PDA

View Full Version : Thoughts on LJ?



jap1
11-16-2008, 09:11 PM
I am wondering how everyone think LJ did in his return. I thought he was decent. He broke some tackles and fought for yardage (unfortunately he was breaking tackles before he got to the line of scrimmage). I think Gailey is once again being brilliant in utilizing LJ with the spread. LJ is good when he runs north-south, so he put him in a shotgun I formation, brilliant.

LJ had 3.5 ypc with inconsistent blocking on the line.

Im curious to hear your opinions ...

jmlamerson
11-16-2008, 09:14 PM
I am wondering how everyone think LJ did in his return. I thought he was decent. He broke some tackles and fought for yardage (unfortunately he was breaking tackles before he got to the line of scrimmage). I think Gailey is once again being brilliant in utilizing LJ with the spread. LJ is good when he runs north-south, so he put him in a shotgun I formation, brilliant.

LJ had 3.5 ypc with inconsistent blocking on the line.

Im curious to hear your opinions ...

LJ did good. Not great or bad - good. I can't say he's worth his money or anything, but we didn't lose the game because he couldn't run the ball either.

I can't think of many RBs who would do better behind our line.

slc chief
11-16-2008, 09:16 PM
LJ did good. Not great or bad - good. I can't say he's worth his money or anything, but we didn't lose the game because he couldn't run the ball either.

I can't think of many RBs who would do better behind our line.

agreed makes you wonder how good this offense would be with a better o-line

jmlamerson
11-16-2008, 09:44 PM
agreed makes you wonder how good this offense would be with a better o-line

If our o-line was better, we would be a top-15 offense. We could have punched in that 1 yard run with LJ. We wouldn't have to run the spread and we could maybe win the time of possession, saving our defense its humiliations.

I think rebuilding our OL is our first and foremost priority.

jap1
11-16-2008, 09:54 PM
If our o-line was better, we would be a top-15 offense. We could have punched in that 1 yard run with LJ. We wouldn't have to run the spread and we could maybe win the time of possession, saving our defense its humiliations.

I think rebuilding our OL is our first and foremost priority.

I agree on all of those points. I just hope Thigpen turns out to be the real deal for the rest of the season, so we dont draft a QB in the first round.

jmlamerson
11-16-2008, 09:58 PM
I agree on all of those points. I just hope Thigpen turns out to be the real deal for the rest of the season, so we dont draft a QB in the first round.

I think, no matter how Thigpen does the rest of the season, that we can wait until the 2nd-3rd to draft a QB. But let's not wait until the 6th, 7th, or never and say all we need is Thigpen. That's what we did for years with Green and Croyle, and look where it got us. Draft Colt McCoy in the 2nd, if available, and sit him behind Tyler in case of injury. If Tyler ends up flaming out next year, we have a QB in the wings. If Tyler ends up a perrenial pro-bowler, we trade McCoy for a 1st rounder. If nothing else, we have a legitimate backup at our traditionally thinnest position.

If we can draft backup safeties, RBs, and TEs in the 3rd, we should be able to draft a backup QB.

greg3564
11-16-2008, 10:06 PM
I think, no matter how Thigpen does the rest of the season, that we can wait until the 2nd-3rd to draft a QB. But let's not wait until the 6th, 7th, or never and say all we need is Thigpen. That's what we did for years with Green and Croyle, and look where it got us. Draft Colt McCoy in the 2nd, if available, and sit him behind Tyler in case of injury. If Tyler ends up flaming out next year, we have a QB in the wings. If Tyler ends up a perrenial pro-bowler, we trade McCoy for a 1st rounder. If nothing else, we have a legitimate backup at our traditionally thinnest position.

If we can draft backup safeties, RBs, and TEs in the 3rd, we should be able to draft a backup QB.

Colt McCoy won't enter the draft this year. He's too smart to be lured into the NFL early. He'll stick it out through his senior year and pad his superior numbers. That being said, we shouldn't draft a player simply because they're there when we pick. We need to draft players we need, and that starts with the O-line.

Darth CarlSatan
11-16-2008, 11:09 PM
Colt McCoy won't enter the draft this year. He's too smart to be lured into the NFL early. He'll stick it out through his senior year and pad his superior numbers. That being said, we shouldn't draft a player simply because they're there when we pick. We need to draft players we need, and that starts with the O-line.

I'd say a defense that can't produce consistently outside of Red Zone stands is in pretty serious "need".

If we don't take 58 in the first round, we're idiots who deserve to lose.

jmlamerson
11-16-2008, 11:32 PM
I'd say a defense that can't produce consistently outside of Red Zone stands is in pretty serious "need".

If we don't take 58 in the first round, we're idiots who deserve to lose.

I'll bite. Who's 58?

Darth CarlSatan
11-16-2008, 11:39 PM
I'll bite. Who's 58?

Assuming we continue on with the C-2 variant, he's the Linebacker we need to bring some long over due fire back to Chiefs Defense:

http://usctrojans.cstv.com/sports/m-footbl/mtt/maualuga_rey00.html

jmlamerson
11-16-2008, 11:43 PM
Assuming we continue on with the C-2 variant, he's the Linebacker we need to bring some long over due fire back to Chiefs Defense:

http://usctrojans.cstv.com/sports/m-footbl/mtt/maualuga_rey00.html

I'll agree with you that the Chiefs need new LBs yesterday, but (1) top 5 is awfully high for a LB; and (2) every high pick on defense (excepting Flowers - maybe)by Edwards has stunk.

If we trade down, I'll probably be in favor.

Grey144
11-17-2008, 04:28 PM
LJ did good. Not great or bad - good. I can't say he's worth his money or anything, but we didn't lose the game because he couldn't run the ball either.

I can't think of many RBs who would do better behind our line.

One thing to say....2 Fumbles....


I would say LJ had a bad day. 67 total yards and 2 fumbles even if they were not lost If you call that a good day then your expectations must be bottom of the barrel. I didn't watch to see if he had any after game comments but I would give him points if he was humble about his performance. I still think I would have prefered running Jamal all day over LJ.

jmlamerson
11-17-2008, 04:49 PM
One thing to say....2 Fumbles....


I would say LJ had a bad day. 67 total yards and 2 fumbles even if they were not lost If you call that a good day then your expectations must be bottom of the barrel. I didn't watch to see if he had any after game comments but I would give him points if he was humble about his performance. I still think I would have prefered running Jamal all day over LJ.

If you run Jamaal Charles all day, be prepared to carry him off the field in a body bag. He doesn't have the heft to run 20+ times a game.

LJ didn't have a good day compared to what you would want from your running game. He had a good game for an inside-the-tackles runner behind a miserable o-line. I give him credit for as many yards as he got behind our line.

jap1
11-17-2008, 05:55 PM
I think he had a good day in the sense that he was breaking tackles, driving tacklers and fighting for extra yards. You cannot blame him for not getting in the endzone when he is hit 3 yards behind the line of scrimmage on a power dive. I will admit that the two fumbles were horrible. But I think he did well with what he had (inconsistent blocking).

yashi
11-17-2008, 06:34 PM
The Good:
He picked up positive yardage on most plays, ran well out of the shotgun which should be important moving forward. Also had a very nice play on a screen pass.

The Bad:
Still the worst pass blocking back in NFL history, 2 fumbles, worthless out of the I.

I don't understand why Charles only had 2 carries. The guy had over 100 yards a couple weeks ago against a top run D. I'd like to see a 50/50 split in the future, with Charles being in every single play that involves blocking. I'd also like to see them do away with the I-Formation completely because it hasn't worked all season.

Sn@keIze
11-18-2008, 11:09 AM
I am wondering how everyone think LJ did in his return. I thought he was decent. He broke some tackles and fought for yardage (unfortunately he was breaking tackles before he got to the line of scrimmage). I think Gailey is once again being brilliant in utilizing LJ with the spread. LJ is good when he runs north-south, so he put him in a shotgun I formation, brilliant.

LJ had 3.5 ypc with inconsistent blocking on the line.

Im curious to hear your opinions ...I was curious to see how he did in this offense since he been gone, not bad I guess considering.

I will say this, I dont care much for this pistol offensive formation. But with anything, give it time and maybe it will gel and Ds will have a hard time defending it.

theaxeeffect4311
11-19-2008, 05:54 AM
Larry Johnson has to go. He may be a productive player, but he's not a team player. It is why I liked Priest Holmes because he did so much for the team even though he was not a exceptionally fast or strong. Plus LJ can't block. Sure, Charles have let a few go but he is by far better and he's only a rookie. Trade Larry off for a first round or whatever we can get. Even though it's a hit on the cap, it's worth it. The team is progressing to a state to where they don't need his type of running game. Use the draft pick to get a ILB (preferably one who can cover the tight end) like Brandon Spikes. He could slip to the second round.

yashi
11-19-2008, 10:39 AM
Larry Johnson has to go. He may be a productive player, but he's not a team player. It is why I liked Priest Holmes because he did so much for the team even though he was not a exceptionally fast or strong. Plus LJ can't block. Sure, Charles have let a few go but he is by far better and he's only a rookie. Trade Larry off for a first round or whatever we can get. Even though it's a hit on the cap, it's worth it. The team is progressing to a state to where they don't need his type of running game. Use the draft pick to get a ILB (preferably one who can cover the tight end) like Brandon Spikes. He could slip to the second round.

a few weeks ago, I would have agreed... now I'm on the fence. I think a combination of LJ and Charles can be very good, if there's balance. LJ shouldn't be in on passing downs, ever. Charles shouldn't be called on for carries between the tackles.

But I think if you use LJ for 1st downs, short yardage situations, and screen plays while using Charles for outside runs, and passing situations, it would work out nicely. The problem is Herm seems to have a problem not giving LJ the ball every time when he's available.

I think the new offensive scheme is working so well, but for some reason we're still trying to run to open up the pass, and it should be the other way around now.

As far as LJ being a cancer in the locker room, can't disagree with you there.

Big Daddy Tek
11-20-2008, 01:04 AM
LJ is the man! GO LJ! The beast is back to spit another drink on you b!tches!

Three7s
11-20-2008, 01:05 AM
LJ is the man! GO LJ! The beast is back to spit another drink on you b!tches!
Maybe Thigpen can take him to court for missing a block, thus nearly killing him......

Darth CarlSatan
11-20-2008, 01:06 AM
LJ is the man! GO LJ! The beast is back to spit another drink on you b!tches!

Oh Lord...

Big Daddy Tek
11-20-2008, 03:17 AM
Oh Lord...

just the response i was hoping for.

theaxeeffect4311
11-20-2008, 02:41 PM
a few weeks ago, I would have agreed... now I'm on the fence. I think a combination of LJ and Charles can be very good, if there's balance. LJ shouldn't be in on passing downs, ever. Charles shouldn't be called on for carries between the tackles.

But I think if you use LJ for 1st downs, short yardage situations, and screen plays while using Charles for outside runs, and passing situations, it would work out nicely. The problem is Herm seems to have a problem not giving LJ the ball every time when he's available.

I think the new offensive scheme is working so well, but for some reason we're still trying to run to open up the pass, and it should be the other way around now.

As far as LJ being a cancer in the locker room, can't disagree with you there.

The thing about it is that Larry Johnson is a big name. We can find a big back in the fifth round of the draft or free agency and groom him into the short yardage back you are talking about. Sure, it will be obvious to the other team when that guy is on the field. However, we would still get the same production from a guy who who is not making millions a year.

But you do bring up a good point about balance. I noticed that Charles only had 2 carries in last week's game. Maybe he was still banged up or whatever the coaches want to use as an excuse. The thing is that Charles is a playmaker. He has home-run ability. He has not gone the distance yet, but anyone can see the potential there. My point is that Larry Johnson will never break out a fifty yard run for a touchdown. (He beat everyone on the Denver defense and still got caught from behind).

This is why I didn't understand re-signing LJ in the first place. He can break tackles, push the pile, and run both inside and out. It is ridiculous how many times LJ is taken down by a shoe-string tackle. You would think a guy with his size would learn to pick up his feet. Trade him off and take whatever we can for him. First round or second round, it doesn't matter. At this point, we've made a mistake by not taking our chance before. We are not going to receive the appropriate compensation for him.

chief31
11-21-2008, 08:49 AM
The thing about it is that Larry Johnson is a big name. We can find a big back in the fifth round of the draft or free agency and groom him into the short yardage back you are talking about. Sure, it will be obvious to the other team when that guy is on the field. However, we would still get the same production from a guy who who is not making millions a year.

But you do bring up a good point about balance. I noticed that Charles only had 2 carries in last week's game. Maybe he was still banged up or whatever the coaches want to use as an excuse. The thing is that Charles is a playmaker. He has home-run ability. He has not gone the distance yet, but anyone can see the potential there. My point is that Larry Johnson will never break out a fifty yard run for a touchdown. (He beat everyone on the Denver defense and still got caught from behind).

This is why I didn't understand re-signing LJ in the first place. He can break tackles, push the pile, and run both inside and out. It is ridiculous how many times LJ is taken down by a shoe-string tackle. You would think a guy with his size would learn to pick up his feet. Trade him off and take whatever we can for him. First round or second round, it doesn't matter. At this point, we've made a mistake by not taking our chance before. We are not going to receive the appropriate compensation for him.

I am far from LJs biggest fan. But, if you get him beyond the LOS, he can run. He can run very well.

It is his terrible attitude and lack of interest in anything other than running in the open that makes me believe that he isn't very good.

You said..."Larry Johnson will never break out a fifty yard run for a touchdown."

His career long (I believe) is a 95 yard TD run. They don't get much longer than that.

Chiefster
11-21-2008, 10:15 PM
I did not see the game so I have no idea.






That is all.