To those who want Portis...

[PeterNorth09]

I've always liked Portis as a running back but between him and Michael Turner I would take Turner. Portis has way more mileage on him than Turner. Barring a freak injury or circumstance, Turner could give us 6-8 good years at the RB position while Portis at most probably has just 3-5 good years left in him.

The argument about Turner being an unproven back is ridiculous. If that's the case, Kevan Barlow is better than Adrian Peterson because Barlow has had a 1,000 yard season in the NFL while Peterson has yet to do so.

[mangenious420]

Turner >> Portis

[serphnx]

I've always liked Portis as a running back but between him and Michael Turner I would take Turner. Portis has way more mileage on him than Turner. Barring a freak injury or circumstance, Turner could give us 6-8 good years at the RB position while Portis at most probably has just 3-5 good years left in him.

The argument about Turner being an unproven back is ridiculous. If that's the case, Kevan Barlow is better than Adrian Peterson because Barlow has had a 1,000 yard season in the NFL while Peterson has yet to do so.

So the Chargers third string RB is better than LT, because he didn't get a chance to play? That is equally if not more so ridiculous.

[ECURB]

So the Chargers third string RB is better than LT, because he didn't get a chance to play? That is equally if not more so ridiculous.

:confused:

He was comparing a college player in the draft to Barlow and you compare the Chargers 3rd stringer to LT???

:confused:

The chargers 3rd string RB has had his chance to make a splash in the NFL... Peterson has not... his logic made perfect sense...

[ECURB]

The conclusion we can draw from this thread.

Ecurb has no idea what the hell he's talking about..on anything....ever.

Right.....

SO portis doesnt fall asleep in meetings and dress up like a clown during practice...

I thought he was going to come out in costume like he did last year on Cold Pizza, I was wrong and I clearly stated that...

I knew exactly what I was talking about, you dont.

[serphnx]

:confused:

He was comparing a college player in the draft to Barlow and you compare the Chargers 3rd stringer to LT???

:confused:

The chargers 3rd string RB has had his chance to make a splash in the NFL... Peterson has not... his logic made perfect sense...

Oh man, tell me this is a joke post? I took his post to the logical conclusion, but even ignoring that, you are trying to tell me it is logical to say that Turner might be better than Portis, but the third stringer can't be better than LT? Why not? What has Turner done to prove he is better than Portis? You can only claim he hasn't gotten the chance, but how exactly has Sproles (I think that is the third stringer, great KR actually as well) gotten a chance? The answer is you can not logically say that, and he isn't even arguing that actually, he knows that I can make that claim and under his assertion it would be equally as valid as his. But then you come in, and decide to show your complete inability to ever understand anything, as if we really needed you to prove it to us again.

You are awesome ecurb, shining your dim light onto us during the normally slow offseason. Yeah there's one more game left, but even the pats fans are acting like it's the offseason now for some reason.

[JetCane]

The conclusion we can draw from this thread.

Ecurb has no idea what the hell he's talking about..on anything....ever.

How can you say that? He has 1700 posts in the last 28 days!

[PeterNorth09]

Oh man, tell me this is a joke post? I took his post to the logical conclusion, but even ignoring that, you are trying to tell me it is logical to say that Turner might be better than Portis, but the third stringer can't be better than LT? Why not? What has Turner done to prove he is better than Portis? You can only claim he hasn't gotten the chance, but how exactly has Sproles (I think that is the third stringer, great KR actually as well) gotten a chance? The answer is you can not logically say that, and he isn't even arguing that actually, he knows that I can make that claim and under his assertion it would be equally as valid as his. But then you come in, and decide to show your complete inability to ever understand anything, as if we really needed you to prove it to us again.

You are awesome ecurb, shining your dim light onto us during the normally slow offseason. Yeah there's one more game left, but even the pats fans are acting like it's the offseason now for some reason.

When did I say the Turner was better than LT? Thanks for putting words in my mouth.

Running Back is a position where players have such a limited life span that once a player proves himself to be good his career is almost over. Portis has 3-4 good years left in the league TOPS. He is an injury prone player who has had a lot of mileage on him.

If the Jets traded a 1st or 2nd round pick for Portis, which is what it would take, they would be a getting a good RB for only 3-4 years and that's it. Maybe less considering Portis's injury history. Compare that to having 6-8 good years out of Michael Turner. The better value is almost always with the RB who has had less wear and tear.

As for Turner not proving himself you can argue the same thing about any RB who hasn't yet had a 1,000 yard season. Hence the comment about being able to use that logic to argue Kevan Barlow is better than Adrian Peterson.

You just don't get it.

[gang_green03]

When did I say the Turner was better than LT? Thanks for putting words in my mouth.

Running Back is a position where players have such a limited life span that once a player proves himself to be good his career is almost over. Portis has 3-4 good years left in the league TOPS. He is an injury prone player who has had a lot of mileage on him.

If the Jets traded a 1st or 2nd round pick for Portis, which is what it would take, they would be a getting a good RB for only 3-4 years and that's it. Maybe less considering Portis's injury history. Compare that to having 6-8 good years out of Michael Turner. The better value is almost always with the RB who has had less wear and tear.

As for Turner not proving himself you can argue the same thing about any RB who hasn't yet had a 1,000 yard season. Hence the comment about being able to use that logic to argue Kevan Barlow is better than Adrian Peterson.

You just don't get it.

Why is everybody calling Portis injury prone when this past season is the only one where he missed significant time?

I agree with your arguement to an extent, however Portis is a legitamate top 5 back. That's better than just good. He's still only 25 years old (only 1 year older than Turner) and isn't the RB cut off around 30? So the arguement should be more like getting a great RB for 4-5 years vs. getting a potential great RB for 6-7 years (would put him past 30 but he doesn't have as much mileage as the normal back).

I'd give up a 1st rounder for Portis because he's a proven elite back that's still fairly young. He'd be a better investment than Turner IMO. The chances that Turner becomes as good as Portis aren't good.

Is it worth the risk to maybe get a couple more years out of Turner that, more than likely, will not be as good as the 5 elite years you know you're getting from Portis?

[Gainzo]

When did I say the Turner was better than LT? Thanks for putting words in my mouth.

Running Back is a position where players have such a limited life span that once a player proves himself to be good his career is almost over. Portis has 3-4 good years left in the league TOPS. He is an injury prone player who has had a lot of mileage on him.

If the Jets traded a 1st or 2nd round pick for Portis, which is what it would take, they would be a getting a good RB for only 3-4 years and that's it. Maybe less considering Portis's injury history. Compare that to having 6-8 good years out of Michael Turner. The better value is almost always with the RB who has had less wear and tear.

As for Turner not proving himself you can argue the same thing about any RB who hasn't yet had a 1,000 yard season. Hence the comment about being able to use that logic to argue Kevan Barlow is better than Adrian Peterson.

You just don't get it.

You just don't get it. Portis is a proven back, Turner isn't.

If you want to put your hopes on Turner that's your thing.

The most carries Turner has had in a season is 80. He has racked up 157 carries in 3 seasons.

Most feature backs average around 350 carries a season.

[PeterNorth09]

Why is everybody calling Portis injury prone when this past season is the only one where he missed significant time?

I agree with your arguement to an extent, however Portis is a legitamate top 5 back. That's better than just good. He's still only 25 years old (only 1 year older than Turner) and isn't the RB cut off around 30? So the arguement should be more like getting a great RB for 4-5 years vs. getting a potential great RB for 6-7 years (would put him past 30 but he doesn't have as much mileage as the normal back).

I'd give up a 1st rounder for Portis because he's a proven elite back that's still fairly young. He'd be a better investment than Turner IMO. The chances that Turner becomes as good as Portis aren't good.

The only reason Portis did not miss serious time like 8 games a year until this year is because he has managed to play through a lot of injuries. His shoulder injury last year expecially bothers me. I like the guy and followed him from U Miami to Denver to Washington. He's won me a couple fantasy leagues. He's a nice player but has taken a lot of abuse over the years and probably has only 3-4 good years left in him maybe less.

Top 5 back? I can name you 5 better than Portis:

1. Tomlinson

2. Larry Johnson

3. Shaun Alexander

4. Edgerrin James

5. Rudi Johnson

I'd rather have Frank Gore than Clinton Portis right now. Same goes for Willie Parker and Steven Jackson. All are guys who have outperformed Portis this year and taken far less abuse.

Turner is one year younger than Portis but he has a lot less wear and tear. He's looked terrific filling in for LT in San Diego and Marty Schottenheimer considers Turner to even be a better inside runner than LT.

[gang_green03]

The only reason Portis did not miss serious time like 8 games a year until this year is because he has managed to play through a lot of injuries. His shoulder injury last year expecially bothers me. I like the guy and followed him from U Miami to Denver to Washington. He's won me a couple fantasy leagues. He's a nice player but has taken a lot of abuse over the years and probably has only 3-4 good years left in him maybe less.

Top 5 back? I can name you 5 better than Portis:

1. Tomlinson

2. Larry Johnson

3. Shaun Alexander

4. Edgerrin James

5. Rudi Johnson

I'd rather have Frank Gore than Clinton Portis right now. Same goes for Willie Parker and Steven Jackson. All are guys who have outperformed Portis this year and taken far less abuse.

Turner is one year younger than Portis but he has a lot less wear and tear. He's looked terrific filling in for LT in San Diego and Marty Schottenheimer considers Turner to even be a better inside runner than LT.

I really like Frank Gore but he's A LOT more of an injury risk than Portis. He's almost like a 20 year old in a 30 year old body. Isn't Alexander 29 or 30? He also struggled this year, partially cause he was banged up and partially because no Hutch blocking for him anymore. Edgerrin James is good but a lot of his success came from the Colts offense he was in. I don't think he was the same after that injury. No way I take Parker over Portis. I'll give you LT, LJ, Jackson, maybe Rudi but I think Portis is top 5 or at least argueably. At the absolute worst he's top 10.

Turner has looked good behind LT but that worries me some. He won't be running behind a HOF RB on the Jets. He also won't have a great offensive line blocking for him. Like I said it would take a lot for Turner to be as good as Portis. He can be but if I had the choice I'd take the sure thing.

Also, I think Washington has used Portis somewhat poorly. They act like he's John Riggins or something. I don't think we'd run him into the ground like Washington does.