Page 7 of 11 FirstFirst ... 34567891011 LastLast
Results 61 to 70 of 105

Thread: Jamaal Charles is the future of the chiefs anyways

  1. #1
    Member Since
    Dec 2008
    Location
    kansas
    Posts
    122
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Default Jamaal Charles is the future of the chiefs anyways


    0 Not allowed!
    goodbye LJ

  2. #61
    Member Since
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,915
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by Drunker Hillbilly View Post
    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.

  3. #62
    Member Since
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Scottsdale,Az
    Posts
    1,292
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by jmlamerson View Post
    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.

  4. #63
    Member Since
    May 2006
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    9,149
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 31
    Given: 27

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by Drunker Hillbilly View Post
    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.

  5. #64
    Member Since
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    1,915
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by Drunker Hillbilly View Post
    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.

  6. #65
    Member Since
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Ct
    Posts
    180
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    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.

  7. #66
    Member Since
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Scottsdale,Az
    Posts
    1,292
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by chief31 View Post
    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.

  8. #67
    Member Since
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    489
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by Drunker Hillbilly View Post
    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.

  9. #68
    Member Since
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Scottsdale,Az
    Posts
    1,292
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by theaxeeffect4311 View Post
    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!!!

  10. #69
    Member Since
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    489
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 0
    Given: 0

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by Drunker Hillbilly View Post
    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?

  11. #70
    Member Since
    May 2006
    Location
    Illinois
    Posts
    9,149
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 31
    Given: 27

    Default


    0 Not allowed!
    Quote Originally Posted by Drunker Hillbilly View Post
    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

    Quote Originally Posted by Drunker Hillbilly View Post
    We can not continue to take chances on O linemen who don't pan out more often than not around the entire league!!
    Quote Originally Posted by Drunker Hillbilly View Post
    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.

Page 7 of 11 FirstFirst ... 34567891011 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •