Big Ernie McCracken Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 http://www.washingtontimes.com/weblogs/red...rtis-ruled-out/ this will probably cut into his carries the accumulation of hits continues to take a toll. I'm sure some huddle Vets will continue to deny that feature backs in the NFL have a finite shelf life. So far Portis, L.T., Larry Johnson, Jamal Lewis, Brian Westbrook have fallen off the map I'll never draft a RB early with over 2,000 carries again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hooknladder Posted November 12, 2009 Share Posted November 12, 2009 the fact is Portis got old. some of us saw it coming....others did not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbimm Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 the fact is Portis got old. some of us saw it coming....others did not. The fact is that it was argued that Portis was going to lose carries to a game plan that would phase him out. That did not happen. He just got hurt. Well that and his team really, really sucked! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BeeR Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 I don't understand why you pimped him so hard in the pre-season? wurd bro. troof. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 The fact is that it was argued that Portis was going to lose carries to a game plan that would phase him out. That did not happen. He just got hurt. Well that and his team really, really sucked! +1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackass Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 http://www.washingtontimes.com/weblogs/red...rtis-ruled-out/ this will probably cut into his carries the accumulation of hits continues to take a toll. I'm sure some huddle Vets will continue to deny that feature backs in the NFL have a finite shelf life. So far Portis, L.T., Larry Johnson, Jamal Lewis, Brian Westbrook have fallen off the map I'll never draft a RB early with over 2,000 carries again. Just took a quick look at the top 24 running backs in the rest of the season rankings (westbrook is 25). It's possible i'm off on someone's age but i believe there are only 2 players in that list over the age of 27. Trivia, who can guess them without looking? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kcmast Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 Just took a quick look at the top 24 running backs in the rest of the season rankings (westbrook is 25). It's possible i'm off on someone's age but i believe there are only 2 players in that list over the age of 27. Trivia, who can guess them without looking? Thomas Jones Can't think of the second. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kpholmes Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 (edited) Thomas JonesCan't think of the second. Gotta be Ricky Edited November 13, 2009 by kpholmes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jackass Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 Gotta be Ricky That's it. Who would have ever thought Ricky would've outlasted all those guys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kpholmes Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 That's it. Who would have ever thought Ricky would've outlasted all those guys. Still have this poster up in my closet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kcmast Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 Gotta be Ricky I started to type Ricky, but didn't think he would be top 25. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hooknladder Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 The fact is that it was argued that Portis was going to lose carries to a game plan that would phase him out. That did not happen. He just got hurt. Well that and his team really, really sucked! wrong. that was an article that was quoted in APRIL. the argument was whether or not Portis would be productive and was worth an early pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tbimm Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 wrong. that was an article that was quoted in APRIL. the argument was whether or not Portis would be productive and was worth an early pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kingfish247 Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 (edited) The fact is that it was argued that Portis was going to lose carries to a game plan that would phase him out. That did not happen. He just got hurt. Well that and his team really, really sucked! +1 The argument has always been that he'll be in some kind of 50/50 share with Betts. It has been the argument every offseason since 2006. It's still wrong. Portis had a concussion, an injury hardly based on his age. Throw in the injuries and age on the OL, Campbell regressing, Cooley's injury, Zorn stinking it up, an egomaniac owner, and it's been a recipe for disaster for the entire Skins offense. Chalking all of this up to Portis turning 28 is just lazy analysis. This isn't like LT in an offense that's stacked with skill position guys, a good QB, and a competent OL. It's a dynamic offense making it obvious LT is just an anchor. On the other hand... the Skins, especially the offense, are just bad. Edited November 13, 2009 by kingfish247 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hooknladder Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 +1 The argument has always been that he'll be in some kind of 50/50 share with Betts. It has been the argument every offseason since 2006. It's still wrong. Portis had a concussion, an injury hardly based on his age. Throw in the injuries and age on the OL, Campbell regressing, Cooley's injury, Zorn stinking it up, an egomaniac owner, and it's been a recipe for disaster for the entire Skins offense. Chalking all of this up to Portis turning 28 is just lazy analysis. This isn't like LT in an offense that's stacked with skill position guys, a good QB, and a competent OL. It's a dynamic offense making it obvious LT is just an anchor. On the other hand... the Skins, especially the offense, are just bad. wrong. the debate was is Portis a worthy RB1 or RB2. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hooknladder Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 looks like it might be awhile................. Clinton Portis could be out a while Posted by Gregg Rosenthal on November 13, 2009 4:20 PM ET With "ongoing ringing" in Clinton Portis' head, questions are starting to surface in Washington about when the running back will be able to return to the lineup. Like, whether he'll be able to return at all. Jason Reid of the Washington Post writes that "at the very least" Portis may need need to sit out a few more games. Zorn said the team will exercise caution and having Portis return this year may not be in the player's best interest. Zorn didn't want to speculate what the ringing in Portis' head meant. "I just know that we just have to be really careful with trying to get a guy back," Zorn said. "These are pretty difficult things to deal with. We're going to try to do the right thing." His backup Ladell Betts is also hurt and was limited in practice Friday because of a foot injury. Betts is expected to play, but may split up the workload with Rock Cartwright and Quinton Ganther. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 wrong. the debate was is Portis a worthy RB1 or RB2. Actually that is pretty false. I even think the title of the thread was "Portis to lose touches" . . . . . but nice try . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hooknladder Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 Actually that is pretty false. I even think the title of the thread was "Portis to lose touches" . . . . . but nice try . . again, that was the title of an article written in APRIL. what ensued was an passionate and informative debate about Portis's viability as a RB1 or RB2 and was he worth a high pick. nice try yourself. you really should know what your talking about before you post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 again, that was the title of an article written in APRIL. what ensued was an passionate and informative debate about Portis's viability as a RB1 or RB2 and was he worth a high pick. nice try yourself. you really should know what your talking about before you post. Weird . . . cause I remember reading an article CLEARLY labeled "Portis to lose touches" and then a discussion afterward that argued over why he would lose touches . . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keggerz Posted November 13, 2009 Share Posted November 13, 2009 Weird . . . cause I remember reading an article CLEARLY labeled "Portis to lose touches" and then a discussion afterward that argued over why he would lose touches . . . . best to let it go...we all know what it said and the direction a few tried to take because their original arguments about RBBC etc wasnt holding water Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
i_am_the_swammi Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 again, that was the title of an article written in APRIL. what ensued was an passionate and informative debate about Portis's viability as a RB1 or RB2 and was he worth a high pick. nice try yourself. you really should know what your talking about before you post. kind of correct, kind of false. The article WAS written in April, but it was posted here in lAugust by Big Ernie, and a discussion ensued regarding its valiidity. During that discussion, which was proven incorrect, those that were incorrect in their stance that Portis would lose touches to Betts, tried to change their point that Portis would be an RB3 not because he was losing touches, but because he was old and worn down. The crux of the original debate was indeed whether he would loses touches to Betts. Even BEM admitted this. it wasn't until much later in the thread, and an ensuing thread, that those that were incorrect tried to backpeddle and make the argument about his age/wear-and-tear. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dowzer Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 LJ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpwallace49 Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 best to let it go...we all know what it said and the direction a few tried to take because their original arguments about RBBC etc wasnt holding water Wise words . . . . . it is best to let those two go back to playing World of warcraft anyways . . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
piratesownninjas Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 BEM doesn't like Clinton Portis. /end BEM's posts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hooknladder Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 kind of correct, kind of false. The article WAS written in April, but it was posted here in lAugust by Big Ernie, and a discussion ensued regarding its valiidity. During that discussion, which was proven incorrect, those that were incorrect in their stance that Portis would lose touches to Betts, tried to change their point that Portis would be an RB3 not because he was losing touches, but because he was old and worn down. The crux of the original debate was indeed whether he would loses touches to Betts. Even BEM admitted this. it wasn't until much later in the thread, and an ensuing thread, that those that were incorrect tried to backpeddle and make the argument about his age/wear-and-tear. yes and no. i commend you Swammi for at least some clarification, but you and Keg know the debate became "is Portis worth a high draft pick". no one "changed" their point. in fact Keg went on to post statistics on high milage backs to defend the position YOU guys took that Portis could still be productive. when that was proven untrue you and Keg began to "backpeddle" and desperatly quoted the title of the APRIL article over and over again.(particularly you). you and Kegs original stance, in the original DELETED thread, was that Portis was a serviceable 1st round draft pick.(which he clearly is'nt). why don't you just admit you were wrong.(you'd get alot more respect that way.) the bottom line is this:- Portis got old. some of us saw it coming...YOU and Keg did not. there's no shame in it Swam....i've been wrong in fantasy football many times and i'm not afraid to admit it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts