SpringStein
01-05-2008, 10:52 AM
Fumbles more than both combined. ;)
Broncoman13
01-05-2008, 10:55 AM
Actually, I think Chris Johnson is closer to Portis than Jamaal Charles.
Charles is faster than Tatum Bell and runs with much better power. I'd say he's a lot better RB than Tatum Bell. Better than Portis, no, but has some of the same attributes. Portis' vision was better IMO. Jamaal Charles doesn't seem to get tripped up by the turf monsters as much as CP though.
Actually, I think Chris Johnson is closer to Portis than Jamaal Charles.
Charles is faster than Tatum Bell and runs with much better power. I'd say he's a lot better RB than Tatum Bell. Better than Portis, no, but has some of the same attributes. Portis' vision was better IMO. Jamaal Charles doesn't seem to get tripped up by the turf monsters as much as CP though.
Ok, but will he be durable. Tatum didnt exactly play through injuries very well. He wasnt a back that proved he could carry the loard. He was most effective as a specialist. Though Portis had injuries, while he was on the field, he was able to fight through it and produce.
If we get Charles, I love his explosiveness but I worry about his toughness running up the middle (like Portis could) and his durability.