I think Betts is a more pure runner and is built for the NFC.. Clinton, althought a Pro Bowl RB is too small and has never been this injury prone. He never missed as many games in Denver as he did last year. I think Skins trade Portis in a package deal for either a 1st and a 3rd round pick or make a move for a vetern QB to back up Jason.. Collins and Brunell arent going to cut it...
2007-02-26 17:26:39 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Sports ➔ Football (American)
No I don't think they should trade Portis. In the NFL today its becoming more and more apparent that it takes a running back tandem to win. Just look at the two teams that made the Super Bowl this year: Indy had Addai and Rhodes, Chicago had Jones and Benson. If the Redskins would split the carries between Portis and Betts I think they'd be more effective and put Portis at a lower risk for injury. The only reason I could see them trading either is if they would be willing to resign and utilize T.J. Duckett who was wasted on their bench last year.
2007-02-26 17:59:04 · answer #1 · answered by jordanmclonghorn 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Betts came on near the end of the season (somewhat lj-esque) so it's still up in the air whether or not he'd be able to play at the same level over the course of an entire season, especially when you consider the relatively porous run defenses he faced.
Portis is still only 25 (26 at the start of the 07-08 season), and if paired with Betts will not reach the dreaded 2000 carry milestone at least for another 2 or 3 years. I don't anticipate them trading Portis away unless an extremely lucrative deal is presented, especially considering the relatively weak class of available runningbacks:
1) Marshawn Lynch (solid all around back but will cost a 1st rounder)
2) Michael Bush (1st day pick)
3) Ahman Green (30 and injury//fumble prone)
4) Michael Turner (RFA: not sure about compensation)
5) Dominic Rhodes (career backup and likely product of a system)
2007-02-27 17:59:32 · answer #2 · answered by Hinagiku 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
After the trade, it looks like Denver came out smelling like roses while Washington's odor was entirely different and more rank!
Clinton Portis has not been as effective as the Redskins' front office would like him to have been. However, I would hold on to this guy for one more season. Use Betts and Portis in a tandem rushing scheme. Also, Washington has the #6 pick in the first round ... and something tells me that powerhouse RBs will definitely be available after the first five selections have gone down. If they trade Portis, Washington grabs a RB in the first round. If they keep Portis, then Clinton will need to have a breakout year or he is done in D.C.
2007-02-27 08:35:48 · answer #3 · answered by icehoundxx 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No way. Do you recall that the Redskins had to get TJ Duckett (he stinks) because of lack of good RBs. Skins need Portis and Betts. However, what they need to do is play them both. See Colts with Addai and Rhodes this past year.
2007-02-27 10:09:12 · answer #4 · answered by hardcoco 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
NOOOOOOOOOO. I would give Portis one more year to prove himself not of being a great running back, but from injuries. If he stays injury free, he can be one of the NFL's best rushers.
I say one more year and then hand the torch to Betts.
It would probably be a good idea to keep both backs anyway, being that the NFL will now all adopt the two-man back system.
2007-02-27 08:03:39 · answer #5 · answered by nileshpatel 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I definently think that Betts is better and should start.......he led me to my fantasy championship last year........ the Skins should bring in a good #2 punch though to follow Betts.
2007-02-27 08:54:03 · answer #6 · answered by Dennis H 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no way. portis is one of the best backs in the league. betts is just a backup.
2007-02-27 02:09:44 · answer #7 · answered by what? 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋