PDA

View Full Version : Rams' Steven Jackson vs. Chiefs' Larry Johnson


jAZ
11-15-2004, 03:27 PM
I'd like to hear a few comments (from those more knowledgable than me) about why Jackson is considered the future of the Rams after Faulk retires and Johnson is considered a bust.

Based on their build alone, both players seem to Eddie George-type RBs (which isn't in the Faulk/Priest/Blaylock mold). Both were late 1st round draft picks. Both were considered the #1 RB in the draft that season.

Johnson has had fewer opportunities than Jackson, but on the surface the two guys seem to have a LOT in common.

Brock
11-15-2004, 03:28 PM
Without getting too technical, Steven Jackson is the shit, Larry JOhnson just looks like it.

Sure-Oz
11-15-2004, 03:29 PM
we def. lose another LJ needs to get some carreis in.

Bob Dole
11-15-2004, 03:29 PM
As long as Rich Scanlon is not a member of the Kansas City Chiefs active roster on game day, Larry Johnson isn't worth the time it takes to type La

See?

jcroft
11-15-2004, 03:30 PM
In general I agree, but Johnson has done a number of things to not endear himself to fans. Also, i think MOST people around here feel that Priest will still be here another year or two, which means that the Chiefs will have wasted Johnson's youthfull years -- unless they deal him, in which case they're not going to get much, making him a bust. Faulk, on the other hand, is definitely on the down side of his great career and Jackson is getting chances to play NOW. Plus, Faulk probably will retire at the end of this year, making Jackson was more useful.

Redcoats58
11-15-2004, 03:30 PM
Johnson is a bust because he gets no playing time it's that simple. How could he ever become a NFL runningback if they don't give him any carries. Sometimes you just have to let a player sink or swim but the Chiefs coaching staff are afraid to let him play. They made him a bust.

Demonpenz
11-15-2004, 03:38 PM
Stephen Jackson is a fast agile and a BIG back. Larry Johnson is just big. Jackson makes one move and he is in the secondary, johnson makes one move and he is running right into the back of Willie roaf

KCTitus
11-15-2004, 03:42 PM
I'd suggest spending more time in the film room Mister...

HolmeZz
11-15-2004, 03:43 PM
Johnson has had fewer opportunities than Jackson, but on the surface the two guys seem to have a LOT in common.

:shake:

Other than the fact that they were both first round picks, they have virtually nothing in common. Jackson's a big bruising back with speed and Johnson's a little bitch with the speed of a DLineman running backwards. Johnson was actually drafted after an injured Willis McGahee, eventhough Willis might've never stepped on an NFL field. That shows you how much the Bills thought of LJ.

Really, I've watched both play in college and in the NFL, and they're not comparable at all.

kc rush
11-15-2004, 03:44 PM
Johnson is a bust because he gets no playing time it's that simple. How could he ever become a NFL runningback if they don't give him any carries. Sometimes you just have to let a player sink or swim but the Chiefs coaching staff are afraid to let him play. They made him a bust.

Given their current standing, I would hope that the Chiefs run LJ a lot to see once and for all what they have.

Redcoats58
11-15-2004, 03:52 PM
Given their current standing, I would hope that the Chiefs run LJ a lot to see once and for all what they have.
I agree. I don't really care for LJ but if you have used a first rounder on a player you better atleast play him.

jcroft
11-15-2004, 04:18 PM
Johnson was actually drafted after an injured Willis McGahee, eventhough Willis might've never stepped on an NFL field. That shows you how much the Bills thought of LJ.

As much as I'd like to use this against Johnson, I think it says more about how strongly the Bills felt about McGahee than about how poorly they felt about LJ. They had a very decent starting RB (Henry) and drafted McGahee anyway because they believed he could be an uber-stud in the future. Very different situation than us, who drafted a RB because Priest was hurt and he may need to be able to step and play right away.

Thig Lyfe
11-15-2004, 04:21 PM
Well, LJ sucks for one thing.

Saulbadguy
11-15-2004, 04:21 PM
We ruined Larry Johnsons career.

HolmeZz
11-15-2004, 04:47 PM
As much as I'd like to use this against Johnson, I think it says more about how strongly the Bills felt about McGahee than about how poorly they felt about LJ. They had a very decent starting RB (Henry) and drafted McGahee anyway because they believed he could be an uber-stud in the future. Very different situation than us, who drafted a RB because Priest was hurt and he may need to be able to step and play right away.

There was a very good chance that McGahee would've never even played a down though. If LJ was that good, they would've taken him over a guy who had just tore his ACL.

jAZ
11-15-2004, 04:50 PM
There was a very good chance that McGahee would've never even played a down though. If LJ was that good, they would've taken him over a guy who had just tore his ACL.
Buffalo was in a position to get a #1 overall quality RB at the end of the 1st round. The only risk was that they would have to rely on one of the best RBs in the league if things don't work out.

Solid move on their part, IMO.

HolmeZz
11-15-2004, 04:54 PM
Exactly. They clearly didn't think LJ was at Willis' level, even with a torn up knee.

jAZ
11-15-2004, 05:04 PM
Exactly. They clearly didn't think LJ was at Willis' level, even with a torn up knee.
We almost agree... They didn't think a healthy Johnson had a healthy McGahee's potential. No one did. They were in a safe enough position to take a risk on McGahee.

That's not quite the same as saying that a healthy LJ is worse than at injured McGahee, IMO.

Thig Lyfe
11-15-2004, 05:06 PM
We almost agree... They didn't think a healthy Johnson had a healthy McGahee's potential. No one did. They were in a safe enough position to take a risk on McGahee.

That's not quite the same as saying that a healthy LJ is worse than at injured McGahee, IMO.

A mentally disabled anteater with a stress fracture and an ear infection is better than LJ healthy.

jcroft
11-15-2004, 05:26 PM
A mentally disabled anteater with a stress fracture and an ear infection is better than LJ healthy.

Bold statement for someone you've never seen play in the NFL.

Mr. Laz
11-15-2004, 05:30 PM
A mentally disabled anteater with a stress fracture and an ear infection is better than LJ healthy.
.

ChiefsCountry
11-15-2004, 05:32 PM
If Peterson wasn't a dipsh*t, LJ would be playing for the Titans right now and we would have a CB or LB helping out our defense.

el borracho
11-15-2004, 05:33 PM
Don't you know the difference yet? All the Chiefs' players suck, while everbody else's players rule. That is why we are Chiefs fans.

HolmeZz
11-15-2004, 05:33 PM
Bold statement for someone you've never seen play in the NFL.

Except for last week against Tampa. And then the carries he got last year.

LJ's just not a good NFL back. Look no further than the fact that he can't even beat out a 5th round draft pick for the #2 spot on the depth chart. There's a reason he doesn't see the field alot. It's because he sucks.

Logical
11-15-2004, 05:36 PM
Top 3 reasons LJ is never going to measure up to Stephen Jackson

1. Stephen Jackson has burst (big time)
2. Stephen Jackson can block
3. Stephen Jackson has good vision for gaps

Thig Lyfe
11-15-2004, 05:40 PM
Bold statement for someone you've never seen play in the NFL.

Larry Johnson vs TB Attempts: 10 Yards: 21 Average: 2.1 Long: 11

Enough said.

Bob Dole
11-15-2004, 05:40 PM
Don't you know the difference yet? All the Chiefs' players suck, while everbody else's players rule. That is why we are Chiefs fans.

That doesn't even make any sense.

You're a dipshit.

jcroft
11-15-2004, 05:53 PM
Except for last week against Tampa. And then the carries he got last year.

LJ's just not a good NFL back. Look no further than the fact that he can't even beat out a 5th round draft pick for the #2 spot on the depth chart. There's a reason he doesn't see the field alot. It's because he sucks.

Dude, I was referring to the anteater. Everyone can see that LJ sucks.

Thig Lyfe
11-15-2004, 06:01 PM
Dude, I was referring to the anteater. Everyone can see that LJ sucks.

ROFL

Logical
11-15-2004, 06:13 PM
Dude, I was referring to the anteater. Everyone can see that LJ sucks.ROFL

jAZ
11-15-2004, 06:32 PM
Dude, I was referring to the anteater. Everyone can see that LJ sucks.
ROFL

Thig Lyfe
11-15-2004, 06:43 PM
RUNNING BACK OF THE FUTURE

http://www.alinereptiles.com/image092803/mammals/New%20born%20baby%20anteater.jpg

HolmeZz
11-15-2004, 06:47 PM
That reminds me more of LJ than Steven Jackson does.

Ralphy Boy
11-15-2004, 07:14 PM
There was a very good chance that McGahee would've never even played a down though. If LJ was that good, they would've taken him over a guy who had just tore his ACL.

"a good chance that McGahee would've never played a down.."
That isn't even close to the truth. EVERYTHING I saw prior to the draft was that McGahee had made a very suprising & strong recovery, it was just a matter of WHEN, not IF, he'd be ready to play.

Having said that, most everyone was shocked that Buffalo took him because they did have Henry and needed help in other positions and many fans were unhappy about it at the time.

Like someone else said, it wasn't a dig at LJ that they didn't take him, but rather showed just how highly they thought of McGahee. Everyone thought he'd be the #1 or #2 pick in the draft prior to his injury and he was considered an all world talent. Given that they had Henry, they could afford to give McGahee time to heal and now they are damn glad they did.

Sure-Oz
11-15-2004, 07:16 PM
I wonder if LJ can avg 3.7 ypc like Mcgahee?

Logical
11-15-2004, 07:20 PM
I wonder if LJ can avg 3.7 ypc like Mcgahee?

Not likely, especially in the Chiefs offense which is not the least bit suited to his running style.

Thig Lyfe
11-16-2004, 03:33 PM
That is a newborn baby anteater by the way. Also a better RB than LJ.