with years left in the tank. Ask yourself this: would Carolina trade Davis for Portis? You bet your ass they would.
I'm sorry Davis left the way he did, but he's not without blame in the departure. He's happy and we're happy.

joecrisp · 05-05-2004, 07:55 AM

The cap room consumed by Davis' contract would likely have prevented the 2003 acquisitions of Coles, Thomas and Morton. It also would have hindered any effort to retain Bailey-- not that it would have mattered-- Bailey was weary of the constant change throughout the organization and wanted a change of scenery. As others have said, Davis is on the downside of his career, and is not a game-changing back at this point. This team is going to be far better with Portis and the other acquisitions made in 2003 and 2004, than it would have been if Davis were still here.

MTK · 05-05-2004, 08:18 AM

Davis is still a quality back, the problem I see with him is he wears down by the end of the season. If the Panthers are smart this year, they'll try to work Foster into the mix more to keep Davis fresh later into the season and into the postseason. Alot of people like to bash on Davis a bit, perhaps to make themselves feel a little better about us letting him go, but the truth is he's still a top back that can shred a defense. Davis was a huge reason for the Panthers' turnaround last year.

But like I said, the only problem is because of his power running style he gets dinged up and runs out of gas by the end of the year. If they can get Foster 5-10 carries per game and keep Davis fresh, he'll be much more dangerous come January.

Portis will make us all forget about Davis.

kingerock · 05-05-2004, 08:48 AM

If I had Davis and Foster I would get Foster 75% of the carries in the 1st half and Davis 75% of the carries in the 2nd half. Foster can get the defense run down then Davis excells in running over a worn defense.

Gibbs philosophy of offense Davis would have done fine with a good H Back, but I think Portis has more potential and upside at this point in his carreer than Davis does. I love Davis and watch Panther's games when I can to see him play, but I'm happy we have Portis.

Drift Reality · 05-05-2004, 09:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

Davis is still a quality back, the problem I see with him is he wears down by the end of the season.

Mattyk makes a good point about the type of runner Davis is - those guys who constantly pound the ball up the middle can start wearing down towards the end of the season (like Davis).

That being said, I'd like to mention that close games are normally won with a strong running back like Davis. If he was in his prime, I'd say it would be a close call between him and Portis, on account of the fact that he simply pounds a defense into submission - which I sort of like. I think that he is more of a Gibbs-style running back.

Now that I've said that, I will say that I'm thrilled to be looking forward to 80-yard TD runs by Portis this year.

Drift Reality · 05-05-2004, 09:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bertoskins

no offense to portis
but if we don;t release davis las two seasons then

cb - bailey and springs
fs- bowen and taylor
lb-washington, barrow, and arrington
dt- noble,............and co

we have unbelievable backfield
hard fitting lb's
and just ave line

By the way - this is a very strange thing to say.

Basically, you just mentioned our entire defense except for Bailey. What you should have probably said was that if we had found a way to renegotiate with Davis, lowering his cap number, we would have an extra third round pick (b/c we wouldn't trade for Canidate), an extra second round pick, and Bailey. Also, we wouldn't have signed Springs (we'd throw Smoot in there) and maybe we could have landed another d-lineman instead (in the Robaire Smith price-range).

Then again, if Davis had stayed, we may have won a few more games and Spurrier might still be our coach.

Hogskin · 05-05-2004, 09:57 AM

Hmmmm - if we kept Davis, no way we would have been able to sign Coles. And as others pointed out, Bailey was gone one way or the other - did not want to work WITH the team to structure his contract so he could stay. AND, with or without Bailey, I believe you will se a GREATLY improved Redskin defense this year.

But most of all, I would much rather have Portis than Davis. Especially at this point in their respective careers. No contest.

skinsguy · 05-05-2004, 10:19 AM

I think Bugel and Gibbs would have resurrected Davis' career a bit. However, I have noticed that Davis seemed to become more injury prone...i.e...last year in the playoff when he had that big run and that was pretty much it for him! I think we're better off with Portis..but it would have been nice to have someone like Davis to come in and relieve Portis when he needed a breather.

BrudLee · 05-05-2004, 10:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by skinsguy

I think Bugel and Gibbs would have resurrected Davis' career a bit. However, I have noticed that Davis seemed to become more injury prone...i.e...last year in the playoff when he had that big run and that was pretty much it for him! I think we're better off with Portis..but it would have been nice to have someone like Davis to come in and relieve Portis when he needed a breather.

I don't know about "more injury prone". Davis has had ONE 16 game season lining up as a tailback in his career. There comes a time when a hamstring never fully heals. I think #48 hit that barrier about three years ago.

FRPLG · 05-05-2004, 11:02 AM

This is the butterfly effect. It's impossible to say how figuring out how to keep Dvais would have change this team currently. I imagine this team would look completely different now than it really does. Who knows...maybe Spurrier sees the light and runs Davis 30 times a game and we win 10 games and make the playoffs so Spurrier stays and Gibbs is off coaching the Falcons and....

05-05-2004, 12:46 AM	#1
bertoskins Special Teams Join Date: May 2004 Location: philippines Age: 50 Posts: 184	what if we did not release stephen davis no offense to portis but if we don;t release davis las two seasons then cb - bailey and springs fs- bowen and taylor lb-washington, barrow, and arrington dt- noble,............and co we have unbelievable backfield hard fitting lb's and just ave line

05-05-2004, 01:29 AM	#3
SKINSnCANES Pro Bowl Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: New Jersey Age: 42 Posts: 5,453	Bailey would still not be here. He didnt want to be a Redskin anymore. We would have just traded for a different player, and I cnat name to many other players that id rather have then CP. Bailey was tired of how things worked here and wanted out, so we got a great back in return. If we kept Bailey we wouldnt have gone after Springs, we would still have Smoot. Im not sure whawt Noble has to do with anything, he had a near career threating injury, I was at the game and I dont remember that happening because stephen davis wasnt there. and the linebackers would be the same either way. __________________ "I'm used to winning, coming from the University of Miami. " Clinton Portis

05-05-2004, 07:44 AM	#6
BrudLee Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Rehoboth Beach, DE Posts: 3,494	Stephen Davis is a very good back on the downside of his career. Clinton Portis is a great back with years left in the tank. Ask yourself this: would Carolina trade Davis for Portis? You bet your ass they would. I'm sorry Davis left the way he did, but he's not without blame in the departure. He's happy and we're happy. __________________ There's nowhere to go but up. Or down. I guess we could stay where we are, too.

05-05-2004, 07:55 AM	#7
joecrisp The Starter Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Charlottesville, VA Age: 48 Posts: 1,501	The cap room consumed by Davis' contract would likely have prevented the 2003 acquisitions of Coles, Thomas and Morton. It also would have hindered any effort to retain Bailey-- not that it would have mattered-- Bailey was weary of the constant change throughout the organization and wanted a change of scenery. As others have said, Davis is on the downside of his career, and is not a game-changing back at this point. This team is going to be far better with Portis and the other acquisitions made in 2003 and 2004, than it would have been if Davis were still here. Last edited by joecrisp; 05-05-2004 at 03:11 PM.

05-05-2004, 08:48 AM	#9
kingerock Special Teams Join Date: Apr 2004 Location: Killeen, TX Age: 48 Posts: 360	If I had Davis and Foster I would get Foster 75% of the carries in the 1st half and Davis 75% of the carries in the 2nd half. Foster can get the defense run down then Davis excells in running over a worn defense. Gibbs philosophy of offense Davis would have done fine with a good H Back, but I think Portis has more potential and upside at this point in his carreer than Davis does. I love Davis and watch Panther's games when I can to see him play, but I'm happy we have Portis. __________________ Redskins fan lost in Texas for 20 years. Need a ride to D.C.

05-05-2004, 07:01 AM	#4
Daseal Puppy Kicker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Arlington, Virginia Age: 41 Posts: 8,341	Skins hit the nail on the head, Bailey wanted out. He wouldn't still be around. As far as Stephen Davis, WHO CARES? He lacks the big play ability that's exciting to watch. I think Carolina should be running DeShaun and tossing Davis's ass on the bench.

05-05-2004, 07:43 AM	#5
bedlamVR Special Teams Join Date: Apr 2004 Posts: 389	i think watching the Panthers in the superbowl summed things up to me . Davis has some amazing career stats but he doesn't turn games he gets most of his yards in third and forth quaters against worn out defences. He can seal a game for you put it away through ball control offence but he is not the back you need to win close gems or come back from deficits. In the superbowl injury not withstanding Foster played a much bigger part of the Pantehrs offence. I cannot see Davis would have remained here as his sal cap hit was far too harsh and his was at odds with the front office. I agree with Skins Bailey would still not have been here but if you want to continue the arguement Bailey and Davis would be eating up serious cap so ther is no way we could have Springs, Arrington, Coles and Washington as well unless we were filling out the rest of the roaster with scrubs.

05-05-2004, 08:18 AM	#8
MTK \m/ Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: NY Age: 51 Posts: 99,427	Davis is still a quality back, the problem I see with him is he wears down by the end of the season. If the Panthers are smart this year, they'll try to work Foster into the mix more to keep Davis fresh later into the season and into the postseason. Alot of people like to bash on Davis a bit, perhaps to make themselves feel a little better about us letting him go, but the truth is he's still a top back that can shred a defense. Davis was a huge reason for the Panthers' turnaround last year. But like I said, the only problem is because of his power running style he gets dinged up and runs out of gas by the end of the year. If they can get Foster 5-10 carries per game and keep Davis fresh, he'll be much more dangerous come January. Portis will make us all forget about Davis.

05-05-2004, 09:57 AM	#12
Hogskin Impact Rookie Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Hartselle, Alabama Age: 83 Posts: 659	Hmmmm - if we kept Davis, no way we would have been able to sign Coles. And as others pointed out, Bailey was gone one way or the other - did not want to work WITH the team to structure his contract so he could stay. AND, with or without Bailey, I believe you will se a GREATLY improved Redskin defense this year. But most of all, I would much rather have Portis than Davis. Especially at this point in their respective careers. No contest.

05-05-2004, 10:19 AM	#13
skinsguy Pro Bowl Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Greensboro, North Carolina Posts: 6,766	I think Bugel and Gibbs would have resurrected Davis' career a bit. However, I have noticed that Davis seemed to become more injury prone...i.e...last year in the playoff when he had that big run and that was pretty much it for him! I think we're better off with Portis..but it would have been nice to have someone like Davis to come in and relieve Portis when he needed a breather. __________________ "Fire Up That Diesel!"

05-05-2004, 11:02 AM	#15
FRPLG MVP Join Date: May 2004 Age: 45 Posts: 10,164	This is the butterfly effect. It's impossible to say how figuring out how to keep Dvais would have change this team currently. I imagine this team would look completely different now than it really does. Who knows...maybe Spurrier sees the light and runs Davis 30 times a game and we win 10 games and make the playoffs so Spurrier stays and Gibbs is off coaching the Falcons and....

what if we did not release stephen davis

Locker Room Main Forum