PDA

View Full Version : Jamaal Charles



honda522
09-14-2010, 09:09 PM
Why is Haley benching the best player again? I just don't get it. I understand rotation, but to not give him carries or get him out on the field is insanity. If he is on the field, he makes plays, even if he doesn't get the ball, he still makes the defense's stomach churn.

whatwasthat?
09-14-2010, 09:11 PM
i wouldnt worry about it...i expect to see an increase in charles activity in cleveland...with that said, we will see more jones too....we will just pound the rock and set up the PA pass

Chiefster
09-14-2010, 09:12 PM
I had not heard that he had been benched. Do you have a link?

honda522
09-14-2010, 09:16 PM
I had not heard that he had been benched. Do you have a link?
No not benched, but he was on the bench for like 3 drives...I rarely saw him out there.

Chiefster
09-14-2010, 09:18 PM
No not benched, but he was on the bench for like 3 drives...I rarely saw him out there.

Oh, gatcha. I wouldn't get too concerned; it's the first game of the season - he'll get his touches.

josh1971
09-14-2010, 09:53 PM
Like a lot of folks, though, I was thinking that 11 carries was way too few. When he did get in there, he averaged the kind of runs that would have prevented a bunch of those 3 and outs.

OTR Chiefs fan
09-14-2010, 10:06 PM
Oh, gatcha. I wouldn't get too concerned; it's the first game of the season - he'll get his touches.

I agree. That's the least of my worries.
:chiefs:

matthewschiefs
09-14-2010, 10:38 PM
He only got 11 carries but thats the same amount that Jones got. What made it such a small number is the amount of 3 and outs we had. If we had gotten more 1st downs he would have had more carries. It's that simple.

Pro_Angler
09-14-2010, 10:50 PM
i wouldnt take too much into it. It was a tough game on a dangerous field. Im sure that they didnt want to risk injury especially with 2 TD lead.

rodu
09-15-2010, 12:00 AM
we're platooning the running game this year

SIC J
09-15-2010, 12:37 AM
Jones and Charles had 11 carries each. Not understanding what you're trying to say???

Hayvern
09-15-2010, 01:20 AM
Guys, we only had 49 plays, of those 26 were rushes and 22 were passes. I just don't see what you guys are complaining about. Do you think we should not play Jones at all? Why are we paying him to be on the team then?

Charles and Jones are two different kinds of runners, it keeps the offense on their toes. I would like to personally see more plays where we have both Charles and Jones in the backfield, but that is going to be very hard to do when the offensive line is still not gelling.

Sn@keIze
09-15-2010, 01:55 AM
Jones and Charles had 11 carries each. Not understanding what you're trying to say???The guy with better yds per carry should get the majority.

I dunno what Charles was but im sure it was way better than Jones.

But Haley is an idiot.

I wanna say Charles average last year was 5.9. Or 5.9 after Johnson left.

Alls i know is the only guy better than Jamall Charles last year after he got the starting job was Chris Johnson. Thats a Fact!

The load needs to be more like 70% Charles 30% Jones.

Hayvern
09-15-2010, 02:07 AM
The guy with better yds per carry should get the majority.

I dunno what Charles was but im sure it was way better than Jones.

But Haley is an idiot.

I wanna say Charles average last year was 5.9. Or 5.9 after Johnson left.

Alls i know is the only guy better than Jamall Charles last year after he got the starting job was Chris Johnson. Thats a Fact!

The load needs to be more like 70% Charles 30% Jones.

Aside from the one long run, they both ran about the same. The one long run was really cool though!!!

Seriously though, both players had some decent carries last night. I like what Haley is doing with the running game right now.

Sn@keIze
09-15-2010, 02:13 AM
Aside from the one long run, they both ran about the same. The one long run was really cool though!!!

Seriously though, both players had some decent carries last night. I like what Haley is doing with the running game right now.
Do you think that Jones wouldve been able to outrun the DBs like that? No.

We may have missed some more long runs that Charles may have gotten.

Fastphilly
09-15-2010, 02:18 AM
You won't see him get as many carries as other premier backs in the league mainly due to the possibility of his lightness of pounding the ball for short yardage situations against run defence formations.We have no answers for the passing game yet so I'm sure BOTH will get fed the ball quite a bit.

Hayvern
09-15-2010, 02:24 AM
Do you think that Jones wouldve been able to outrun the DBs like that? No.

We may have missed some more long runs that Charles may have gotten.

No, but I also don't believe that Charles wears down defenses like Jones does either, especially those on the defensive line.

My opinion of course, I just want to keep the defenses guessing, and this team is going to be a running team. We are going to give defenses a lot of different things to look at. It is ALWAYS going to be bigger than just one player.

I told all of my fantasy buddies to avoid picking Jones or Charles, simply because they are going to be sharing the carries this season.

And I am OK with that.

yashi
09-15-2010, 09:58 AM
He only got 11 carries but thats the same amount that Jones got. What made it such a small number is the amount of 3 and outs we had. If we had gotten more 1st downs he would have had more carries. It's that simple.

If he had more carries, we would have had more 1st downs.

yashi
09-15-2010, 09:59 AM
You won't see him get as many carries as other premier backs in the league mainly due to the possibility of his lightness of pounding the ball for short yardage situations against run defence formations.We have no answers for the passing game yet so I'm sure BOTH will get fed the ball quite a bit.

Ugh. He is exactly the same size as Chris Johnson, and Charles had over 20 carries a game in basically every game he started last season and showed no signs of slowing down at any point. I hate the durability argument. There's no reason not to get him the ball 15-20 times at a minimum, even if it means less carries for Jones.

KCINNYC
09-15-2010, 10:31 AM
He only got 11 carries but thats the same amount that Jones got. What made it such a small number is the amount of 3 and outs we had. If we had gotten more 1st downs he would have had more carries. It's that simple.

EXACTLY.

Jammal Charles is not starting because he is not the leader of men that Thomas Jones is.

Thomas Jones is one of those very very rare players in the NFL that is a GIFTED leader. Sure there is always a leader on a team, but this is a talent Jones has. He gets his teammates to change their behavior, bad work ethic or habits and never has to say a word. Teammates naturally just want to be like him. He is special.

He was also the THIRD best running back in the league last year. Jammal Charles is talented yes, but he is not the leader of that Locker Room. You can not have Thomas Jones on your roster looking up to Jammal Charles. It doesn't compute.

It makes perfect sense to start Jones, be the mentor to Jammal Charles that makes Charles great, let Jammal continue to prove himself and make dramatic runs for TD's, and the system works beautifully.

By the way, we doubted the logic with Derrick Johnson and look how that played out.

kcvet
09-15-2010, 11:36 AM
this gonna be another RB by committee ??

yashi
09-15-2010, 12:03 PM
EXACTLY.

Jammal Charles is not starting because he is not the leader of men that Thomas Jones is.

Thomas Jones is one of those very very rare players in the NFL that is a GIFTED leader. Sure there is always a leader on a team, but this is a talent Jones has. He gets his teammates to change their behavior, bad work ethic or habits and never has to say a word. Teammates naturally just want to be like him. He is special.

He was also the THIRD best running back in the league last year. Jammal Charles is talented yes, but he is not the leader of that Locker Room. You can not have Thomas Jones on your roster looking up to Jammal Charles. It doesn't compute.

It makes perfect sense to start Jones, be the mentor to Jammal Charles that makes Charles great, let Jammal continue to prove himself and make dramatic runs for TD's, and the system works beautifully.

By the way, we doubted the logic with Derrick Johnson and look how that played out.

Oh, god...

Look, I get it. Thomas Jones is a great leader. He's a great person. His father was a coal miner. He's the greatest locker room presence of all-time. He had 1400 yards last year. He's getting better with age. He walks on water, etc. etc. etc.

BUT JAMAAL CHARLES IS ONE OF THE MOST TALENTED BACKS IN THE LEAGUE! If we had Nelson Mandela, do we start him just because he's a great person/leader? Hell no! We start the player who gives us the best chance to win. That's Jamaal Charles! He had the most yards per carry last year, out of anybody in the league!

As they say on ESPN, C'mon Man!!!

I'm getting all worked up here, but seriously. Give Charles 20 carries a game, a mediocre passing game, and the defense/special teams we saw on Monday, and we are in the playoffs this year.

Seek
09-15-2010, 01:36 PM
I do think Haley has a concern with Charles fumbline. Not like the two fumbles from Jones in the pre-season wasn't a concern, but Haley went into protetion mode and wanted to just pound the ball up the middle.

The couple late Carries Charles got, San Diego keyed in on him and bent him in some painful looking tackles.

I can't defend this very much, specially when the team is putning the ball with 12 seconds left on the play clock and the clock was running... But I am not trying to get on this negative thrashing that people feel like they need to do after a win.

RedSea_Rouch
09-15-2010, 02:10 PM
One game into the season and this is already popping up?

Not many teams have the luxury of having 2 very good HB on the team, some don't even have the luxury of one. If you are going to be a running team, which we will be, you NEED to have 2 guys who can get the job done.

I think both Jones and Charles would have had more carries on Monday night if our Offense could get a 1st down to save their life. In a game where we were trying to hold on to the lead in the 2nd half, I have no problem with giving the ball to Jones. He is known for his ability to hold on the the ball and wear a Defense down.

I honestly believe that, for now, Charles will have more success if we use him to spell Jones. Jones can come in and get the dirty work done and Charles can come in with fresh legs and run the ball against a tired Defense.

Charles IS a great player and will continue growing as a player. With that being said, we are NOT a great team. I know we all want to believe we will be a serious contender just like every fan of every team wants to believe, but we need Charles for the long run. Why waste his legs on a season that will probably be average at best when we need him for the future?

SIC J
09-15-2010, 02:38 PM
Well lets break it down.....

Beginning of the game it was Jones, Jones, Jones...... in the 3rd series, they put in Charles, it catches the Chargers off guard and he breaks a run for 56 yards.

Looks like the game plan worked for me. Anyone else?

Hayvern
09-15-2010, 02:41 PM
Well lets break it down.....

Beginning of the game it was Jones, Jones, Jones...... in the 3rd series, they put in Charles, it catches the Chargers off guard and he breaks a run for 56 yards.

Looks like the game plan worked for me. Anyone else?

Agreed and rep added, that is exactly what I think they are going for with this trio.

buffman316
09-15-2010, 02:55 PM
The plan does need some revision. Charles simply needs moe carries than Jones. TJ can get short yardage carries and some second down carries, but JC is simply electric and can turn nothing into a huge game.

honda522
09-15-2010, 05:58 PM
Ok, I can see some points that are pretty valid. But what I am getting is this the way its going to be all year round? Haley has a track record for doing crap like this...like with DJ for instance. I just don't want to see JC on the sideline when he could be lining up in the slot or far wide or in the back field being a distraction of some sort.

matthewschiefs
09-15-2010, 07:15 PM
This is only an issue because really the whole offense didn't get the job done. If we don't have so many 3 and out Charles would have had more carries as would jones. They ended up with the same amount of carries. That's just playing the two stud rbs we have not anyone being benched.

SIC J
09-15-2010, 08:22 PM
Oh and just in case you didn't know the numbers.....

Jones 11 carries for 39 yards
Charles 11 carries for 92 yards. You take away the big run for 56 yards and he was only 10 for 36 yards. Just about the same as Jones.

Jones is a solid back and Charles is so quick out the box. As long as they're putting up good numbers together, I don't really think it matters who gets the ball. And if the Chiefs offensive starts getting first downs and more plays, we'll see more carries from both of them.

I prefer to see Charles though.

chiefnut
09-16-2010, 02:13 PM
we only had 3 play drives, no one is gonna get many touches that way

aaronchieffan
09-16-2010, 02:32 PM
Charles did real good for the amount of carries that he got. I look for him to do even bigger and better things this season. Starting next week at the Browns.

Hayvern
09-16-2010, 03:51 PM
One thing that I think really applies here to the number of plays that the Chiefs had overall was the strategy that Haley used when the team was ahead.

Haley admitted that he went very conservative with the lead. He stated that he told the guys they all needed to protect the football above all else. He did not want one overstretched play to turn into 6 because someone lost control of a wet football in the rain. He also made a statement that he would have rather punted 17 times than turn the ball over once.

I believe that played a huge part in how Cassel was throwing the ball and how the runningbacks were running.

It is not about individual player statistics, it is about winning games. In that, I am with Haley all the way.

tg1979
09-16-2010, 04:26 PM
I actually don't mind it. It will keep him healthy and his legs young for years to come. If Chris Johnson keeps getting used the way he is, I don't see how he'll have anything left in 3 years.

matthewschiefs
09-16-2010, 05:05 PM
One thing that I think really applies here to the number of plays that the Chiefs had overall was the strategy that Haley used when the team was ahead.

Haley admitted that he went very conservative with the lead. He stated that he told the guys they all needed to protect the football above all else. He did not want one overstretched play to turn into 6 because someone lost control of a wet football in the rain. He also made a statement that he would have rather punted 17 times than turn the ball over once.

I believe that played a huge part in how Cassel was throwing the ball and how the runningbacks were running.

It is not about individual player statistics, it is about winning games. In that, I am with Haley all the way.

In that weather I think playing like we did was the best. One Turnover from us gets them back in the game sooner and then we might not have been able to hold on. I don't want to see that every time we get a lead but in that spot I think that it was the right move to play the way we did.

slc chief
09-17-2010, 02:32 AM
yups

chief31
09-17-2010, 09:19 PM
I told all of my fantasy buddies to avoid picking Jones or Charles, simply because they are going to be sharing the carries this season.

And I am OK with that.

I did that too. But I also took Charles every chance I got.

:D


Well lets break it down.....

Beginning of the game it was Jones, Jones, Jones...... in the 3rd series, they put in Charles, it catches the Chargers off guard and he breaks a run for 56 yards.

Looks like the game plan worked for me. Anyone else?

Well, to be fair, he was "taking defenses by surprise" without that element of surprise last season.

It worked. So I have no complaints. But I can't agree that the "surprise" was a major factor.


Oh and just in case you didn't know the numbers.....

Jones 11 carries for 39 yards
Charles 11 carries for 92 yards. You take away the big run for 56 yards and he was only 10 for 36 yards. Just about the same as Jones.

Jones is a solid back and Charles is so quick out the box. As long as they're putting up good numbers together, I don't really think it matters who gets the ball. And if the Chiefs offensive starts getting first downs and more plays, we'll see more carries from both of them.

I prefer to see Charles though.

Taking away Charles' most successful play, the two look pretty even.

Are we just taking away that one play for the purposes of making them appear even?

Charles is definitely the weapon on this offense. The threat of breaking a long TD is exactly what makes Charles the more valuable player.

Having said that, I am still fine with how they managed the carries in A WIN OVER THE CHARGERS!!!!!


I may have some concerns from this game. But no complaints, as many of my concerns prior to this game were significantly eased.