Player Spotlight: Clinton Portis (1 Viewer)

[Marc Levin]

and did Portis have a better QB the last 2 years in Denver? Hardly. Did he have a better #1 and #2 WR? NO WAY. If Portis could still get those kind of runs against D's who were focusing on the run, think what he MIGHT be able to do against D's that HAVE to defend Coles and Brunell? Yes, the Skins o-line is not as proven as the Broncos, but the other skilled positions I'd give the Skins the edge. Portis is too good to NOT be a top 5 back, regardless of where he plays. (just like LT. His line sucks, his QB sucks, his WR's sucks, but he still dominated. So will Portis)

Are you trying to say that Washington is a better place for a RB than Denver?

No - he's saying the points you make for why Washington is a worse place for Portis are not RELEVANT.The only point you make that IS relevant is the OL - and I believe the Washington OL has the right pieces as long as they receive the right coaching.Spurrier screwed up this team from the head down, but he built it from the body up. Gibbs will get the team's head screwed back into an NFL track - the team has plenty of talent, it has simply had truly horrendous coaching the last four years.

 

[Burning Sensation]

and did Portis have a better QB the last 2 years in Denver? Hardly. Did he have a better #1 and #2 WR? NO WAY. If Portis could still get those kind of runs against D's who were focusing on the run, think what he MIGHT be able to do against D's that HAVE to defend Coles and Brunell? Yes, the Skins o-line is not as proven as the Broncos, but the other skilled positions I'd give the Skins the edge. Portis is too good to NOT be a top 5 back, regardless of where he plays. (just like LT. His line sucks, his QB sucks, his WR's sucks, but he still dominated. So will Portis)

Are you trying to say that Washington is a better place for a RB than Denver?

No - he's saying the points you make for why Washington is a worse place for Portis are not RELEVANT.The only point you make that IS relevant is the OL - and I believe the Washington OL has the right pieces as long as they receive the right coaching.Spurrier screwed up this team from the head down, but he built it from the body up. Gibbs will get the team's head screwed back into an NFL track - the team has plenty of talent, it has simply had truly horrendous coaching the last four years.

The OL is a pretty big deal, dont you think? As far as Spurrier screwing up the Redskins, i would think Snyder is more to blame for that.I will now end what appears to be(but is not) my bashing of Portis. Can he rush for 1500+ yards and 15+ TD's, sure, he has the talent. Do i think he will on Washington, no. Like i projected earlier, 1500-1600 total yards, and 10 TD range, somewhere in the top 10 RB's, but not in the top 5.P.S. I cant wait to bump this thread during/after the season, which i will do wether im right or wrong.

 

[dj_stouty]

P.S. I cant wait to bump this thread during/after the season, which i will do wether im right or wrong.

And I'll do the same! Guess I should leave my predictions1600 yards rushing with 10 TD, 350 Yards receiving with 4 TDs

 

[Callas Disregard]

Portis's PPG numbers are really amazing when you consider that he missed about half of the week 2 game, about half of the week 3 game, over a quarter of the week 11 game, and about a quarter of the week 12 game. If you divide his total points by 11.5 games instead of 13 games, Portis was the #1 fantasy RB in PPG last year.

Oh yeah, we could have all kinds of fun with this methodology. Let's see: every time Tony Fisher or Najeh Davenport gets a touch, I reduce Ahman Green's "games played" by a fraction. Every time Tomlinson breaks a long one and has to sit out a couple plays to suck some oxygen, I reduce HIS "games played" by a fraction. Every time the Chiefs are up by 30 points and Priest sits out the last 8 minutes, I only credit him with 7/8 of a game.The problem with this is, if I started Portis in weeks 2, 3, 11, and 12, I was not allowed to change my lineup mid-game when Portis went out. I was stuck with Portis for the WHOLE GAME. In fantasy football, you have to use "games started" as your measure. The fact that Portis has a nasty tendency to fail to finish games because he gets beat up MUST be factored into your projections. I'm not ready to pronounce him the next Fred Taylor, but considering his "smallness" his injury problems were fairly predictable -- and it's reasonable to assume that will continue.

 

[Maurile Tremblay]

The fact that Portis has a nasty tendency to fail to finish games because he gets beat up MUST be factored into your projections.

Only if you believe it's a tendency.I don't treat injuries as tendencies very often. YMMV.

 

[jurb26]

Portis's PPG numbers are really amazing when you consider that he missed about half of the week 2 game, about half of the week 3 game, over a quarter of the week 11 game, and about a quarter of the week 12 game. If you divide his total points by 11.5 games instead of 13 games, Portis was the #1 fantasy RB in PPG last year.

Oh yeah, we could have all kinds of fun with this methodology. Let's see: every time Tony Fisher or Najeh Davenport gets a touch, I reduce Ahman Green's "games played" by a fraction. Every time Tomlinson breaks a long one and has to sit out a couple plays to suck some oxygen, I reduce HIS "games played" by a fraction. Every time the Chiefs are up by 30 points and Priest sits out the last 8 minutes, I only credit him with 7/8 of a game.The problem with this is, if I started Portis in weeks 2, 3, 11, and 12, I was not allowed to change my lineup mid-game when Portis went out. I was stuck with Portis for the WHOLE GAME. In fantasy football, you have to use "games started" as your measure. The fact that Portis has a nasty tendency to fail to finish games because he gets beat up MUST be factored into your projections. I'm not ready to pronounce him the next Fred Taylor, but considering his "smallness" his injury problems were fairly predictable -- and it's reasonable to assume that will continue.

Ummmm are you talking about the weeks 2, 11, and 12 in which Portis racked up 429 yds or 143 per game.... :wacko: Week 3 I'll give you.

 

[DogFather]

What did Portis score in those weeks he got the injuries? I seem to remember him still putting up around 10 or so points in the games he missed a half due to injury... could be wrong. So yeah, I was stuck with him for that whole game, but he didn't give me a zero, and actually scored fairly well... basically like dropping my RB1 to a RB2/3.

 

[switz]

If you ignore the name and just look at the situation, you have:One of the top-3 best RBs in football the past two seasons that a team determined be a winner went and signed to a high money contract, after getting a former SB coach. Then look at the surrounding cast. Two solid WRs, one who could be spectacular. And improving QB. A very strong OL. No real competition from the other RBs on the team.You look at it that way and you'd say they are going to ride this guy as far as he'll take them, and I'd say you are right.

This is a good post that has been largely ignored in this thread.

i think it is being ignored because it convienetly disregards facts.

What "facts" BS?

 

[jurb26]

PS: In the games that are sited to be so detrimental to the Portis owners last year (2,3,11,12), all he did was put up 471 tot yds or 118 per game. Man must really suck to have bad weeks = 118 yds.

 

[Burning Sensation]

If you ignore the name and just look at the situation, you have:

One of the top-3 best RBs in football the past two seasons that a team determined be a winner went and signed to a high money contract, after getting a former SB coach. Then look at the surrounding cast. Two solid WRs, one who could be spectacular. And improving QB. A very strong OL. No real competition from the other RBs on the team.

You look at it that way and you'd say they are going to ride this guy as far as he'll take them, and I'd say you are right.

This is a good post that has been largely ignored in this thread.

i think it is being ignored because it convienetly disregards facts.

What facts are distorted? It is a true statement of the players in D.C.And the history (albeit a small pool) of RBs switching teams in their prime is good.

I'm only going to chime in here to recall that the Philly run D is not great - the Giants' run D is horrible - and Washington will be playing a middle of the road run D schedule. I foresee a bad-A Portis putting up top-5 numbers again, but a slight downtick from his Denver days in the TD department. I do foresee another injury keeping him out for a couple games.

14 GP, 14 GS 300 rushes, 5.1 YPC, 1530 rush yards, 49 rec., 465 yards, 11 rush TDs, 2 rec. TDs, 13 total TDs

If he plays a 16 game season, he will be the #1 or #2 fantasy rusher.

For starters, he says if you "ignore the name". 2ndly, he leaves out the fact that Portis is leaving Denver, which cant be good for a RB's numbers. He Calls Gibbs a former Superbowl coach, but leaves out the fact he hasnt coached in 10+ years. Two solid WR's? i would love to know who the 2nd one is? A "very stong" oline? really? An "improving" QB, i wouldnt exactly call Brunnell improving, maybe decling, or aging, but not improving. My point is anyne can twist, or leave out key points and facts, or exagerate to make it sound better for their argument. I could do it right now to make Portis sound like Ron Dayne, but i am too lazy, so i wont.

Here Switz, i didnt fel like typing it again, so i will just bump it

 

[switz]

If you ignore the name and just look at the situation, you have:

One of the top-3 best RBs in football the past two seasons that a team determined be a winner went and signed to a high money contract, after getting a former SB coach. Then look at the surrounding cast. Two solid WRs, one who could be spectacular. And improving QB. A very strong OL. No real competition from the other RBs on the team.

You look at it that way and you'd say they are going to ride this guy as far as he'll take them, and I'd say you are right.

This is a good post that has been largely ignored in this thread.

i think it is being ignored because it convienetly disregards facts.

What facts are distorted? It is a true statement of the players in D.C.And the history (albeit a small pool) of RBs switching teams in their prime is good.

I'm only going to chime in here to recall that the Philly run D is not great - the Giants' run D is horrible - and Washington will be playing a middle of the road run D schedule. I foresee a bad-A Portis putting up top-5 numbers again, but a slight downtick from his Denver days in the TD department. I do foresee another injury keeping him out for a couple games.

14 GP, 14 GS 300 rushes, 5.1 YPC, 1530 rush yards, 49 rec., 465 yards, 11 rush TDs, 2 rec. TDs, 13 total TDs

If he plays a 16 game season, he will be the #1 or #2 fantasy rusher.

For starters, he says if you "ignore the name". 2ndly, he leaves out the fact that Portis is leaving Denver, which cant be good for a RB's numbers. He Calls Gibbs a former Superbowl coach, but leaves out the fact he hasnt coached in 10+ years. Two solid WR's? i would love to know who the 2nd one is? A "very stong" oline? really? An "improving" QB, i wouldnt exactly call Brunnell improving, maybe decling, or aging, but not improving. My point is anyne can twist, or leave out key points and facts, or exagerate to make it sound better for their argument. I could do it right now to make Portis sound like Ron Dayne, but i am too lazy, so i wont.

Here Switz, i didnt fel like typing it again, so i will just bump it

Yeah after I posted I saw some others raised the same question. Obviously the "facts" that seem important to you are really non-factors in my opinion. Prtis obviously doens't have any lingering injuries, he was fully healthy his rookie season, the line difference is unknown at this time seeing that Gibbs/Bugel produced great running lines before, Brunell is an improvement over Ramsey last year, and Ramsey this year is an improvement over Ramsey last year and both are an improvement over Plummer, the WR corps is unquestionably strong (I seriously thought better of you to even question that), and they're better than DEN's wrs at this stage. The ten year difference didn't impact Vermeil, and shouldn't impact Gibbs since he hired coaches from today's game.We'll agree to disagree because I know we see it differently. It'll be something to see it play out though.

 

[Burning Sensation]

If you ignore the name and just look at the situation, you have:

One of the top-3 best RBs in football the past two seasons that a team determined be a winner went and signed to a high money contract, after getting a former SB coach. Then look at the surrounding cast. Two solid WRs, one who could be spectacular. And improving QB. A very strong OL. No real competition from the other RBs on the team.

You look at it that way and you'd say they are going to ride this guy as far as he'll take them, and I'd say you are right.

This is a good post that has been largely ignored in this thread.

i think it is being ignored because it convienetly disregards facts.

What facts are distorted? It is a true statement of the players in D.C.And the history (albeit a small pool) of RBs switching teams in their prime is good.

I'm only going to chime in here to recall that the Philly run D is not great - the Giants' run D is horrible - and Washington will be playing a middle of the road run D schedule. I foresee a bad-A Portis putting up top-5 numbers again, but a slight downtick from his Denver days in the TD department. I do foresee another injury keeping him out for a couple games.

14 GP, 14 GS 300 rushes, 5.1 YPC, 1530 rush yards, 49 rec., 465 yards, 11 rush TDs, 2 rec. TDs, 13 total TDs

If he plays a 16 game season, he will be the #1 or #2 fantasy rusher.

For starters, he says if you "ignore the name". 2ndly, he leaves out the fact that Portis is leaving Denver, which cant be good for a RB's numbers. He Calls Gibbs a former Superbowl coach, but leaves out the fact he hasnt coached in 10+ years. Two solid WR's? i would love to know who the 2nd one is? A "very stong" oline? really? An "improving" QB, i wouldnt exactly call Brunnell improving, maybe decling, or aging, but not improving. My point is anyne can twist, or leave out key points and facts, or exagerate to make it sound better for their argument. I could do it right now to make Portis sound like Ron Dayne, but i am too lazy, so i wont.

Here Switz, i didnt fel like typing it again, so i will just bump it

Yeah after I posted I saw some others raised the same question. Obviously the "facts" that seem important to you are really non-factors in my opinion. Prtis obviously doens't have any lingering injuries, he was fully healthy his rookie season, the line difference is unknown at this time seeing that Gibbs/Bugel produced great running lines before, Brunell is an improvement over Ramsey last year, and Ramsey this year is an improvement over Ramsey last year and both are an improvement over Plummer, the WR corps is unquestionably strong (I seriously thought better of you to even question that), and they're better than DEN's wrs at this stage. The ten year difference didn't impact Vermeil, and shouldn't impact Gibbs since he hired coaches from today's game.We'll agree to disagree because I know we see it differently. It'll be something to see it play out though.

Well, i guess truth is in perception. You dont see Portis' 3 seperate injuries last year as making hm injury pone, i do(although i am not overly concerned, as every player is injury prone). You dont think being out of the league 10+ years as a potential problem for Gibbs, based on one success case in Vermeil, i do. And you are not serious about saying you dont know if there is an Oline difference, are you? If Portis was out of the picture for either team, and you had, oh, lets say Lamont Jordan on your $5000 entry fee dynasty league, and Denver and Washington were bidding for Jordans services(assuming he would be the sure starter for both teams) were would you want him to end up?As far as Washingtons WR's, why would you "think better of me" when i say their WR's are are not "unquestionably strong"? LAverneus Coles is unquestionably strong, but the rest of their WR's are average, at best. Also, just because Snyder gave Brunnell a ton of moeny does not make him a great QB, as a matter of fact, i would rather have Plummer than Brunnell(i would actually rather have Ramsey than Brunnell) but anyway, we will see whose "truth" is correct in 7 months

 

[switz]

You dont think being out of the league 10+ years as a potential problem for Gibbs, based on one success case in Vermeil, i do.

And you are not serious about saying you dont know if there is an Oline difference, are you? If Portis was out of the picture for either team, and you had, oh, lets say Lamont Jordan on your $5000 entry fee dynasty league, and Denver and Washington were bidding for Jordans services(assuming he would be the sure starter for both teams) were would you want him to end up?

As far as Washingtons WR's, why would you "think better of me" when i say their WR's are are not "unquestionably strong"? Laverneus Coles is unquestionably strong, but the rest of their WR's are average, at best.

Also, just because Snyder gave Brunnell a ton of moeny does not make him a great QB, as a matter of fact, i would rather have Plummer than Brunnell(i would actually rather have Ramsey than Brunnell) but anyway, we will see whose "truth" is correct in 7 months

Gibbs - if he assembled a staff with little experience in today's game, I would worry, but he didn't. It seems his staff is solid, and I don't think he'll miss a beat. Seriously.The OLine - I believe Denver's blocking shemes are better for runners, but Denver's opponents also keyin on the run more than the pass. I beleive the WAS passing game is better than DEN's and will offset the difference. I also believe Bugel and Co will turn a line of potential all-pros into a stellar line.

The WRs - Coles is steller, Gardner is more than solid, and Thrash as the #3 is superb. He's got game breaking ability in the right situation. He's just not a #1 WR.

And as forthe QBs I like Ramsey better than Brunell now, but I like both betterthan Plummer. I think Brunell is a better decision maker than Plummer and still has a good enough arm to make things happen.

It's going to be a fun season. If anything, I think Portis will exceed the average expectations. But then again I have Portis and LT in my dynasty, so I am a bit biased

 

[Burning Sensation]

and did Portis have a better QB the last 2 years in Denver? Hardly. Did he have a better #1 and #2 WR? NO WAY. If Portis could still get those kind of runs against D's who were focusing on the run, think what he MIGHT be able to do against D's that HAVE to defend Coles and Brunell? Yes, the Skins o-line is not as proven as the Broncos, but the other skilled positions I'd give the Skins the edge. Portis is too good to NOT be a top 5 back, regardless of where he plays. (just like LT. His line sucks, his QB sucks, his WR's sucks, but he still dominated. So will Portis)

Are you trying to say that Washington is a better place for a RB than Denver?

No - he's saying the points you make for why Washington is a worse place for Portis are not RELEVANT.The only point you make that IS relevant is the OL - and I believe the Washington OL has the right pieces as long as they receive the right coaching.Spurrier screwed up this team from the head down, but he built it from the body up. Gibbs will get the team's head screwed back into an NFL track - the team has plenty of talent, it has simply had truly horrendous coaching the last four years.

The OL is a pretty big deal, dont you think? As far as Spurrier screwing up the Redskins, i would think Snyder is more to blame for that.I will now end what appears to be(but is not) my bashing of Portis. Can he rush for 1500+ yards and 15+ TD's, sure, he has the talent. Do i think he will on Washington, no. Like i projected earlier, 1500-1600 total yards, and 10 TD range, somewhere in the top 10 RB's, but not in the top 5.P.S. I cant wait to bump this thread during/after the season, which i will do wether im right or wrong.

didnt think i forget, did ya?

 

[jurb26]

didnt think i forget, did ya?

You may be right about Portis this year after all, but how is McAllister doing?

 

[cstu]

My trading away of Portis for Alexander before the season is looking better every week. I love it when a plan comes together.

 

[Burning Sensation]

didnt think i forget, did ya?

You may be right about Portis this year after all, but how is McAllister doing?

Not so well, but, despite Portis playing in 5 games and Deuce in 2, they have the same amount of 100 yard games.

 

[jurb26]

didnt think i forget, did ya?

You may be right about Portis this year after all, but how is McAllister doing?

Not so well, but, despite Portis playing in 5 games and Deuce in 2, they have the same amount of 100 yard games.

True, but not TDs.

 

[Dancing Bear]

Hey jurb26 and Repressed Dennis,You guys out there?I guess I over-stated Portis' ability to rush when I predicted a high 4 to 5 ypc ...At this point, he will be lucky to squeek out even a 4.00 ypc. I.E. average running back performance. Based on what Q and Droughns have done this year, do you still think that Portis is the reason he gained yards at a 5.5 clip?Guess again!

 

[jurb26]

Hey jurb26 and Repressed Dennis,You guys out there?I guess I over-stated Portis' ability to rush when I predicted a high 4 to 5 ypc ...At this point, he will be lucky to squeek out even a 4.00 ypc. I.E. average running back performance. Based on what Q and Droughns have done this year, do you still think that Portis is the reason he gained yards at a 5.5 clip?Guess again!

While we were most certainly wrong, this is most certainly a trip.

 

[Dancing Bear]

jurb26,I was not "fishing" in anyway. I took it on the chin quite heavily for stating in preseason in this very thread that Portis would not obtain the same numbers that he did in Denver.You could at least acknowledge that my differing opinion is now proving to be sound.

 

[jurb26]

jurb26,I was not "fishing" in anyway. I took it on the chin quite heavily for stating in preseason in this very thread that Portis would not obtain the same numbers that he did in Denver.You could at least acknowledge that my differing opinion is now proving to be sound.

What part of "while we were most ceratinly wrong" does not acknowledge that? Or are you still fishing here?I have no problem admiting I misjudged this situation, only with the tone of which you present your case.It is clear that injuries have had a great deal to do with his misfortune this year in Wash. It is also clear that Portis was more than a system RB. It is still unclear however how much success Portis will encounter throughout his career in Wash. I woul expect things turn for the better next season.

 

[dj_stouty]

jurb26,

I was not "fishing" in anyway. I took it on the chin quite heavily for stating in preseason in this very thread that Portis would not obtain the same numbers that he did in Denver.

You could at least acknowledge that my differing opinion is now proving to be sound.

Portis could very well still make 1,500 yards...regardless if his YPC is in the 4.0s.As many have said on this board...1,200 yards in the NFC usually transpires to 1,500 yards in the AFC. If Portis rushes for 1,500 yards in the NFC does that transpire to 1,800 yards in the AFC? Probably not...but you get my point.

Name me a player in NFL history that has rushed for over 1,500 yards each of his first three seasons. You can't...because it has never been done before.

 

[switz]

I will now end what appears to be(but is not) my bashing of Portis. Can he rush for 1500+ yards and 15+ TD's, sure, he has the talent. Do i think he will on Washington, no. Like i projected earlier, 1500-1600 total yards, and 10 TD range, somewhere in the top 10 RB's, but not in the top 5.P.S. I cant wait to bump this thread during/after the season, which i will do wether im right or wrong.

didnt think i forget, did ya?

1100 yards in 12 games. He's still within reach of 1500 in 16 games, right?The 5 TDs are ludicrous....We'll see what happens over the next 4 games, Portis right now is #10 in my league. Obviously he has alot of cathup to do to make it into top-5, but he does have 25% f the season left, and aside from PHI, a pretty soft run schedule.

 

[placeholder10391]

I too said all along that Portis' numbers would come back down to earth, and that he was being draft way higher than his numbers would justify.He's not a bad back, but it's always funny to see the "mega stud" for what he really is when you take the Denver O-line out of the equation. I wonder what he's done with the Championship belt he put in after his big game last season? It's gonna be collecting plenty of dust in Washington...

 

[jurb26]

He's not a bad back, but it's always funny to see the "mega stud" for what he really is when you take the Denver O-line out of the equation.

Thats funny cause the Den line seems to be missing him just as muich as he is missing them right about now.With Portis the Den run game ranked as so last year:atts 2ndyds 2ndavg 3rdtds 3rdW/O Portis this year and basically the same tools on O:atts 6yds 7avg 16tds 25

 

[Dancing Bear]

Earl Campbell came pretty close IMHO:145016971934Barry Sanders got 1300 or more:147013041548

 

[1911]

I wonder what he's done with the Championship belt he put in after his big game last season? It's gonna be collecting plenty of dust in Washington...

He had it on after the game against the Giants.

 

[Repressed Dennis]

Hey jurb26 and Repressed Dennis,

You guys out there?

I guess I over-stated Portis' ability to rush when I predicted a high 4 to 5 ypc ...

At this point, he will be lucky to squeek out even a 4.00 ypc. I.E. average running back performance. Based on what Q and Droughns have done this year, do you still think that Portis is the reason he gained yards at a 5.5 clip?

Guess again!

If Portis gets 10 TDs over the next four games, my prediction will be right in line! :rotflmao: Seriously, Portis and the entire Redskins offense have been one of the largest disappointments in FF this year. And your projections were slightly better than mine. However, let's look at your three stated reasons for your projections:

1. Denver O-line better than Skins O-line.

Definitely true this year. We'll see about next year.

2. Portis will miss time being "nicked up".

At least through week 13, Portis has been one of the most durable backs in the league and hasn't missed any time with injury.

3. Gibbs will use RBBC to lighten the load on Portis.

With the exception of the Pittsburgh game, when Gibbs gave up on the run altogether, Portis has been the primary ball-carrier every week, and is currently second to Curtis Martin in total carries this year.

So your results are better, but for the wrong reasons. It really comes back to a reason I discounted, which is that the Skins passing game was the least threatening in the league. Game after game, defenders who played the Redskins stated that they completely discounted the Skins ability to throw the ball down the field, and concentrated on the run and short passing games.

Also, if you think what jurb and I posted was "taking it on the chin", then I apologize. But I've seen MUCH more pointed, and personal, postings on this board. Check out the Free For All sometime...

 

[jurb26]

Also, if you think what jurb and I posted was "taking it on the chin", then I apologize. But I've seen MUCH more pointed, and personal, postings on this board. Check out the Free For All sometime...

Agree with the whole post, but inparticular this part. NO personaly attacks were intended, just a good old fashion debate. No hard feelings I hope.

 

[Dancing Bear]

Dennis,I appreciate your comments and insights.I did place a "fragile" tag on Clinton, and he has proven to be more durable than I expected with the load placed on him.

 

[Repressed Dennis]

Yeah - just watch. Next year Portis will get off to a GREAT start, then get hurt...that's the way these things go, sometimes...

 

[Big Score]

I don't know if you guys bothered to compare his numbers at this stage of the season last year, to this stage of the season this year, but his numbers are actually pretty darn similar.The reality is that through 13 games, he is only 220 rushing yards and 79 receiving yards behind this point of 2003. That's only about 30 yards per game.Considering how the Skins have played and the opposing D's simply keying on him as the only legit offensive weapon for the majority of the season, I for one, am thoroughly impressed. Portis will be seriously undervalued come next years draft IMO, for Fantasy Football purposes, he may well end up being the S.O.D.

 

[Mungo Burrows]

If Portis gets 10 TDs over the next four games, my prediction will be right in line! :rotflmao:

If I read the stats correctly, he only had 5 TDs through 11 games last year, and got 9 in his last three games (sat out the last 2). Maybe 10 more this year isn't that farfetched!

 

[dj_stouty]

Earl Campbell came pretty close IMHO:145016971934Barry Sanders got 1300 or more:147013041548

Well "close" doesn't cut it. And quite frankly, for Earl Campbell and Barry Sanders to be "close" to Portis in yardage your first 3 years in the league is quite a compliment to Portis.Portis is still learning Gibb's offense...and Gibbs is still learning how to best utilize Portis. I think a 3rd 1,500 yard year would be amazing....although I would like to see more than 5 TDs and 1 Passing TD.

 

[redman]

Earl Campbell came pretty close IMHO:145016971934Barry Sanders got 1300 or more:147013041548

Well "close" doesn't cut it. And quite frankly, for Earl Campbell and Barry Sanders to be "close" to Portis in yardage your first 3 years in the league is quite a compliment to Portis.Portis is still learning Gibb's offense...and Gibbs is still learning how to best utilize Portis. I think a 3rd 1,500 yard year would be amazing....although I would like to see more than 5 TDs and 1 Passing TD.

This is exactly right regarding Gibbs and Portis. Gibbs has finally recognized that Portis excells when he gets to make his own reads and cutbacks with zone blocking in front of him, rather than having the play designed for him to go to a specific point at a specific moment. Last week for what I understand was the first time this season, Gibbs put in zone blocking for Portis, and the traditional man-to-man blocking for Ladell Betts, who is more of a grinder. The result was that the two of them combined for more than 200 yards rushing, with Betts averaging almost 6 ypc. The reports from the team are that the offense started clicking last week. It took longer than I thought it would, but they've turned a corner IMHO. I would therefore not be shocked to see Portis end up with over 1500 rushing yards and double digit TD's when it's all said and done.

 

[dj_stouty]

Earl Campbell came pretty close IMHO:145016971934Barry Sanders got 1300 or more:147013041548

Well "close" doesn't cut it. And quite frankly, for Earl Campbell and Barry Sanders to be "close" to Portis in yardage your first 3 years in the league is quite a compliment to Portis.Portis is still learning Gibb's offense...and Gibbs is still learning how to best utilize Portis. I think a 3rd 1,500 yard year would be amazing....although I would like to see more than 5 TDs and 1 Passing TD.

This is exactly right regarding Gibbs and Portis. Gibbs has finally recognized that Portis excells when he gets to make his own reads and cutbacks with zone blocking in front of him, rather than having the play designed for him to go to a specific point at a specific moment. Last week for what I understand was the first time this season, Gibbs put in zone blocking for Portis, and the traditional man-to-man blocking for Ladell Betts, who is more of a grinder. The result was that the two of them combined for more than 200 yards rushing, with Betts averaging almost 6 ypc. The reports from the team are that the offense started clicking last week. It took longer than I thought it would, but they've turned a corner IMHO. I would therefore not be shocked to see Portis end up with over 1500 rushing yards and double digit TD's when it's all said and done.

 

[montanagold]

Portis is still learning Gibb's offense...and Gibbs is still learning how to best utilize Portis.

What is there to learn? This guy is a highly touted vet. Rookies come into the NFL from the draft at RB and can make an immediate impact. Its one of the few positions where that can happen. I've got to give Portis credit and say that he probably understands this offense. I think its more of a broken scheme / Gibbs issue. Or injuries..

 

[NYG Endzone]

Anyone starting Clinton vs Philly?

 

[jurb26]

Anyone starting Clinton vs Philly?

Yup, I am.

 

[thecardiackid]

Anyone starting Clinton vs Philly?

Me 2, but I'm scared. At least CP is @ home and the O seems to be finding itself.Too many bad game memories. Lucky to be in the playoffs with him in the middle of round 1.If I didn't have to pick Sunday am, I'd probably throw C Brown in...

 

[jurb26]

Anyone starting Clinton vs Philly?

Me 2, but I'm scared. At least CP is @ home and the O seems to be finding itself.Too many bad game memories. Lucky to be in the playoffs with him in the middle of round 1.If I didn't have to pick Sunday am, I'd probably throw C Brown in...

lookin like a nice decision so far