PDA

View Full Version : Jamaal Charles is the future of the chiefs anyways



Chiefstillidie
12-29-2008, 12:25 AM
goodbye LJ

Vandelay
12-29-2008, 12:30 AM
LJ and Herm can split the cab fare to the airport.

Bike
12-29-2008, 12:33 AM
Remember, LJ has his new Bentley from his 47 mil contract. He can drive both of them to hell outta here...

hermhater
12-29-2008, 12:43 AM
I hope someone takes his ***.

Bike
12-29-2008, 12:47 AM
I like LJ and Herm. But, then again, I like sour milk and autopsies...

hermhater
12-29-2008, 12:57 AM
No more beer for you then!

tornadospotter
12-29-2008, 01:01 AM
I like LJ and Herm. But, then again, I like sour milk and autopsies...


No more beer for you then!
So pass your beer to me.:D

hermhater
12-29-2008, 01:03 AM
Don't touch my beer!!!

Bike
12-29-2008, 01:09 AM
Beer is good. Let there be more beer.

theaxeeffect4311
12-29-2008, 02:16 AM
Does anyone know why we did not use Charles more this season?

Chiefstillidie
12-29-2008, 02:27 AM
because herm edwards is an idiot and he thinks building the team around lj was the whole answer...jc will be better then lj in my opinion.

Chiefstillidie
12-29-2008, 02:28 AM
even the cbs guys said they didn't know why kc wasn't using jamaal more..that should tell you something right there.

yashi
12-29-2008, 11:43 AM
I don't think Charles should be considered the future... I think his role should be similar to Jerious Norwood on the Falcons and Leon Washington on the Jets but with a few more carries: return kicks and punts, catch screen passes, passing downs, and 10-15 carries a game (outside the tackles). I do think he would be the perfect lightning if we could find the thunder (not LJ).

I think Rashad Jennings from Liberty would be perfect.. he is a huge guy who also runs a great 40 time and can bulldoze people.

jmlamerson
12-29-2008, 12:11 PM
I don't think Charles should be considered the future... I think his role should be similar to Jerious Norwood on the Falcons and Leon Washington on the Jets but with a few more carries: return kicks and punts, catch screen passes, passing downs, and 10-15 carries a game (outside the tackles). I do think he would be the perfect lightning if we could find the thunder (not LJ).

I think Rashad Jennings from Liberty would be perfect.. he is a huge guy who also runs a great 40 time and can bulldoze people.

Take Shonne Greene of Iowa (if he comes out) in the 3rd round and watch him be our Brandon Jacobs/Marion Barber.

I don't like Charles as much as most people here. I don't think he will ever be a healthy contributor to the team as a RB, and I don't think he has the vision to be a premier PR/KR. I'd be happy to be proven wrong.

yashi
12-29-2008, 12:24 PM
Take Shonne Greene of Iowa (if he comes out) in the 3rd round and watch him be our Brandon Jacobs/Marion Barber.

I don't like Charles as much as most people here. I don't think he will ever be a healthy contributor to the team as a RB, and I don't think he has the vision to be a premier PR/KR. I'd be happy to be proven wrong.

I can see why you would think that from watching him at times this year, but after it's all said and done the guy did have 5.3 yards per attempt this season and did great at blocking out of the backfield. I saw some problems, but I also saw a guy who was the 1st to run for 100 against Tampa in week 9. There's definitely potential there.. but I think he'd be most effective with a situational 10 carries a game, not a lot more or less.

Sn@keIze
12-29-2008, 01:57 PM
These days theres not many PRIMARY running backs anymore. Its all going to tandems. Which I like cuz you dont have to spend big $ on one that thinks he IT.

I think Charles will work good in our one two punch next year. But dont think hes an every down back.

Drunker Hillbilly
12-29-2008, 02:42 PM
Im not sure what part of "no RB will ever be productive for the Chiefs if they don't address the O line" you guys don't understand?????????????

chief31
12-29-2008, 03:27 PM
Im not sure what part of "no RB will ever be productive for the Chiefs if they don't address the O line" you guys don't understand?????????????

I agree, in an NFL style offense. But, Charles did average almost a full YPC better than LJ this season. (5.3 to 4.5)

:D

Coach
12-29-2008, 03:39 PM
These days theres not many PRIMARY running backs anymore. Its all going to tandems. Which I like cuz you dont have to spend big $ on one that thinks he IT.

I think Charles will work good in our one two punch next year. But dont think hes an every down back.

He is a good 1-2 punch type of back.

jmlamerson
12-29-2008, 03:51 PM
I agree, in an NFL style offense. But, Charles did average almost a full YPC better than LJ this season. (5.3 to 4.5)

:D

Well yeah, but he also only rushed 67 times and was injured three times. He may get healthier in time, but we can't go into 2009 with him as our 1RB, not if we want any semblance of a running game.

Drunker Hillbilly
12-29-2008, 04:18 PM
I agree, in an NFL style offense. But, Charles did average almost a full YPC better than LJ this season. (5.3 to 4.5)

:D
Great!!! If you definition of success id percentage points then we have more problems than we know about!! Besides, Charles won't play half the games a normal RB will play because he will be hurt all the time. :D

D.A.S.
12-29-2008, 11:36 PM
I don't like Charles as the starter. Not that I don't think he can do it, I just think we would do better with a two back system. Charles\Smith rotation sounds good to me.

Coach
12-29-2008, 11:46 PM
I don't like Charles as the starter. Not that I don't think he can do it, I just think we would do better with a two back system. CharlesSmith rotation sounds good to me.

I think Charles will need to be part of a running back by committee. I am not against a 2-back system either. I think Charles is our version of Leon Washington.

theaxeeffect4311
12-30-2008, 01:15 AM
Great!!! If you definition of success id percentage points then we have more problems than we know about!! Besides, Charles won't play half the games a normal RB will play because he will be hurt all the time. :D

At least he knows how to block, unlike LJ. Charles will be a better team player than LJ.

And as far as the O-line is concerned it will be fixed. The Chiefs will spend money in the offseason.

Hayvern
12-30-2008, 10:37 AM
At least he knows how to block, unlike LJ. Charles will be a better team player than LJ.

And as far as the O-line is concerned it will be fixed. The Chiefs will spend money in the offseason.

Yeah, even Herm was saying that free agency was something they were likely to consider this season... How about getting Sproles to run with Smith and Charles?

yashi
12-30-2008, 11:25 AM
Yeah, even Herm was saying that free agency was something they were likely to consider this season... How about getting Sproles to run with Smith and Charles?

Sproles and Charles are too similar.. speedy, undersized RBs who are best in passing downs and running outside the tackles. We need someone who bangs between the tackles for the tough yards. The thing I do like about Sproles is that he's one of the best return guys in the league.

Derrick Ward could be an interesting signing if he isn't too expensive. I'm just worried that a large part of his success came from running behind the Giants O-Line. Jacobs would be much better, but he'd be too expensive and will probably re-sign with the Giants.

I think Smith could be a good short yardage back.. seems like he always manages to squeeze through for an extra yard, and rarely gets stopped in the backfield like a certain #27.

Ward, Charles, Smith could be a pretty good and inexpensive backfield. Then the money can be put into both lines.

I should add though that I would rather just draft an RB. Any decent back can prosper behind a good o-line.

chief31
12-30-2008, 11:48 AM
Great!!! If you definition of success id percentage points then we have more problems than we know about!! Besides, Charles won't play half the games a normal RB will play because he will be hurt all the time. :D

Well, when one guy carries the ball further than the other, then that percentage means something.

But the fact is that you've said noone could do any better, and yet someone did.

His being injured doesn't change the fact that when he got the football, he took it further that LJ did, when he had the ball.

And YPC is really the measurement of success for rushing. You can run for 1700 yards, but if it took more than 400 carries to do it, then it's just pretty good.

If you did it on 300 carries, then you had a much higher degree of success rushing.

jmlamerson
12-30-2008, 12:01 PM
I should add though that I would rather just draft an RB. Any decent back can prosper behind a good o-line.

Amen. Good teams don't overpay for RBs. The Falcons were the only team to strike gold with an expensive RB acquisition this year, and they may be regretting the deal in a couple seasons when Turner's legs die.

A steady supply of fresh legs is more important than almost any individual RB.

Drunker Hillbilly
12-30-2008, 12:15 PM
Well, when one guy carries the ball further than the other, then that percentage means something.

But the fact is that you've said noone could do any better, and yet someone did.

His being injured doesn't change the fact that when he got the football, he took it further that LJ did, when he had the ball.

And YPC is really the measurement of success for rushing. You can run for 1700 yards, but if it took more than 400 carries to do it, then it's just pretty good.

If you did it on 300 carries, then you had a much higher degree of success rushing.
Like I said, if your definition is this, then we have nothing further to talk about on this subject! 4 or 5 tenths of a percentage point means NOTHING when talking about yards per carry and you know it!! Charles is not anywhere near the RB that LJ is. Its just a fact! Go to any board from any team in the league that will give an unbiased opinion and you won't find 10 people that say Charles is better. Period!

yashi
12-30-2008, 12:31 PM
And YPC is really the measurement of success for rushing..

Well I'm not going to argue that YPC is an important stat, it really isn't a complete measurement for success. Example:

Player A has 10 carries for 50 yards (5.0 YPC), consisting of (1) 50 yard carry, and (9) 0 yard carries.

Player B has 10 carries for 40 yards (4.0 YPC), consisting of (10) 4 yard carries.

Which players performance is more likely to result in a win for the team? Player A has a much higher YPC, but picked up 1 first down the entire game, and scored at most 1 touchdown. The other 9 carries he didn't move the chains and didn't help open up the pass.

That's my rant about YPC. Consistency is more important for me, which is why I'd rather have player B. It's not about how many yards you get, it's how and when you get them. It's also part of the reason why teams don't give someone like Jerious Norwood 20 carries a game.

Jerome Bettis had 3.9 YPC for his career and Tatum Bell has 4.9 for his career. You tell me which one you'd rather have.

chief31
12-30-2008, 12:35 PM
Like I said, if your definition is this, then we have nothing further to talk about on this subject! 4 or 5 tenths of a percentage point means NOTHING when talking about yards per carry and you know it!! Charles is not anywhere near the RB that LJ is. Its just a fact! Go to any board from any team in the league that will give an unbiased opinion and you won't find 10 people that say Charles is better. Period!

You're right. There is nothing more to say. half a yard per carry is quie significant. And we are talking about .8 yards per carry anyway.

You seriously need to get over yourself. Your opinion is nothing more than an opinion. It is not fact.

LJ is an average NFL HB at best. If he did anything besides run when there is great blocking, then he may be above average. But he doesn't.

The only other things that he does well are act with little to no class, and pout.

He is not a top-five NFL HB. He is not a top-ten NFL HB.

He is Lawrence Phillips, with the benefit of having ran behind some HOF blockers for a while, with an offensive genius of a coach.

Remove the HOF blockers and offensive genius, and you get what we've seen the past two seasons.

Nothing.

Drunker Hillbilly
12-30-2008, 02:17 PM
You're right. There is nothing more to say. half a yard per carry is quie significant. And we are talking about .8 yards per carry anyway.

You seriously need to get over yourself. Your opinion is nothing more than an opinion. It is not fact.

LJ is an average NFL HB at best. If he did anything besides run when there is great blocking, then he may be above average. But he doesn't.

The only other things that he does well are act with little to no class, and pout.

He is not a top-five NFL HB. He is not a top-ten NFL HB.

He is Lawrence Phillips, with the benefit of having ran behind some HOF blockers for a while, with an offensive genius of a coach.

Remove the HOF blockers and offensive genius, and you get what we've seen the past two seasons.

Nothing.
Now this is a classic post! YOU telling someone to get over their self!!!! HAAAAAA HAAAAAAA!!!!!! Like your opinion means more than anyone else's here bud!!!! Moderator or not, your not the know all god of football!!

Half a yard per carry is NOT significant when your getting tackled behind the line of scrimmage every single time you get the ball! Go ahead, stick with Charles and whomever you want to tandem with him back there. They will have one of the worst running games in football. Oh yea, remove the offensive genius and HOF's from ANY team and you get what we had the past two years!!!!

jmlamerson
12-30-2008, 02:34 PM
Now this is a classic post! YOU telling someone to get over their self!!!! HAAAAAA HAAAAAAA!!!!!! Like your opinion means more than anyone else's here bud!!!! Moderator or not, your not the know all god of football!!

Half a yard per carry is NOT significant when your getting tackled behind the line of scrimmage every single time you get the ball! Go ahead, stick with Charles and whomever you want to tandem with him back there. They will have one of the worst running games in football. Oh yea, remove the offensive genius and HOF's from ANY team and you get what we had the past two years!!!!

Do you think that LJ will actually be more beneficial to the Chiefs next year than a rookie? LJ is on the wrong side of 30 and is unhappy on the Chiefs. He might do well (1000-1200 yds a year) for another team for another 2-3 years, but as a dominant force, he's finished.

Is he a more complete RB than Charles? Sure. He's bigger, better inside the tackles, and won't break down with 20+ carries a game. But Charles could be a good 3DRB for the Chiefs for the next ten years. Even if he were happy, LJ would only be modestly productive for the next 2-3.

I agree that Charles is not our answer at RB (at least not solely), but neither is LJ. But while Charles has long term use to the Chiefs, LJ, unfortunately, does not.

Would you agree that trading/cutting LJ and drafting a big RB is the best solution to this problem?

leoness8
12-30-2008, 02:44 PM
Charles is definately not the answer at RB. He is though a long term 3rd down running back for the chiefs just like jmlamerson said. This year was a good rookie class for running backs...its tough to say that 3 or 4 rookie running backs will come out of college a produce right away again...we will see.

Sn@keIze
12-30-2008, 02:49 PM
[quote=jmlamerson;110596]Do you think that LJ will actually be more beneficial to the Chiefs next year than a rookie? quote]



No, but only because this isnt his style of offense. If it was tight formation with one or two wide outs it would be different story.

This spread out O isnt him. Plus, as you pointed out, hes past his prime.

Drunker Hillbilly
12-30-2008, 02:52 PM
Do you think that LJ will actually be more beneficial to the Chiefs next year than a rookie? LJ is on the wrong side of 30 and is unhappy on the Chiefs. He might do well (1000-1200 yds a year) for another team for another 2-3 years, but as a dominant force, he's finished.

Is he a more complete RB than Charles? Sure. He's bigger, better inside the tackles, and won't break down with 20+ carries a game. But Charles could be a good 3DRB for the Chiefs for the next ten years. Even if he were happy, LJ would only be modestly productive for the next 2-3.

I agree that Charles is not our answer at RB (at least not solely), but neither is LJ. But while Charles has long term use to the Chiefs, LJ, unfortunately, does not.

Would you agree that trading/cutting LJ and drafting a big RB is the best solution to this problem?
At this point maybe it would be best to get rid of him strictly from the point that he doesn't want to be here. However, If the team were to address the O line like they should have 3 years ago, he is the PERFECT back for the team! So yes, I do think LJ would be a better back than drafting a rookin RB IF the O line were addressed.

LJ is absolutely a better back than Charles and if you don't consider 1200 yds a "dominant force" I don't know what the heck is considering the league leader this year is at 1400 and some change!! Again modestly productive is not 1200 yds in my opinion. Its a darn good year! Someone said something about him going to Denver. I think it has been proven that if he goes to Denver, he will compete for the ruching title for the next 2 years or so!!!!

Sn@keIze
12-30-2008, 02:58 PM
At this point maybe it would be best to get rid of him strictly from the point that he doesn't want to be here. However, If the team were to address the O line like they should have 3 years ago, he is the PERFECT back for the team! So yes, I do think LJ would be a better back than drafting a rookin RB IF the O line were addressed.

LJ is absolutely a better back than Charles and if you don't consider 1200 yds a "dominant force" I don't know what the heck is considering the league leader this year is at 1400 and some change!! Again modestly productive is not 1200 yds in my opinion. Its a darn good year! Someone said something about him going to Denver. I think it has been proven that if he goes to Denver, he will compete for the ruching title for the next 2 years or so!!!!I dont think Shanahan is that stupid unless he get him for cheap or low pick.

Plus Shanahan is the epidamy of RB tandems, you just dont know who is gonna start for them.

jmlamerson
12-30-2008, 03:06 PM
At this point maybe it would be best to get rid of him strictly from the point that he doesn't want to be here. However, If the team were to address the O line like they should have 3 years ago, he is the PERFECT back for the team! So yes, I do think LJ would be a better back than drafting a rookin RB IF the O line were addressed.

LJ is absolutely a better back than Charles and if you don't consider 1200 yds a "dominant force" I don't know what the heck is considering the league leader this year is at 1400 and some change!! Again modestly productive is not 1200 yds in my opinion. Its a darn good year! Someone said something about him going to Denver. I think it has been proven that if he goes to Denver, he will compete for the ruching title for the next 2 years or so!!!!

Let me put it this way: I don't think LJ, even if he were happy, would do appreciatively better than a big rookie RB behind an improved line. I think that a healthy LJ and a health Tatum Bell would do very similar behind the Denver OL (which is, BTW, one of the reasons that Denver won't shell out the bucks for him). It isn't that I want to ditch him because he's a bad player - I just think that the detriments of his attitutde, possible suspension, and salary are not equal to his positives. I really believe that we can find a rookie that will equal his production next year, even in the later rounds, as long as we rebuild our OL.

I don't think you can or should compare Charles with LJ. They fit two entirely separate roles on the team. I don't trust Charles to be an every down back. And LJ won't ever be the 3DRB or blocker that Charles is. Two entirely separate positions, basically.

I'm not sneezing at 1000-1200 yards, but that's about 65-80 yards a game. It isn't enough of an impact to be worth 1RB money. I'd prefer to take the cap hit this year (while we have the cap flexibility) of a trade or cut, and use the future savings to rebuild to rebuild the rest of our team in FA or to resign any future stars we drafted.

My personal bet - LJ is a Patriot by August.

Drunker Hillbilly
12-30-2008, 04:29 PM
1200 yds not worthy of 1RB money????? The avg yds per carry for Peterson is 4.8. LJ averaged 4.5. Peterson had 170 more attempts than LJ. Even with this line there is no doubt in my mind that with an equal amount of carries, LJ's numbers would have been in the ballpark with Peterson. Meaning with in a few hundred. LT who is in the standings ranked 12 spots higher than LJ, had 100 more carries than LJ and only had 235 more yds. Only 5 guys in the top 20 averaged more yds per carry than LJ did. Seems to me this all comes down to....give him the damn ball and he will produce!!!!! That is the one thing he has wanted. To get the amount of carries to be productive!!!!!!

jmlamerson
12-30-2008, 04:55 PM
1200 yds not worthy of 1RB money????? The avg yds per carry for Peterson is 4.8. LJ averaged 4.5. Peterson had 170 more attempts than LJ. Even with this line there is no doubt in my mind that with an equal amount of carries, LJ's numbers would have been in the ballpark with Peterson. Meaning with in a few hundred. LT who is in the standings ranked 12 spots higher than LJ, had 100 more carries than LJ and only had 235 more yds. Only 5 guys in the top 20 averaged more yds per carry than LJ did. Seems to me this all comes down to....give him the damn ball and he will produce!!!!! That is the one thing he has wanted. To get the amount of carries to be productive!!!!!!

If you give LJ the ball, a good OL, and he stays healthy, he will produce. The same is true for many, many RBs. Again, I'm not saying that he's a bad RB - just that he isn't worth the salary, attitude, or possible suspension. That with the conditions outlined above, almost any RB can be successful. That LJ is very replacable in the draft or FA.

Very, very few RBs are worth big money today, and those few are threats in the passing game. LJ is a good back who we can replace fairly easily if we try.

Drunker Hillbilly
12-30-2008, 05:02 PM
If you give LJ the ball, a good OL, and he stays healthy, he will produce. The same is true for many, many RBs. Again, I'm not saying that he's a bad RB - just that he isn't worth the salary, attitude, or possible suspension. That with the conditions outlined above, almost any RB can be successful. That LJ is very replacable in the draft or FA.

Very, very few RBs are worth big money today, and those few are threats in the passing game. LJ is a good back who we can replace fairly easily if we try.
Ok if you say so but my point was that even with the line we had this year, he would have had over your 1200 yd mark with anywhere near the carries the top 5 guys got. I would bet there aren't many RB's that could do that. As far as the attitude and off field problems go, I agree he was a jerk but those things come with frustration. Doesn't make it right but it is true. IMO, had they given him the ball like they should have, many of these problems would not have happened. Productivity cures a lot.

jmlamerson
12-30-2008, 05:45 PM
Ok if you say so but my point was that even with the line we had this year, he would have had over your 1200 yd mark with anywhere near the carries the top 5 guys got. I would bet there aren't many RB's that could do that. As far as the attitude and off field problems go, I agree he was a jerk but those things come with frustration. Doesn't make it right but it is true. IMO, had they given him the ball like they should have, many of these problems would not have happened. Productivity cures a lot.

You do remember that he was suspended/injured for four games (or 1/4 of the year) for his personal problems, decreasing his carries? And that if you subtract the anamolous Denver game, his YPC average drops to 4.1 YPC.

Before he was suspended after the Carolina game, he had 93 carries (18.6 carries per game) for 411 yards (4.4 YPC). It wasn't the lack of carries that screwed him up. It was only after he was suspended, the Chiefs switched to the spread to save their QB's life, and LJ mouthed off that his number of carries dropped.

If he hadn't been suspended and mouthed off, and he had kept at 18.6 carries per game, he would have finished with a respectable 298 carries for the season. It was his fault his carries decreased, not the team's.

TG was more frustrated than anyone else on the team - he demanded a trade midseason. And he finished 1000+ yards and in the pro bowl. LJ's suspension and attitude on the field were the cause of his problems.

leaves
12-30-2008, 06:04 PM
I can't ever see Charles doing better than 1000yds at prime. I think Kolby was a better back, but I agree with the longevity of Charles' career. Who knows too, maybe we'll grab a solid back in the next 2-3yrs to puzzle into that Priest, LJ, etc. role.

Xploder
12-30-2008, 06:12 PM
what we need is a big back some big strong and just intimidating RB to make a defensive player not want to be the first there to try and tackle him for fear of much pain. I dont know who and i dont know where but i know hes out there waiting to become that player. there have been these players in the past. Okoye and Bettis just to mention some greats of the last 20 yrs. I like the the idea of a thunder and lightining back field but what i am asking for is a storm

Drunker Hillbilly
12-30-2008, 06:31 PM
You do remember that he was suspended/injured for four games (or 1/4 of the year) for his personal problems, decreasing his carries? And that if you subtract the anamolous Denver game, his YPC average drops to 4.1 YPC.

Before he was suspended after the Carolina game, he had 93 carries (18.6 carries per game) for 411 yards (4.4 YPC). It wasn't the lack of carries that screwed him up. It was only after he was suspended, the Chiefs switched to the spread to save their QB's life, and LJ mouthed off that his number of carries dropped.

If he hadn't been suspended and mouthed off, and he had kept at 18.6 carries per game, he would have finished with a respectable 298 carries for the season. It was his fault his carries decreased, not the team's.

TG was more frustrated than anyone else on the team - he demanded a trade midseason. And he finished 1000+ yards and in the pro bowl. LJ's suspension and attitude on the field were the cause of his problems.
Portis
Forte
Grant
LT
Jacobs
Jackson
Gore
Barber etc......

All had more carries and all missed games for one reason or another!!!

jmlamerson
12-30-2008, 07:13 PM
Portis
Forte
Grant
LT
Jacobs
Jackson
Gore
Barber etc......

All had more carries and all missed games for one reason or another!!!

True. My point was that LJ's suspension and attitude were the main causes of his decrease in workload, whereas you were saying that his decrease in workload was the cause of his attitude.

LJ was averaging 19 carries a game until his suspension. He averaged 14/game afterwards. Add in a four game suspension, some truly awful games from him (Carolina, Cincinatti, 2nd SD game), and his overall bad numbers begin to make a lot of sense.

The seven players you mention all missed games for injury reasons - not for behavior reasons.

Matt Forte played all sixteen games and had 316 carries (19.8 carries/game).

Ryan Grant played all sixteen games and had 312 carries (19.5 carries/game).

LT played all sixteen games and had 292 carries (18.3 carries/game).

Brandon Jacobs played in 13 games and had 219 carries (16.9 carries/game).

Jackson played in 12 games and had 253 carries (21 carries/game).

Gore played in 14 games and had 240 carries (17.1 carries/game).

Marion Barber played in 15 games and had 238 carries (15.9 carries/game).

Look at these numbers. If LJ doesn't get suspended, he averages 18.6 carries a game, which is more than LT, Jacobs, Gore, and Barber.

As it is, he averaged 16.1 carries a game, which is more than Barber.

Look, LJ brought his problems on himself this season. The numbers don't lie.

Drunker Hillbilly
12-30-2008, 08:38 PM
True. My point was that LJ's suspension and attitude were the main causes of his decrease in workload, whereas you were saying that his decrease in workload was the cause of his attitude.

LJ was averaging 19 carries a game until his suspension. He averaged 14/game afterwards. Add in a four game suspension, some truly awful games from him (Carolina, Cincinatti, 2nd SD game), and his overall bad numbers begin to make a lot of sense.

The seven players you mention all missed games for injury reasons - not for behavior reasons.

Matt Forte played all sixteen games and had 316 carries (19.8 carries/game).

Ryan Grant played all sixteen games and had 312 carries (19.5 carries/game).

LT played all sixteen games and had 292 carries (18.3 carries/game).

Brandon Jacobs played in 13 games and had 219 carries (16.9 carries/game).

Jackson played in 12 games and had 253 carries (21 carries/game).

Gore played in 14 games and had 240 carries (17.1 carries/game).

Marion Barber played in 15 games and had 238 carries (15.9 carries/game).

Look at these numbers. If LJ doesn't get suspended, he averages 18.6 carries a game, which is more than LT, Jacobs, Gore, and Barber.

As it is, he averaged 16.1 carries a game, which is more than Barber.

Look, LJ brought his problems on himself this season. The numbers don't lie.
Agreed on everything you wrote but if you don't think some of his attitude was due to the fact that he was not getting the carries he thought he deserved you are mistaken!! If you go to work tomorrow and your boss has given half of your responsibilities to another person tell me you won't wonder why! Then when it continues for a few weeks, tell me your attitude at work won't change. When a person is thought to be a productive piece of any team or organization and all of a sudden things change and the changes bring nothing better and most of the time worse results than when you were doing the job, everyone's attitude would change!!!! Oh yea, and Forte, Grant and LT all may have played in all 16 games but missed significant time in several throughout the year!

theaxeeffect4311
12-31-2008, 02:15 AM
Agreed on everything you wrote but if you don't think some of his attitude was due to the fact that he was not getting the carries he thought he deserved you are mistaken!! If you go to work tomorrow and your boss has given half of your responsibilities to another person tell me you won't wonder why! Then when it continues for a few weeks, tell me your attitude at work won't change. When a person is thought to be a productive piece of any team or organization and all of a sudden things change and the changes bring nothing better and most of the time worse results than when you were doing the job, everyone's attitude would change!!!! Oh yea, and Forte, Grant and LT all may have played in all 16 games but missed significant time in several throughout the year!

The thing is that LJ has had a bad attitude since the 2006 season before he got his contract extension. Then it became worse after he signed the extension because he was not being productive and blamed it on the offensive line. You can talk in analogies all you want but unless you give an answer to why LJ can break a trend of workhorse running backs becoming unproductive once they hit the age of 30, this would be an opportune time to trade LJ while he has a shred of value to another team.

I think it is funny that on one thread you criticize people for wanting to draft 4 linemen (even though no one said that number) but here you say that for LJ to become good, the Chiefs need to fix the O-line. So what is the answer? Draft linemen? Make the players we have better? Go into FA? Give LJ another contract extension? I just wonder what you would do if this was your team.

Drunker Hillbilly
12-31-2008, 12:11 PM
The thing is that LJ has had a bad attitude since the 2006 season before he got his contract extension. Then it became worse after he signed the extension because he was not being productive and blamed it on the offensive line. You can talk in analogies all you want but unless you give an answer to why LJ can break a trend of workhorse running backs becoming unproductive once they hit the age of 30, this would be an opportune time to trade LJ while he has a shred of value to another team.

I think it is funny that on one thread you criticize people for wanting to draft 4 linemen (even though no one said that number) but here you say that for LJ to become good, the Chiefs need to fix the O-line. So what is the answer? Draft linemen? Make the players we have better? Go into FA? Give LJ another contract extension? I just wonder what you would do if this was your team.
You are as out of your mind as the others have said Ive come to realize!!!! Someone did mention drafting 3 or 4 O linemen with the first picks! I said I would NOT do that because more than likely at least 1 of them would bew a bust! Also, I said FA is where you build your O line, not through the draft. I aslo said that I would keep LJ. How were LJ's numbers in 2006?

chief31
12-31-2008, 04:56 PM
Now this is a classic post! YOU telling someone to get over their self!!!!

Ahem....


Charles is not anywhere near the RB that LJ is. Its just a fact!


HAAAAAA HAAAAAAA!!!!!! Like your opinion means more than anyone else's here bud!!!! Moderator or not, your not the know all god of football!!

I am not the one who is stating my opinion, then saying..."Its just a fact!".


Half a yard per carry is NOT significant when your getting tackled behind the line of scrimmage every single time you get the ball!

If you are getting tackled behind the LOS every time, then there will be a (-) in front of your YPC stat.

There isn't one, because that is just an exaggeration.

I'll do some of the math for you. You believe that LJ is a top-five HB in the NFL, so I will use his numbers to show what .5 and .8 YPC means.

2006 LJ - 1789 yards, with a 4.3 YPC. (416 carries)

If he had averaged .5 YPC more (4.8 YPC), then he would have had 1996 yards.

Had he been .8 YPC better (The difference between his and Charles' YPC this seasonand 5.1 YPC), then he would have had 2121 yards.

The difference is, in the (.5 YPC x 416 carries) situation, is 207 yards.

For the (.8 YPC x 416 carries), the difference is 334 yards.

Like it or not, that is quite significant.


Go ahead, stick with Charles and whomever you want to tandem with him back there. They will have one of the worst running games in football.

A. We already had that. We call him LJ.

B. If we stay with this Spread Offense, then the running game is secondary. LJ is a feature back, who has less value in that system.

C. If we go back to an NFL style offense, then we might well have a a horrible running game. Just like LJ has been giving us. But we may be better, if we improve the O-line.


Oh yea, remove the offensive genius and HOF's from ANY team and you get what we had the past two years!!!!

My point exactly. LJ isn't good enough to lead the league in Yards, with a bad O-line. And he doesn't contribute much in the way of anything else.

He is far too expensive for what we are able to get from him.

You seem to think that he is Micheal Jordan. I think that he is Scottie Pippen. (Plus a horrible attitude)

theaxeeffect4311
12-31-2008, 05:01 PM
You are as out of your mind as the others have said Ive come to realize!!!! Someone did mention drafting 3 or 4 O linemen with the first picks! I said I would NOT do that because more than likely at least 1 of them would bew a bust! Also, I said FA is where you build your O line, not through the draft. I aslo said that I would keep LJ. How were LJ's numbers in 2006?

Still living in the past. That's cool. Let's talk stats:

LJ- 416 carries for 1789 yards for a 4.3 average.
LT- 348 carries for 1815 yard for a 5.2 average.
MJD (rookie season, 2nd round selection)- 166 carries for 941 yards for a 5.7 average.

What does this tell me? LJ was not the best even when he ran for the most carries. Is he really that great then? You have made the argument (maybe not this thread though) that LJ would be up there with the top RBs this season if he had more carries. But the season where he had the most carries, he was not even the best RB. Then you look at Jones-Drew in his rookie season. Less than have the half the carries of LJ and he received over half the yard LJ did. Is LJ that dominant then? Looks to me that if we can get a second round pick for LJ, and have the ability to get a running back comparable to Jones-Drew, then the Chiefs will easily replace him.


Well, let's take a look at the possible FA O-linemen in the next coming season worth taking:

Jordan Gross (likely to re-sign with the Panthers since they made the playoffs and have a young team)
Vernon Carey (Miami RT, but no word if he will be re-signed)
Jason Peters (great LT for the Bills, and mentioned his disapproval of the Bills ability reach a contract. However, it is unlikely the Bills will let him go, since Peters still wants to be part of the team.

Out of the three best linemen available, only one is a question mark. So what O-line do you see building through free agency? The Chiefs have a better chance of drafting 4 linemen (which I am not suggesting we do, I'm a defense guy) and by your logic, finding two starters which would be the number the Chiefs need.

Charles may not be the starter but he can fill a role like Norwood did for Atlanta. Charles is worth keeping.

Drunker Hillbilly
12-31-2008, 05:08 PM
When your right your right! Almost 1800 yds is just not acceptable! BTW, I noticed you only named 2 other RB's. Why is this?

theaxeeffect4311
12-31-2008, 05:32 PM
When your right your right! Almost 1800 yds is just not acceptable! BTW, I noticed you only named 2 other RB's. Why is this?

Read the post and you will see why I named two other running backs...

:sign0104:

Drunker Hillbilly
12-31-2008, 05:37 PM
Read the post and you will see why I named two other running backs...

:sign0104:
Oh no, quit name calling!

I did read it. Your implying that he would not have been a top back in the league with as many carries.

chief31
12-31-2008, 05:38 PM
When your right your right! Almost 1800 yds is just not acceptable! BTW, I noticed you only named 2 other RB's. Why is this?

559 in '07 and 874 in '08 are pretty damn unimpressive though.

Drunker Hillbilly
12-31-2008, 05:43 PM
559 in '07 and 874 in '08 are pretty damn unimpressive though.
So was EVERY other aspect of the team! I guess you think Adrian Peterson would have had the same numbers he had this year if he were on the Chiefs eh?

jmlamerson
12-31-2008, 05:50 PM
So was EVERY other aspect of the team! I guess you think Adrian Peterson would have had the same numbers he had this year if he were on the Chiefs eh?

I think you're missing everyone's point. We're not saying that LJ is bad. We're saying he's replacable. Almost all RBs are.

If you take almost any durable back and feed him the ball 20+ times a game for 16 games, he will end up with 1000-1200 yards.

LJ's success was based on his strong OL, his durability, and his large number of carries more than anything else.

Drunker Hillbilly
12-31-2008, 05:56 PM
I think you're missing everyone's point. We're not saying that LJ is bad. We're saying he's replacable. Almost all RBs are.

If you take almost any durable back and feed him the ball 20+ times a game for 16 games, he will end up with 1000-1200 yards.

LJ's success was based on his strong OL, his durability, and his large number of carries more than anything else.
I totally understand your point but my feeling is that his attitude is a product of not getting the ball. No he is not a scholar citizen but most of the problems would go away if he got the ball. He is a bit of a diva. However based on the numbers, if he had gotten the ball anywhere near the number of times A. Peterson got the ball. even with this pathetic line, his numbers would be in the same ballpark as Petersons. To me, thats impressive! So, if you all are saying that the only reason you want to trade him is because he was a jerk, great I get that but by no means do I think he is washed up. Nor do I think we can get a back whether it be in FA or the draft that will be more productive than LJ has in his years as a Chief.

chief31
12-31-2008, 05:58 PM
So was EVERY other aspect of the team! I guess you think Adrian Peterson would have had the same numbers he had this year if he were on the Chiefs eh?

Same as LJ? Or same as he did with The Vikings this season?

I think his numbers would have been much closer to LJs.

But you don't want any excuses for why LJs '06 yards weren't all that amazing. So there are no excuses for his '07 and '08 numbers either.

Personally, I think that there are variables that factor in. But, when those variables show LJ in a lesser light, you dismiss them. Then, you turn right around and start screaming about variables that show LJ in a positive light.

1789 rushing yards in a season is very good. Period. But, if it took 416 carries, then it isn't as good as when others did it.

But you refuse to acknowledge that.

You only acknowledge variables that look good for LJ.

Drunker Hillbilly
12-31-2008, 06:02 PM
Same as LJ? Or same as he did with The Vikings this season?

I think his numbers would have been much closer to LJs.

But you don't want any excuses for why LJs '06 yards weren't all that amazing. So there are no excuses for his '07 and '08 numbers either.

Personally, I think that there are variables that factor in. But, when those variables show LJ in a lesser light, you dismiss them. Then, you turn right around and start screaming about variables that show LJ in a positive light.

1789 rushing yards in a season is very good. Period. But, if it took 416 carries, then it isn't as good as when others did it.

But you refuse to acknowledge that.

You only acknowledge variables that look good for LJ.
What I acknowledge is the fact that he got the job done. I don't care how many times it took. If that is the best part of your offense then use it! Which again, if he would have gotten the carries that anyone in the top 5 had gotten, it still would have been the most productive part of our offense. BTW, there are variables for everything said on this site. If my aunt had balls she'd be my uncle! Also, I was referring to Peterson running behind the Chiefs line. His numbers would have been far worse you do agree correct?

jmlamerson
12-31-2008, 06:03 PM
I totally understand your point but my feeling is that his attitude is a product of not getting the ball. No he is not a scholar citizen but most of the problems would go away if he got the ball. He is a bit of a diva. However based on the numbers, if he had gotten the ball anywhere near the number of times A. Peterson got the ball. even with this pathetic line, his numbers would be in the same ballpark as Petersons. To me, thats impressive! So, if you all are saying that the only reason you want to trade him is because he was a jerk, great I get that but by no means do I think he is washed up. Nor do I think we can get a back whether it be in FA or the draft that will be more productive than LJ has in his years as a Chief.

Yeah, but as I (painfully) showed you, his numbers (18.6/game) were above average for RBs until his suspension. It wasn't until his suspension that his numbers of carries dipped to 14.4/game.

You've got the cause and effect backwards.

Drunker Hillbilly
12-31-2008, 06:06 PM
Yeah, but as I (painfully) showed you, his numbers (18.6/game) were above average for RBs until his suspension. It wasn't until his suspension that his numbers of carries dipped to 14.4/game.

You've got the cause and effect backwards.
And as painfully as it is to say yet again to you is that I don't believe his suspension occurs if he were happy on the football field. Work affect people's lives away from their jobs every single day. I bet it affects you sometimes.

chief31
12-31-2008, 06:07 PM
I totally understand your point but my feeling is that his attitude is a product of not getting the ball. No he is not a scholar citizen but most of the problems would go away if he got the ball. He is a bit of a diva. However based on the numbers, if he had gotten the ball anywhere near the number of times A. Peterson got the ball. even with this pathetic line, his numbers would be in the same ballpark as Petersons. To me, thats impressive! So, if you all are saying that the only reason you want to trade him is because he was a jerk, great I get that but by no means do I think he is washed up. Nor do I think we can get a back whether it be in FA or the draft that will be more productive than LJ has in his years as a Chief.


He would have gotten the ball a whole lot more, had he been successful with the ball, as we would have been able to stick with Herms "run it down your throat" offense.

But the fact that he couldn't move the ball and get first downs, coupled with horrible QB protection, forced a change in offensive style. A style thatgets the HB the ball a whole lot less.

It's amazing that you blame a horrible O-line for LJs poor output. But lobby against drafting early O-line.

jmlamerson
12-31-2008, 06:14 PM
And as painfully as it is to say yet again to you is that I don't believe his suspension occurs if he were happy on the football field. Work affect people's lives away from their jobs every single day. I bet it affects you sometimes.

I'm sure the Chiefs overall crappiness contributed some. But it wasn't a lack of carries. That's the difference. The Chiefs gave LJ the ball more than average until his suspension. LJs unhappiness stemmed from the performance of the team, not his workload in it. Which makes him unprofessional, not underworked.

leaves
12-31-2008, 06:15 PM
I fully believe that AP would have a 1000 yd season on any of the 32 teams. I do think LJ could've been used much more effiently and OL couldve been better, but of the strong backs out there, AP isn't one to compare to LJ.

Drunker Hillbilly
12-31-2008, 06:17 PM
He would have gotten the ball a whole lot more, had he been successful with the ball, as we would have been able to stick with Herms "run it down your throat" offense.

But the fact that he couldn't move the ball and get first downs, coupled with horrible QB protection, forced a change in offensive style. A style thatgets the HB the ball a whole lot less.

It's amazing that you blame a horrible O-line for LJs poor output. But lobby against drafting early O-line.
I don't lobby against drafting O line early. I lobby against drafting 3 or 4 of them with our fisrt 3 or 4 picks! They will not all pan out! History shows this.

As far as LJ goes, if he gets 100 more carries, which still puts him outside of most in the top 10, at 4.2 yds per carry gives him over 1200 I believe. I know that an extra 400 yds rushing would have won us a few more games.

theaxeeffect4311
12-31-2008, 06:18 PM
I totally understand your point but my feeling is that his attitude is a product of not getting the ball. No he is not a scholar citizen but most of the problems would go away if he got the ball. He is a bit of a diva. However based on the numbers, if he had gotten the ball anywhere near the number of times A. Peterson got the ball. even with this pathetic line, his numbers would be in the same ballpark as Petersons. To me, thats impressive! So, if you all are saying that the only reason you want to trade him is because he was a jerk, great I get that but by no means do I think he is washed up. Nor do I think we can get a back whether it be in FA or the draft that will be more productive than LJ has in his years as a Chief.

LJ- 416 carries for 1789 yards for a 4.3 average.
LT- 348 carries for 1815 yard for a 5.2 average.
MJD (rookie season, 2nd round selection)- 166 carries for 941 yards for a 5.7 average.

What does this tell me? LJ was not the best even when he ran for the most carries. Is he really that great then? You have made the argument (maybe not this thread though) that LJ would be up there with the top RBs this season if he had more carries. But the season where he had the most carries, he was not even the best RB. Then you look at Jones-Drew in his rookie season. Less than have the half the carries of LJ and he received over half the yard LJ did. Is LJ that dominant then? Looks to me that if we can get a second round pick for LJ, and have the ability to get a running back comparable to Jones-Drew, then the Chiefs will easily replace him.

This is exactly what I said earlier. I'm saying again because maybe you will see that LJ's number are not great. They are above average at best. The fact that we ran him into the ground and he got 1789 yards does not mean he can do it again.

Drunker Hillbilly
12-31-2008, 06:20 PM
LJ- 416 carries for 1789 yards for a 4.3 average.
LT- 348 carries for 1815 yard for a 5.2 average.
MJD (rookie season, 2nd round selection)- 166 carries for 941 yards for a 5.7 average.

What does this tell me? LJ was not the best even when he ran for the most carries. Is he really that great then? You have made the argument (maybe not this thread though) that LJ would be up there with the top RBs this season if he had more carries. But the season where he had the most carries, he was not even the best RB. Then you look at Jones-Drew in his rookie season. Less than have the half the carries of LJ and he received over half the yard LJ did. Is LJ that dominant then? Looks to me that if we can get a second round pick for LJ, and have the ability to get a running back comparable to Jones-Drew, then the Chiefs will easily replace him.

This is exactly what I said earlier. I'm saying again because maybe you will see that LJ's number are not great. They are above average at best. The fact that we ran him into the ground and he got 1789 yards does not mean he can do it again.
And they'll sure never know unless they at least give it a shot!!!

theaxeeffect4311
12-31-2008, 06:22 PM
And they'll sure never know unless they at least give it a shot!!!

How can we hand him the ball 26 times (that is how many carries he averaged a game in 2006) a game if we go three and out and play from behind?

chief31
12-31-2008, 06:27 PM
I don't lobby against drafting O line early. I lobby against drafting 3 or 4 of them with our fisrt 3 or 4 picks! They will not all pan out! History shows this.

You lobby against taking a serious approach to the O-line....See below


We can not continue to take chances on O linemen who don't pan out more often than not around the entire league!!


As far as LJ goes, if he gets 100 more carries, which still puts him outside of most in the top 10, at 4.2 yds per carry gives him over 1200 I believe. I know that an extra 400 yds rushing would have won us a few more games.

Like I said, if he did anything with the ball when we were giving it to him, then we wouldn't have had to make a desperate change to the offensive philosophy.

Drunker Hillbilly
12-31-2008, 06:28 PM
How can we hand him the ball 26 times (that is how many carries he averaged a game in 2006) a game if we go three and out and play from behind?
We did do that a bunch but I think giving him the ball more would have been more productive than what we got out of any of the QB's that we started. Horrible TO ratio.

Big Daddy Tek
12-31-2008, 06:29 PM
How can we hand him the ball 26 times (that is how many carries he averaged a game in 2006) a game if we go three and out and play from behind?

We couldn't hand him the ball 26 times, even if we do have a lead. Jamal Charles is a 10-12 touch back, not even a 10-12 carry back. His entire career, he will be the lighting to somebodies thunder. Hopefully he proves me wrong, but before he can even do that he will have to learn to hold onto the ball. At this point in his career, he couldn't wipe LJ's A$$, much less replace him. Like I said, maybe that all changes, I hope it does cause JC is exciting.

chief31
12-31-2008, 06:35 PM
We couldn't hand him the ball 26 times, even if we do have a lead. Jamal Charles is a 10-12 touch back, not even a 10-12 carry back. His entire career, he will be the lighting to somebodies thunder. Hopefully he proves me wrong, but before he can even do that he will have to learn to hold onto the ball. At this point in his career, he couldn't wipe LJ's A$$, much less replace him. Like I said, maybe that all changes, I hope it does cause JC is exciting.

A pile of manure could accomplish what LJ has the past two seasons. With the obvious exception of abusing women. :lol:

Drunker Hillbilly
12-31-2008, 06:36 PM
A pile of manure could accomplish what LJ has the past two seasons. With the obvious exception of abusing women. :lol:
I am wondering how you would have faired? Hmmm? Not comparing you to manure or anything!:lol:

chief31
12-31-2008, 06:39 PM
I am wondering how you would have faired? Hmmm? Not comparing you to manure or anything!:lol:

Very nice.

But I would have done about as well as the current pile, known as LJ. :D

Drunker Hillbilly
12-31-2008, 06:41 PM
Very nice.

But I would have done about as well as the current pile, known as LJ. :D
Wanna bet on that too? I WILL do the research for this one!!

chief31
12-31-2008, 06:47 PM
Wanna bet on that too? I WILL do the research for this one!!

Too? So we are go on the other?

If you can get me a starting HB job with The Chiefs in '08, then it's on!:lol:

theaxeeffect4311
12-31-2008, 06:48 PM
We couldn't hand him the ball 26 times, even if we do have a lead. Jamal Charles is a 10-12 touch back, not even a 10-12 carry back. His entire career, he will be the lighting to somebodies thunder. Hopefully he proves me wrong, but before he can even do that he will have to learn to hold onto the ball. At this point in his career, he couldn't wipe LJ's A$$, much less replace him. Like I said, maybe that all changes, I hope it does cause JC is exciting.

I was talking about LJ. I know that Charles is not a premiere back, but do not underestimate him. The Chiefs barely used him this season. To the Chiefs, he is a Jerious Norwood. But Charles is still exciting to watch, just like Norwood. Charles could have 12 carries and be a good back.

Big Daddy Tek
12-31-2008, 06:52 PM
A pile of manure could accomplish what LJ has the past two seasons. With the obvious exception of abusing women. :lol:

Have you noticed a trend the past two seasons? Keep thinking about it. Have you figured it out yet? BINGO! You got it! Everybody has sucked the past two years. Good DB's have had to cover for too long, linebackers have been overpowered by lineman that were supposed to be taken by our D-lineman, no running back has been able to do anything because of our awful O-line, every Quarterback before Tyler has completly failed and even he had a rough time, and last but not least, our Head Coach who took 4 out of his first 6 teams to the playoffs has won 6 games. Does that mean that they all suck? No it means that when your team is this bad, especially your lines, you cannot do anything with any other position. if your mad bacause LJ spit in some loud mouth b!tches face, than fine, but I dont wanna hear how LJ sucks. You seen what he did with a good line. Herms first year when he broke the Carries record, shortened his career and ran for nearly 1800 yards (which you show no respect for and that disgusts me), the O-line was terrible. Kyle Turley, John Welbourn, Chris Bober, gimme a break. It has only gotten worse since then. By the way LJ ran for almost 900 yards and missed 4 games this year. Throw in games that he received under 12 carries and youve got a pretty good argument that LJ "is the man". I know you hate everybody, but you have to be realistic at one point also. JC wants to be LJ when he grows up.

Big Daddy Tek
12-31-2008, 06:53 PM
I was talking about LJ. I know that Charles is not a premiere back, but do not underestimate him. The Chiefs barely used him this season. To the Chiefs, he is a Jerious Norwood. But Charles is still exciting to watch, just like Norwood. Charles could have 12 carries and be a good back.

100% agree and good comparison

chief31
01-01-2009, 01:44 AM
Have you noticed a trend the past two seasons? Keep thinking about it. Have you figured it out yet? BINGO! You got it! Everybody has sucked the past two years. Good DB's have had to cover for too long, linebackers have been overpowered by lineman that were supposed to be taken by our D-lineman, no running back has been able to do anything because of our awful O-line, every Quarterback before Tyler has completly failed and even he had a rough time, and last but not least, our Head Coach who took 4 out of his first 6 teams to the playoffs has won 6 games. Does that mean that they all suck? No it means that when your team is this bad, especially your lines, you cannot do anything with any other position. if your mad bacause LJ spit in some loud mouth b!tches face, than fine, but I dont wanna hear how LJ sucks. You seen what he did with a good line. Herms first year when he broke the Carries record, shortened his career and ran for nearly 1800 yards (which you show no respect for and that disgusts me), the O-line was terrible. Kyle Turley, John Welbourn, Chris Bober, gimme a break. It has only gotten worse since then. By the way LJ ran for almost 900 yards and missed 4 games this year. Throw in games that he received under 12 carries and youve got a pretty good argument that LJ "is the man". I know you hate everybody, but you have to be realistic at one point also. JC wants to be LJ when he grows up.

I know LJ is a pretty good runner. I reluctantly say it alot.

But that doesn't change the outcome of his performance over these past two seasons.

And noone is more aware that he woulda shoulda coulda done alot better, with better circumstances.

I was basically just hassling DH by casing LJ.

I do have my issues with LJ. Namely his refusal to take on blocking assignments, spiteful behaviour toward women and his lack of effort when asked to do something that is not running between the tackles.

But I openly admit that he is a good runner, between the Tackles.

Now, staggering his stats to make it look like he had some great season is weak.

Do the same with Charles, and it makes LJ look bad again.

leaves
01-02-2009, 03:01 PM
that Norwood connection is a good comparison, and he really is like Jerious was his rookie yr. Idk why we don't let the "speed demon" go on special teams.

theaxeeffect4311
01-02-2009, 07:04 PM
that Norwood connection is a good comparison, and he really is like Jerious was his rookie yr. Idk why we don't let the "speed demon" go on special teams.

I don't know. I understand if you don't want the guy to get hurt, but come on. Let the kid play. I liked how many times he made the big play.

greg3564
01-02-2009, 10:27 PM
I was talking about LJ. I know that Charles is not a premiere back, but do not underestimate him. The Chiefs barely used him this season. To the Chiefs, he is a Jerious Norwood. But Charles is still exciting to watch, just like Norwood. Charles could have 12 carries and be a good back.

Charles reminds a lot of Priest Holmes. Everyone underestimated Priest in the pros and he produced the goods. Charles is the same. He can run up the middle. Will he move a pile? Probably not. But when he slips through, he's gone. There were a lot of naysayers when he played at Texas and he proved them, and opposing teams, wrong in a big way.

YouTube - Jamaal Charles

tornadospotter
01-02-2009, 10:41 PM
YouTube - Priest holmes

theaxeeffect4311
01-03-2009, 01:15 AM
Charles reminds a lot of Priest Holmes. Everyone underestimated Priest in the pros and he produced the goods. Charles is the same. He can run up the middle. Will he move a pile? Probably not. But when he slips through, he's gone. There were a lot of naysayers when he played at Texas and he proved them, and opposing teams, wrong in a big way.


If Charles is the second coming of Priest Holmes I would be so happy. Not because Priest is my favorite Chiefs player, but because Priest did whatever it took to win. He elevated the game of those around him. However, I have to say that Charles has more speed than Priest, so it will be interesting to see how Charles develops. If he can hit the weight room but not lose speed, this kid could be scary especially if he is paired with another good back.

tornadospotter
01-03-2009, 01:22 AM
If Charles is the second coming of Priest Holmes I would be so happy. Not because Priest is my favorite Chiefs player, but because Priest did whatever it took to win. He elevated the game of those around him. However, I have to say that Charles has more speed than Priest, so it will be interesting to see how Charles develops. If he can hit the weight room but not lose speed, this kid could be scary especially if he is paired with another good back.
A Tony Richards type of full back, can cox become that. But let us not forget about Kolby Smith.

theaxeeffect4311
01-03-2009, 01:33 AM
A Tony Richards type of full back, can cox become that. But let us not forget about Kolby Smith.

I like Kolby Smith. He actually reminds me of Priest more than Charles. Smith does not look impressive which is why he was probably taken in the fifth round. However, he does well on the field, just like Priest. Smith looks like he can run inside or out, and always fall forward for a positive gain. If we can get a great full back to open holes for him and Charles, we do not need another running back once we trade LJ off.

Big Daddy Tek
01-03-2009, 01:54 AM
I like Kolby Smith. He actually reminds me of Priest more than Charles. Smith does not look impressive which is why he was probably taken in the fifth round. However, he does well on the field, just like Priest. Smith looks like he can run inside or out, and always fall forward for a positive gain. If we can get a great full back to open holes for him and Charles, we do not need another running back once we trade LJ off.

Kolby played awful this year. Savage looked better than him in regular season play. I would love for him to emerge as a great runner, but Im pretty sure that wont happen. He has no burst and average lateral movement and thats what Priest was known for. I dont agree with the comparison.

theaxeeffect4311
01-03-2009, 02:08 AM
Kolby played awful this year. Savage looked better than him in regular season play. I would love for him to emerge as a great runner, but Im pretty sure that wont happen. He has no burst and average lateral movement and thats what Priest was known for. I dont agree with the comparison.

I did not seem much out of him this season either, but I think the Chiefs re-sign him cheap in the offseason. Before his season ending injury, they just did not use him much. I guess I make the comparison based more on last year than this season. He had a couple of good games and did not fumble once. I see Smith as having the potential to develop into a great player. We can disagree on this because I do not mind there being only one Priest Holmes.

tornadospotter
01-03-2009, 02:28 AM
I did not seem much out of him this season either, but I think the Chiefs re-sign him cheap in the offseason. Before his season ending injury, they just did not use him much. I guess I make the comparison based more on last year than this season. He had a couple of good games and did not fumble once. I see Smith as having the potential to develop into a great player. We can disagree on this because I do not mind there being only one Priest Holmes.
Amen:11:

m0ef0e
01-05-2009, 06:34 PM
I really like Charles but don't think he's durable enough to be an every-down back.

RedZones
01-06-2009, 05:20 PM
I agree with a comment stated earlier: Good teams in todays NFL have two good RB's, and Thunder type runner for btwn the Tackels and a Lightning like Charles that can hit a big play at any given point in the game. (NYG jacobs and ward, MIA Brown and Williams, DAL Barber and Jones, CAR Williams and Stewart, BAL McGahee and McClain, etc.)

I feel that Charles should get 10-15 touches per game (outside runs/ Screens/etc.) We should get rid of LJ in a trade to help with another position (DE, LB, OL) or for high draft picks.

Then we should sign Derrick Ward from the giants, since they wont be able to afford to keep both him and Jacobs (we have the cap room). Or like someone else has stated, Draft Shonn Green RB from Iowa to carry the load (100+ yds rushing in every game this season! possibly one game he missed the mark, but still that is impressive) the second option will be alot cheaper than the first.

leaves
01-06-2009, 05:42 PM
I agree someone like Shonn Green would be a nice fit, if we actually get rid of LJ. And tornado, I gotta give praise for your little Kolby note cuz I like the kid as well. He looks bad when he gets hit before he can hit the hole, but I also saw him consistently get 5+ yardage after LJ effed up, and then they pulled him off. I also saw Charles look pretty bad on half his carries.

Chiefstillidie
01-07-2009, 02:42 PM
well i still like charles better then smith anyday

leaves
01-08-2009, 10:46 PM
I didn't, but now I think Kolby's gonna be worse after the injury. It'd be nice if we could grab a guy like Sproles in the offseason and a big back in draft.

Hayvern
01-09-2009, 02:43 AM
There are so many factors in this that the argument of Johnson being good or not cannot be laid completely at Johnson's feet.

For instance, when a team gets behind, you cannot run the ball as often, if JOhnson needs 25 carries in a game and will break one or two for 20 yards or more, then that is perfectly fine if the defense can keep you in the game to make the yards.

The defense being out of the equation, when you get a score or two down, you cannot afford to go three and out anymore, you have to put up some yards. Johnson is not good enough to be able to be relied upon to get enough yards to bring you back in the game. Especially behind the offensive line we have.

How many plays from within the 10 yard line did we run this season where we failed to score? I remember one game where we had something like 12 plays from within the 12 yard line and could not run, pass or any other way get the ball into the end zone.

That is just plane stupid and if Johnson WAS the kind of back that his fans claim he is, then having that many chances could have resulted in 6 points.

In the early days Johnson benefited from an awesome offensive line, when that line left, we found out just what kind of player we had.

I would be willing to keep the guy if he was somewhat more like Gonzales where he was teaching the players good sportsmanship and mentoring off the field, but he is not doing that. There are no good points for Johnson being on this team right now.

greg3564
01-09-2009, 06:11 PM
I didn't, but now I think Kolby's gonna be worse after the injury. It'd be nice if we could grab a guy like Sproles in the offseason and a big back in draft.

That's exactly who Charles is. When I was watching the game last weekend, I swore I was watching Charles. Charles just hasn't had the number of carries per game week in and week out. We'll see next year, as I think he get's elevated to the starting position with another power back for short yardage situations.

leaves
01-10-2009, 02:56 PM
I'm just not a big Charles fan to be honest. I do think with a solid #1 powerback he'd be successful, but the thing I like about Sproles is that he runs with power. He plants his feet into the ground and pushes off where as Charles does more treading. JC (that feels weird) reminds me more of Reggie Bush than Darren Sproles.

theaxeeffect4311
01-11-2009, 03:27 AM
I'm just not a big Charles fan to be honest. I do think with a solid #1 powerback he'd be successful, but the thing I like about Sproles is that he runs with power. He plants his feet into the ground and pushes off where as Charles does more treading. JC (that feels weird) reminds me more of Reggie Bush than Darren Sproles.

I can see why you would say that, but I say give Charles time. In college, Charles would go from football in the fall/winter, then track in the spring. Which means he did not do much weight lifting that other football players do. Now that he is in the NFL, I see him bulking up more. On top of that, if he learns better ball security and ball carry vision, he'll be a great back whether he's carrying the load or a change of pace back. Charles will either turn out like Reggie Bush or Chris Johnson (it's weird to compare him to two young players). After watching Johnson today, I believe a speed RB can carry the load of the team. So it just matters on how Charles develops.

RedZones
01-11-2009, 01:38 PM
I agree that if CHarles can bulk up a bit more, we could rely on him as the starting back. Then we really could afford to get rid of LJ and draft a back like Shonn Green.

I also agree with the comment about keeping LJ if he was more like Gonzalez. A humble well rounded individual that is a good influence on the young players. Johnson has so much baggage, and bad habbits... you don't want the team to turn into the Bengals, look what Chad Johnson and Chris Henry have done there, bad decisions outside of football = bad, undiciplined play on the football field.

So bulk up abit Charles and give us hope! you could be the next LT in this league.

Coach
01-11-2009, 11:00 PM
I like Kolby Smith. He actually reminds me of Priest more than Charles.
Me too.


I agree with a comment stated earlier: Good teams in todays NFL have two good RB's, and Thunder type runner for btwn the Tackels and a Lightning like Charles that can hit a big play at any given point in the game. (NYG jacobs and ward, MIA Brown and Williams, DAL Barber and Jones, CAR Williams and Stewart, BAL McGahee and McClain, etc.)

I feel that Charles should get 10-15 touches per game (outside runs/ Screens/etc.) We should get rid of LJ in a trade to help with another position (DE, LB, OL) or for high draft picks.

Then we should sign Derrick Ward from the giants, since they wont be able to afford to keep both him and Jacobs (we have the cap room). Or like someone else has stated, Draft Shonn Green RB from Iowa to carry the load (100+ yds rushing in every game this season! possibly one game he missed the mark, but still that is impressive) the second option will be alot cheaper than the first.

Good post. I also think Shonn Green out of Iowa could be a good between the tackles runner. Last I saw, he was slated to be the 5th RB taken. Probably lands in the 3rd-4th round. I think the Chiefs could get that kind of pick out of LJ. Then we would have a very young talented "between the tackles" RB with fresh legs to compliment Jamaal Charles. Kolby Smith also could serve this purpose and provide some depth.

I'd take Shonn Green for less money and with a better attitude before I would take a ball hungry, poor attitude LJ. Don't get me wrong, I think LJ is the perfect compliment to Jamaal Charles. It just doesn't seem that LJ wants to split time or become that kind of a back. He also wants out of KC.

leaves
01-12-2009, 01:00 PM
I cannot believe I'm finding some fellow Kolby fans, this is awesome. I do forget that Charles was such a big track man, he could bulk up a good 5-10lbs. I think with the weight he'll lose speed, but run more like a RB. Also, I would absolutely love to see Shonn Green, the only thing with strong,power backs is that they usually need the load of carries in order to weardown defenses. If our staff can accept letting a rookie take the load, I believe Charles and Smith would benefit greatly. With Shonn Green/Rashad Jennings/Eric Kettani-types we could get the similar backfield to Dallas or NYG.

RedZones
01-12-2009, 07:42 PM
Yeah I like Shonn Green too, and I don't see why our coaches would have a problem letting him tote the tough running load.

We are starting to see a lot of young talents specialist in the NFL. I believe these last few year, and the two to three years to come will be the next generation in the NFL.

Look at what rookie running backs have done in the last 2-3 years.

This year: Chris Johnson, Matt Forte, Johnathan Stewart, Steve Slaton, Leronn McClain, Kevin Jones, Jamal Charles, BenJarves Green-Ellis, and Felix Jones, Ryan Torain, and McFadden before they got hurt

Last Year: Marshawn Lynch, Adrian Peterson, Ryan Grant

Two years ago: Joeseph Addai, Mo Jones-Drew, Reggie Bush, De Angelo Williams,

We have seen some potential HOF backs drafted in these past three years. Why not have the Cheifs get rid of LJ for potentially a dimond in the rough like Shonn Green? What else do we have to loose?

leaves
01-12-2009, 09:45 PM
The RB generation has def. caught up. I believe TE's have already caught up, WR's are going to start, and soon Defensive players are gonna have to start becoming more universally dynamic too.