This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Personally, I don't see any way Portis plays in this game. He couldn't even straighten out his leg and now he's going to be able to play running back, the most punishing position in the NFL? I just don't see it. Factor in that Betts appears to be good to go, and I think the chances of Portis playing is less than 5%, not close to 50/50.That being said, I'm not buying that he's going to be out for another few weeks. I think he returns by week 13 at the latest.
I'm reminded of the week leading up to the 2006 opener vs. Minnesota.
He's not 100%. I'm certainly not going to argue that. But because of that it lets the 'Skins have the upperhand in the gamemanship that is injury reports. They get to say 50-50 all week. What do you prepare for as a D cooridinator? Do you plan as if Portis will be in no matter what? Would Zorn's game plan not change at all with Betts, SA or Rock in there instead of Portis? I would think something would have to change. So, again, how do you plan to defend a frontrunner for league MVP when everyone is talking about the difference between Grade II's and Grade IIIs and how many weeks will be missed, but the team keeps saying "50-50" and GTD. It just seems to benefit the Redskins the most to make his injury sound bad, without ever really saying it's bad. It's not like Portis hasn't been listed as questionable this season (3 times, in fact).It's just as effective, and maybe even more, the other way around as well. If it is a 3 week recovery, why not keep them thinking he still may play? But, unless they are totally lying about him not being able to straighten his leg, I can't see any way he plays.Sidewinder16 said:dgreen said:He's not 100%. I'm certainly not going to argue that. But because of that it lets the 'Skins have the upperhand in the gamemanship that is injury reports. They get to say 50-50 all week. What do you prepare for as a D cooridinator? Do you plan as if Portis will be in no matter what? Would Zorn's game plan not change at all with Betts, SA or Rock in there instead of Portis? I would think something would have to change. So, again, how do you plan to defend a frontrunner for league MVP when everyone is talking about the difference between Grade II's and Grade IIIs and how many weeks will be missed, but the team keeps saying "50-50" and GTD. It just seems to benefit the Redskins the most to make his injury sound bad, without ever really saying it's bad. It's not like Portis hasn't been listed as questionable this season (3 times, in fact).
It's just as effective, and maybe even more, the other way around as well. If it is a 3 week recovery, why not keep them thinking he still may play? But, unless they are totally lying about him not being able to straighten his leg, I can't see any way he plays.Sidewinder16 said:dgreen said:He's not 100%. I'm certainly not going to argue that. But because of that it lets the 'Skins have the upperhand in the gamemanship that is injury reports. They get to say 50-50 all week. What do you prepare for as a D cooridinator? Do you plan as if Portis will be in no matter what? Would Zorn's game plan not change at all with Betts, SA or Rock in there instead of Portis? I would think something would have to change. So, again, how do you plan to defend a frontrunner for league MVP when everyone is talking about the difference between Grade II's and Grade IIIs and how many weeks will be missed, but the team keeps saying "50-50" and GTD. It just seems to benefit the Redskins the most to make his injury sound bad, without ever really saying it's bad. It's not like Portis hasn't been listed as questionable this season (3 times, in fact).
to the bolded part.As for the last bit, that was days ago, no? It seems what has been coming out over the last 48 hours has been that he's getting treatment and it's improving. He was out on the field today, sans pads, getting his "mental reps". I don't think Zorn is having him do that if he really still can't bend his leg.
Hi, I'm new to this Forum and Thread. I hope this hasn't been gone over yet. But isn't anyone besides me hoping Portis rehabs another week. I realize this is Dallas, but Betts is a damn good backup. Rock has always surpassed most folks expectations, and Alexander may still have a little left in the tank. We are in a playoff marathon, not a sprint. We need Portis down the stretch, and his ego sometimes makes him do things that are irrational (preseason shoulder dislocation tackle). Let's rest up and have him see the specialists, and cash in on that big money we put towards Betts.It's just as effective, and maybe even more, the other way around as well. If it is a 3 week recovery, why not keep them thinking he still may play? But, unless they are totally lying about him not being able to straighten his leg, I can't see any way he plays.Sidewinder16 said:dgreen said:He's not 100%. I'm certainly not going to argue that. But because of that it lets the 'Skins have the upperhand in the gamemanship that is injury reports. They get to say 50-50 all week. What do you prepare for as a D cooridinator? Do you plan as if Portis will be in no matter what? Would Zorn's game plan not change at all with Betts, SA or Rock in there instead of Portis? I would think something would have to change. So, again, how do you plan to defend a frontrunner for league MVP when everyone is talking about the difference between Grade II's and Grade IIIs and how many weeks will be missed, but the team keeps saying "50-50" and GTD. It just seems to benefit the Redskins the most to make his injury sound bad, without ever really saying it's bad. It's not like Portis hasn't been listed as questionable this season (3 times, in fact).
to the bolded part.As for the last bit, that was days ago, no? It seems what has been coming out over the last 48 hours has been that he's getting treatment and it's improving. He was out on the field today, sans pads, getting his "mental reps". I don't think Zorn is having him do that if he really still can't bend his leg.
All of that would be well and good if Portis is in danger of making a significant MCL tear worse. My assertion is that the MCL "tear" isn't nearly as bad as it's being made out to be (this seems to be mostly the work of the media, IMO). If it were as bad as needing a specialist's consultation, that would have been done last week when his knee stiffened up on him and they diagnosed him. Nothing of the sort has been reported or even hinted at. I don't even think anything has been mentioned of any kind of scan (MRI, for example).It would be ridiculous to play this "50-50" game all week only to say, "yep, we knew it was a bad tear last week, but we waited until after Dallas to have him looked at".I'm not saying I think he'll definitely play. I just believe it's greater than the 50-50 Zorn is asserting. And at this moment nothing leads me to believe he'll need to miss anything more than the Dallas game. Again, I could be way off, but right now, I really don't think so.And secondary to Portis' current injury status situation, I completely disagree that the Portis' '06 preseason shoulder injury was "irrational" on his part, and the 'Skins did not spend big money on Betts.
You don't think the contract Betts signed in 12/06- a five-year, $11 million contract extension through 2012, is big money for a backup RB? Don't get me wrong, I'm happy they did it. I would just like to see them be careful with Portis. He has shown he'll play if it's left up to him, but I am worried what happened to S-Jax in week 9 will repeat itself here. I realize it's a totally different injury, but knee problems can be just as tricky.Your right. Calling Portis's decision to make an extremely hard arm tackle in the Cincinatti preseason game "irrational" probably isn't the right call. Actually it probably shouldn't be called a decision to begin with. It's instinctual to make the play when your on the field. I just remember watching it and realizing at the split second he threw his left arm out there, that there was a good chance he's going to get injured on that tackle. I then got angry at Brunell for the interception, Gibbs for having him out there, and Portis for sacrificing himself to make the tackle. It's that attitude that has helped make him such a reliable RB over the years. Guess you have to take the bad with the good.
this seems realistic to me. i can't see Portis carrying the ball 20+ times plus a few receptions thrown in. also, if Dallas starts racking up points, it'll probably take washington out of it's gameplan to rush the ball down Dallas' throat. The actual happenings of the game might push Zorn to keep Portis off the field.
Philly went up 14-0 quick on the 'Skins and that didn't take them out of their gameplan. I don't see Zorn panicking and throwing anything out the window this week. If they want to run it, they'll run it. Whoever is getting the carries, Dallas doesn't exactly have the greatest run D.I'm more worried about Springs being out this game than how the rushing carries are going to be divvied up.
As an observer and not a fan, this is what I saw too.You are as good as your run game is. it sets up everything else on offense. The screens, mis-direction, short slants etc. Campbell had NO time to stand in the pocket at all. 1 deep ball the whole game. Defense.....your secondary is very good, but no pass rush as mentioned above. I was worried a hit to Romo could mean trouble, but he wa kept clean for the most part.I still say you remind me of the Cowboys of last year.Oh and not gloating....but it was nice to see Newman dominant Moss. Many of you have been critical of him.
switch a few key words and this could be one of my quotes about the Cowboys earlier this season.funny how being a devoted fan of an NFL team can take you to extreme highs and lows on a weekly basis.
Absolutely nothing, officially from the team, even hinted that Portis could have a serious injury requiring weeks of rest. I found it simultaneously humorous and frustrating that so much was being made out of a phrase made on a local radio show by an NFL player who has shown a propensity for theatrics, hyperbole, overstatement and even misstatement at times.I've read people speculating that the 'Skins were playing games with the injury report even to the point of lying about whether Portis was really injured or not, and whether or not the NFL should investigate. The team never said anything more than "questionable (knee)".
Jim Zorn has been extremely honest about the injury status of players. If the NFL were to investigate, they would probably conclude they want more teams to be upfront with information like the Redskins are.The team never said anything more than "questionable (knee)".
I heard the beginning of Vinny's radio show today and he was praising Portis' toughness and for playing. He made some comments that made it sound like Portis was on tables receiving treatment all week. So, I do believe that Portis is "banged up," but probably nothing more.As long as health isn't an issue, I see them getting back to him this week in Seattle. He's only had 13 and 15 carries the last two games. He should be back up around 25 next week.
Hit the nail right on the head! I'd add that everytime the coaches have played conservatively, it is also hinders our ability. Other than that, it's all sum'd up by what you posted.Amazing how we got absolutely no (zero, ziltch, nada, niet, etc) pressure on Romo and how they had constant pressure on JC even with 3 guys pass rushing.
In all fairness, he didn't dominate him...JC just never got a chance to throw the ball. Of course, he had to have done a decent job, but it wasn't like JC was throwing Moss the ball and Newman kept breaking it up.Before last night, MBIII had approx 25 yds total? Last night he was running all over the 'Skins and surely made up for the past three games. Very frustrating to see a complete lack of any ability to stop a guy that we bottled up so well in the last year and half.Ratliff looked really good for you guys last night too.Bankerguy said:
And extremely disappointing to not stop the run when you know they're going to run. For some reason, Landry and Horton were playing 10 yards off the LOS on much of that last drive. And, on some of those plays, Landry was running back deep at the snap, only to have to stop and head back up to the play...after Barber had already picked up at least 5 yards.
I read somewhere this morning that Blache said he was regretting not assigning another man to stop the run on that last drive.
So, this means Montgomery will be out 2-4 weeks with an injury more serious than is being let on, right?[/sarcasm]
Can't say that I've noticed Washington really make an impact in any game this season. As long as Blades can hold his own, I'm sure he'll provide as much as, if not more than, Washington.Sounds like Portis is about as good as can be expected at this point of a season. Like I said earlier, I expect a heave dose of Clinton next week in Seattle.
It didn't really matter. They never saw the ball again because MBIII chewed them up with those runs.And no comments about that BS call on the ball downed inside the 1 yard line by Rock that was ruled a touchback because it rolled into his back? I know one call doesn't make or break a game, but if the Cowboys get it on their 1, down 7-0, chances are they don't score and make it 7-7. Only Rock's nice run back of the KO gave them the chance to get the late FG to lead 10-7 at the half. And they NEVER scored again.BTW, after 10 games last year, the Skins were 5-5 and had scored 201 points. Sean Taylor was still alive. This year they are 6-4 and have scored 181 and Sean Taylor's dead. Both lines are essentially the same and the QB, RB and WRs are the same. But this year, we think we have a "better" team. Go figure.
I guess my assertion is that you defend a little different when your opponent has poor field position. I think pinning them back would have 1) let the D know you have confidence in them to get a stop and 2) gets the D a little more fired up and aggresive, knowing the opposition really has to work to get anywhere on the field.It may not have mattered, true. I just would rather have had the game in the D's hands with Dallas deep than in the O's hands trying to pick up 4 yards on 4th down after struggling most of the game.
Personally, I would have preferred something other than a 3-yard pass to a well-covered receiver on 4th and 4. Too bad they already used the QB draw.
the reason there has been no comments is because it was the correct call. it's pretty cut and dry. he was in the endzone and was in contact with the ball. thats a touchback.It didn't really matter. They never saw the ball again because MBIII chewed them up with those runs.And no comments about that BS call on the ball downed inside the 1 yard line by Rock that was ruled a touchback because it rolled into his back? I know one call doesn't make or break a game, but if the Cowboys get it on their 1, down 7-0, chances are they don't score and make it 7-7. Only Rock's nice run back of the KO gave them the chance to get the late FG to lead 10-7 at the half. And they NEVER scored again.
BTW, after 10 games last year, the Skins were 5-5 and had scored 201 points. Sean Taylor was still alive. This year they are 6-4 and have scored 181 and Sean Taylor's dead. Both lines are essentially the same and the QB, RB and WRs are the same. But this year, we think we have a "better" team. Go figure.
I dislike the rule but it was ruled correctly. The ball is still alive if it gets pused backwards I think is how it is worded, if Campbell(?) hadn't kicked the ball back at Rock it would have been down at the 2 yard line.It didn't really matter. They never saw the ball again because MBIII chewed them up with those runs.And no comments about that BS call on the ball downed inside the 1 yard line by Rock that was ruled a touchback because it rolled into his back? I know one call doesn't make or break a game, but if the Cowboys get it on their 1, down 7-0, chances are they don't score and make it 7-7. Only Rock's nice run back of the KO gave them the chance to get the late FG to lead 10-7 at the half. And they NEVER scored again.
BTW, after 10 games last year, the Skins were 5-5 and had scored 201 points. Sean Taylor was still alive. This year they are 6-4 and have scored 181 and Sean Taylor's dead. Both lines are essentially the same and the QB, RB and WRs are the same. But this year, we think we have a "better" team. Go figure.
Bankerguy said:
Except for the "nice" part. Oh, and as for the Cowboys last year comparison, this 'Skins team ain't a 13-win team, so . . . If they go on a tear with some great football to end the year and make the playoffs, nobody's going to be talking much about the last two games, but I'm not seeing a quick, easy solution to these line problems. That o-line looks every bit its age, particularly on the right side. Oh, and make a ####### play once in a while, Rabach! 
Good call by the refs.Terrible call by Rock.the reason there has been no comments is because it was the correct call. it's pretty cut and dry. he was in the endzone and was in contact with the ball. thats a touchback.It didn't really matter. They never saw the ball again because MBIII chewed them up with those runs.And no comments about that BS call on the ball downed inside the 1 yard line by Rock that was ruled a touchback because it rolled into his back? I know one call doesn't make or break a game, but if the Cowboys get it on their 1, down 7-0, chances are they don't score and make it 7-7. Only Rock's nice run back of the KO gave them the chance to get the late FG to lead 10-7 at the half. And they NEVER scored again.
BTW, after 10 games last year, the Skins were 5-5 and had scored 201 points. Sean Taylor was still alive. This year they are 6-4 and have scored 181 and Sean Taylor's dead. Both lines are essentially the same and the QB, RB and WRs are the same. But this year, we think we have a "better" team. Go figure.
Possibly, though I think his extra PT in this game was due more to the fact that ARE got dinged up.I sure would like to see what he could do with some room to run after the catch.
Sad part that I left out was MBIII had approx 25 yds total in the last three games before this past Sunday. Oh well...
Yeah, it was more like a 2 yard pass with a defender all over his back. Bad move...
I guess it's the perception of how we won a few of the games this past season. The high of beating Dallas and then Philly gave everyone a feel good feeling, if you know what I mean. That is some interesting info there though as it appears we haven't really become better. Maybe the others around us just got worse.It didn't really matter. They never saw the ball again because MBIII chewed them up with those runs.And no comments about that BS call on the ball downed inside the 1 yard line by Rock that was ruled a touchback because it rolled into his back? I know one call doesn't make or break a game, but if the Cowboys get it on their 1, down 7-0, chances are they don't score and make it 7-7. Only Rock's nice run back of the KO gave them the chance to get the late FG to lead 10-7 at the half. And they NEVER scored again.
BTW, after 10 games last year, the Skins were 5-5 and had scored 201 points. Sean Taylor was still alive. This year they are 6-4 and have scored 181 and Sean Taylor's dead. Both lines are essentially the same and the QB, RB and WRs are the same. But this year, we think we have a "better" team. Go figure.
It was there if Campbell throws it about 3 seconds earlier as Moss crossed the middle.
