Jamaal Charles is the future of the chiefs anyways

[Chiefstillidie]

goodbye LJ

[theaxeeffect4311]

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]

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]

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...

[Drunker Hillbilly]

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

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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]

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?