PDA

View Full Version : Bennett: Herm wants 580 carries this season


dirk digler
08-30-2006, 12:15 PM
Micheal Bennett was on 810 this morning and said that Herm told him they are targeting 580 carries for the season for the team.

I am not very good at math but that is 36.25 carries per game. Poor LJ he may not last to see his next contract.

Messier
08-30-2006, 12:19 PM
But give 10 of those carries a game to Bennett.

Count Alex's Losses
08-30-2006, 12:19 PM
You're not very bright, are you?

The Chiefs ran the ball 520 times last year.

You're only talking about 4 more rushes per game, and we have a quality backup this year. LJ isn't going to run it 36 times a game, geez.

jAZ
08-30-2006, 12:19 PM
I'm guessing MB is pointing that out because he expects to see more carries than a #2 RB might otherwise expect.

rad
08-30-2006, 12:20 PM
That doesn't mean LJ is getting all those carries. We do have more than one running back, you know.

LJ was on ESPN last night and said he needs at least 30 carries to get going. I can live with Bennett getting 5-8 carries per game.

dirk digler
08-30-2006, 12:25 PM
You're not very bright, are you?

The Chiefs ran the ball 520 times last year.

You're only talking about 4 more rushes per game, and we have a quality backup this year. LJ isn't going to run it 36 times a game, geez.

I realized that we ran the ball 520 times last year but you do realize that if LJ gets over 400 carries like they want him to do this may limit his career. So do decide to run him in the ground or not?

BTW this is what Petro was talking about today that when the last few RB's who reached the 400 carry plateau they have fallen off dramatically or their careers have ended.

Curtis Martin
Jamal Anderson
Terrell Davis
Jamal Lewis

Brock
08-30-2006, 12:28 PM
JMO, but Bennett isn't your average backup RB. I'm betting he's going to carry the ball quite a bit.

Count Alex's Losses
08-30-2006, 12:28 PM
LJ isn't going to carry it 400 times this year.

Pitt Gorilla
08-30-2006, 12:30 PM
You're not very bright, are you?

The Chiefs ran the ball 520 times last year.

You're only talking about 4 more rushes per game, and we have a quality backup this year. LJ isn't going to run it 36 times a game, geez.The thing is, LJ WANTS 30+ carries a game. He was on ESPN yesterday talking about how he doesn't get "warmed up" until 30 carries or so. If you watched him in college, this wouldn't be too surprising; they ran him all the time. I don't think he would hold up to the pounding, but the guy wants the rock...a lot...

Mecca
08-30-2006, 12:31 PM
The thing is, LJ WANTS 30+ carries a game. He was on ESPN yesterday talking about how he doesn't get "warmed up" until 30 carries or so. If you watched him in college, this wouldn't be too surprising; they ran him all the time. I don't think he would hold up to the pounding, but the guy wants the rock...a lot...

That's to many.........he'll set the record for carries and have a 3 year career. I'd rather not shorten his career dramatically so he can break the single season record.

Count Alex's Losses
08-30-2006, 12:34 PM
If you watched him in college, this wouldn't be too surprising; they ran him all the time.

Larry had 271 carries as a senior in 13 games.

Reerun_KC
08-30-2006, 12:37 PM
If it was up to herm we would line up in goal line every down and try to win games 3-0.

dirk digler
08-30-2006, 12:37 PM
LJ isn't going to carry it 400 times this year.

He got 336 last year, 9 in which he started or was it 7 I can't remember.

400 carries in a 16 game season is 25 carries per game. You don't think he will get 25 carries per game?

Count Alex's Losses
08-30-2006, 12:39 PM
400 carries in a 16 game season is 25 carries per game. You don't think he will get 25 carries per game?

No.

We're going to be shortening the games, and we have Bennett.

dirk digler
08-30-2006, 12:41 PM
From ESPN.com

Although he started only nine games in 2005, not moving into the lineup until Holmes was lost to neck and back injuries that might still threaten his career, Johnson registered big numbers. In his nine starts, Johnson went over 100 yards every game, with seven outings of 130 or more yards and a pair of 200-yard performances. During the starting stretch, Johnson carried 261 times for 1,351 yards and 16 touchdowns. In only one of the nine games did he fail to score, and he had six multiple-touchdown games, with two contests in which he scored three times.

Extrapolate those numbers over a 16-game season and here's what you get: 464 carries, 2,402 yards, and 28 touchdowns.

OK, so hand any back the ball 464 times in a season -- the league record for rushes is 410, established by Jamal Anderson of Atlanta in 1998, and only three men have ever posted 400 carries in a year -- and his legs might fall off. But Johnson embraces the workhorse tag and feels he gets better with more work in a game, and opponents concur.

Wile_E_Coyote
08-30-2006, 12:42 PM
if Bettis was the bus, that will make LJ the caterpiller

dirk digler
08-30-2006, 12:45 PM
No.

We're going to be shortening the games, and we have Bennett.

You do realize in last week's preseason game he had 9 carries in 1 quarter and Herm was bitching about us not running in certain situations?

KC had 39 rushes last game.

LJ will easily get 25 carries a game or he won't be a happy camper.

Count Alex's Losses
08-30-2006, 12:47 PM
Preseason is not regular season.

LJ won't get 400 carries this year!

jspchief
08-30-2006, 12:52 PM
LJ will get 25-26 carries per game, and Bennett will get 10-12. There's your 580.

It will be a lot of running, but it's not inconceivable.

Personally, I'd prefer something closer to 22 and 10-12 giving us about 30-35 rushes per game.

picasso
08-30-2006, 12:54 PM
Bennet won't get 12 carries a game if he fumbles all of the time.

milkman
08-30-2006, 12:55 PM
From ESPN.com

Although he started only nine games in 2005, not moving into the lineup until Holmes was lost to neck and back injuries that might still threaten his career, Johnson registered big numbers. In his nine starts, Johnson went over 100 yards every game, with seven outings of 130 or more yards and a pair of 200-yard performances. During the starting stretch, Johnson carried 261 times for 1,351 yards and 16 touchdowns. In only one of the nine games did he fail to score, and he had six multiple-touchdown games, with two contests in which he scored three times.

Extrapolate those numbers over a 16-game season and here's what you get: 464 carries, 2,402 yards, and 28 touchdowns.

OK, so hand any back the ball 464 times in a season -- the league record for rushes is 410, established by Jamal Anderson of Atlanta in 1998, and only three men have ever posted 400 carries in a year -- and his legs might fall off. But Johnson embraces the workhorse tag and feels he gets better with more work in a game, and opponents concur.

Every RB feels they get stronger as tehy get more carries.

If LJ gets 400 carries, his body will begin breaking down, and his career will be shortened.

350-370 carries would be just about the ideal number, with Bennett getting the rest.

One thing to note, Parker posted a stat with regards to Marty that showed that the Chiefs, under Marty, eclipsed 500 carries only 5 times.

580 carries is a ridiculous number.

dirk digler
08-30-2006, 12:56 PM
LJ will get 25-26 carries per game, and Bennett will get 10-12. There's your 580.

It will be a lot of running, but it's not inconceivable.

Personally, I'd prefer something closer to 22 and 10-12 giving us about 30-35 rushes per game.

Yep.

Gochiefs if you believe Herm is more conservative than AS or DV look at the 9 games LJ started last year and tell me he won't run the ball as much or more. These are LJ's carries. Only 1 game did he NOT get 25 carries.

Oakland - 22
Buffalo - 27
Houston - 36
NE - 31
Denver - 30
Dallas - 26
NYG - 31
San Diego - 32
Bengals - 26

dirk digler
08-30-2006, 12:57 PM
Every RB feels they get stronger as tehy get more carries.

If LJ gets 400 carries, his body will begin breaking down, and his career will be shortened.

350-370 carries would be just about the ideal number, with Bennett getting the rest.

One thing to note, Parker posted a stat with regards to Marty that showed that the Chiefs, under Marty, eclipsed 500 carries only 5 times.

580 carries is a ridiculous number.

I agree and I am afraid they are going to run LJ into the ground. Here are the rushing totals for the last 3 years under DV/AS.

2005 - 520
2004 - 496
2003 - 446

jspchief
08-30-2006, 12:59 PM
Yep.

Gochiefs if you believe Herm is more conservative than AS or DV look at the 9 games LJ started last year and tell me he won't run the ball as much or more. These are LJ's carries. Only 1 game did he NOT get 25 carries.

Oakland - 22
Buffalo - 27
Houston - 36
NE - 31
Denver - 30
Dallas - 26
NYG - 31
San Diego - 32
Bengals - 26You can't really put too much stock in LJ's carries as a starter last year though because we had nobody else to carry the ball to give him breathers.

If we had a relaible backup behind LJ last year, there's a lot of games where he would have seen much fewer carries.

keg in kc
08-30-2006, 01:00 PM
Personally, I'd prefer something closer to 22 and 10-12 giving us about 30-35 rushes per game.Ditto.

One thing Vermeil often said that I agree with was that they wanted to shoot for 35 passes and 30 rushes per game. That to me would be the perfect balance, with elevated carries in games that warrant that.

JBucc
08-30-2006, 01:00 PM
22 for LJ
12 for Bennett
2 for Cruz

Count Alex's Losses
08-30-2006, 01:03 PM
Bennett isn't going to see 12 carries a game, either.

Also, we'll have a couple games where we fall behind and have to pass 40 times. And of course, a couple games where we blow someone out and LJ is on the bench after rushing 10 times for 100 yards.

brent102fire
08-30-2006, 01:06 PM
LJ said he NEEDS atleast 30 carries per game when he was on ESPN last night. 30 for LJ and 6 for Bennett. Sounds good to me...hopefully, he doesn't get hurt. I guess he could get hurt rushing 15 times a game too... :hmmm:

JBucc
08-30-2006, 01:08 PM
Okay 24 for LJ
8 for Bennett
5 for Trent
5 for Smith
3 for Brown
6 on Reverses for Dante
2 for Cruz

milkman
08-30-2006, 01:08 PM
LJ said he NEEDS atleast 30 carries per game when he was on ESPN last night. 30 for LJ and 6 for Bennett. Sounds good to me...hopefully, he doesn't get hurt. I guess he could get hurt rushing 15 times a game too... :hmmm:

30 carries a game is 480 carries in a season.

That would be both irresponsible and crazy.

Count Alex's Losses
08-30-2006, 01:09 PM
Okay 24 for LJ
8 for Bennett
5 for Trent
5 for Smith
3 for Brown
6 on Reverses for Dante
2 for Cruz

Please shut up.

tk13
08-30-2006, 01:10 PM
I've been harping on this carry thing for a while, I know. But... I don't think we're going to reach that number. Herm keeps saying that, but that's a lot of running. It's possible, I'm not just not sure we'd do it.

I saw that piece on ESPN and heard LJ say he thinks he needs 30 carries a game. The first thing that went in my head was the math, and that was 480 carries, which would obliterate the record. I really wouldn't think that's feasible, but then again we ran him at that pace last year. He's a tough guy though, I think he could do it... although he might very well feel the effects of that in a couple years. I don't think LJ really knows his own limits yet, he hasn't played a full season and taken a full season of pounding. He's still kinda learning that I think, like last year in the Denver game when he took himself out in the 4th quarter because he was just out of gas. I think we'll be okay, but that probably is a small worry, that LJ isn't going to pace himself because he's just full speed ahead all the time.

The one thing in his advantage is he just doesn't have the wear and tear of other RB's cause he sat for 3 years in college and for two years here. That should help. 580 carries is reachable, but it'll be tough. The Steelers led the league last year with 549 carries, and led the league the year before that with 618. They also finished 32nd in pass attempts both years. If we do that and run effectively, we're gonna be tough to beat.

eazyb81
08-30-2006, 01:11 PM
I don't get the concern over "running LJ into the ground" and "shortening his career"....who cares? Most starting RBs have short careers anyways, why not get the most out of him while we can, then let some other team take him off our hands in a few years after he's past his prime. I want what is best for KC, not what is best for LJ's long-term career aspirations.

Also, I think Bennett will get a handful of carries this year, but I think he will play an even larger role in the passing game. I expect to see him line up in the slot and and take a lot of screen passes so we can take advantage of his speed in the open field.

Mecca
08-30-2006, 01:12 PM
Anyone who wants Larry Johnson to carry the ball 400 times in a season is crazy. You'll basically take our best player and cut years off his career.

350 is about the max amount of carries he should have,especially if he gets 30-40 catches.

JBucc
08-30-2006, 01:13 PM
Please shut up.no

Mecca
08-30-2006, 01:14 PM
I don't get the concern over "running LJ into the ground" and "shortening his career"....who cares? Most starting RBs have short careers anyways, why not get the most out of him while we can, then let some other team take him off our hands in a few years after he's past his prime. I want what is best for KC, not what is best for LJ's long-term career aspirations.

Also, I think Bennett will get a handful of carries this year, but I think he will play an even larger role in the passing game. I expect to see him line up in the slot and and take a lot of screen passes so we can take advantage of his speed in the open field.

So you think it's wise to find a great player, burry him in the ground and have to replace him in 2 years.......You can get the most out of him for 5-7 years instead of 3 if you don't do something stupid like give him 400 carries.

What is best for KC isn't destroying the best player on the team, after Jamal Anderson set that record he was basically done......keep that in mind.

Cochise
08-30-2006, 01:15 PM
25 for Johnson, 7-8 for Bennett, the odd one here and there for the fullback or an end around. I mean, I don't write for two football websites or anything, but this does not seem like we're doomed material or anything. Probably just a moderate increase over last year when most people were yelling that we needed to run the ball more anyways.

milkman
08-30-2006, 01:16 PM
I don't get the concern over "running LJ into the ground" and "shortening his career"....who cares? Most starting RBs have short careers anyways, why not get the most out of him while we can, then let some other team take him off our hands in a few years after he's past his prime. I want what is best for KC, not what is best LJ's long-term career aspirations.

Also, I think Bennett will get a handful of carries this year, but I think he will play an even larger role in the passing game. I expect to see him line up in the slot and and take a lot of screen passes so we can take advantage of his speed in the open field.

What's best for the Chiefs is to have a stud RB for 7-8 years, rather than 2-3 years,

The great ones have long careers.

Jim Brown, Walter Payton, Barry Sanders, Emmitt Smith.

I'd rather have a 15-1600 yard back for 7 years than a 3 year wonder.

KC hasn't exactly been a RB factory.

FringeNC
08-30-2006, 01:17 PM
Why does it make sense to have a goal for the number of rushes in the season? I thought the point is to win games, and on offense, the point is to get first downs and score.

Part of me says the offense is going to be just fine...Turley will be okay, the offense won't change, Green is still in charge, etc...

Part of me is a little panicked by all the idiotic talk coming out of Edwards' mouth about changing the offense to be more conservative.

Mecca
08-30-2006, 01:17 PM
25 for Johnson, 7-8 for Bennett, the odd one here and there for the fullback or an end around. I mean, I don't write for two football websites or anything, but this does not seem like we're doomed material or anything. Probably just a moderate increase over last year when most people were yelling that we needed to run the ball more anyways.

Well, Larry Johnsons pace at the end of the season is to high to carry out for a full season.....I think some people don't understand that.

dirk digler
08-30-2006, 01:18 PM
You can't really put too much stock in LJ's carries as a starter last year though because we had nobody else to carry the ball to give him breathers.

If we had a relaible backup behind LJ last year, there's a lot of games where he would have seen much fewer carries.

I think a good indicator of what will happen is if look at the NY Jets Rushing stats in 2004 when they went to the playoffs.

31 yr old Curtis Martin rushed 371 times for an average of 23 carries per game.

LaMont Jordan rushed 93 times for 5.8 carries a game.

Now take into account LJ is alot younger than Martin was and he could easily break the 400 carry mark.

IMHO there is only 2 scenarios where LJ doesn't get 25 carries per game:

1. He is hurt and out of the game
2. We are down by 14 pts or more and we have to throw the ball 40 times.

If we are winning by 10 points or more Herm will ride LJ to 40 carries a game.

eazyb81
08-30-2006, 01:19 PM
So you think it's wise to find a great player, burry him in the ground and have to replace him in 2 years.......You can get the most out of him for 5-7 years instead of 3 if you don't do something stupid like give him 400 carries.

What is best for KC isn't destroying the best player on the team, after Jamal Anderson set that record he was basically done......keep that in mind.

Or we could wisen up and realize the careers of RBs in this league are short, and we should use LJ up while we have him and replace him with a younger guy once he starts to fall off. Denver has done it for years, why can't we do the same thing?

I haven't once mentioned 400+ carries for LJ, all I have said is that i'm not really worried about his long-term career. Only three players have had 400 carries in a season, and I think it's a long shot for LJ to reach that mark this year.

Mecca
08-30-2006, 01:19 PM
Ugh......if he carries it 400 times we'll be drafting a RB in 2 years.

Count Alex's Losses
08-30-2006, 01:20 PM
LJ won't break 40 carries in a single game this year.

Mecca
08-30-2006, 01:21 PM
Or we could wisen up and realize the careers of RBs in this league are short, and we should use LJ up while we have him and replace him with a younger guy once he starts to fall off. Denver has done it for years, why can't we do the same thing?

I haven't once mentioned 400+ carries for LJ, all I have said is that i'm not really worried about his long-term career. Only three players have had 400 carries in a season, and I think it's a long shot for LJ to reach that mark this year.

Wisen up........Larry Johnson looks like an elite back, sure Denver gets production but you can see a difference from when they had Portis to now that they don't. It's just not wise to get a player who has ability that doesn't come along very often and blow it by working him to much.

When you have players that are elite like that you don't run them into the ground you pace them so they're great for 8 years instead of 3....

eazyb81
08-30-2006, 01:22 PM
What's best for the Chiefs is to have a stud RB for 7-8 years, rather than 2-3 years,

The great ones have long careers.

Jim Brown, Walter Payton, Barry Sanders, Emmitt Smith.

I'd rather have a 15-1600 yard back for 7 years than a 3 year wonder.

KC hasn't exactly been a RB factory.

I'm not sure how realistic it is to expect LJ to be a "stud RB" for the next 7-8 years.....RBs break down, that's just the way of the NFL. Let's ride him while he's in his prime, and then replace him with a younger version once he starts to break down. It might not be the most sympathetic thing to do, but it's the smart football decision.

If you haven't noticed, we HAVE been a RB factory the past few years. LJ, Priest Holmes, and Derrick Blaylock have dominated the past few years in this system.

John_Wayne
08-30-2006, 01:23 PM
How many carries, yards and TDs do you think Bennett will get for the season. I think it could be significant. I'd say around 125 carries, 600 yds and 8 TDs. That's just a guess. I really like the signing of Bennet more and more all the time.

Mecca
08-30-2006, 01:25 PM
I'm not sure how realistic it is to expect LJ to be a "stud RB" for the next 7-8 years.....RBs break down, that's just the way of the NFL. Let's ride him while he's in his prime, and then replace him with a younger version once he starts to break down. It might not be the most sympathetic thing to do, but it's the smart football decision.

If you haven't noticed, we HAVE been a RB factory the past few years. LJ, Priest Holmes, and Derrick Blaylock have dominated the past few years in this system.

The offensive line is breaking down too........You should be able to work your RB at a good rate and get 6-8 years....Tomlinson is still going strong of course no one is giving him 400 carries either. I don't like this attitude of "oh well run LJ into the ground we can just get another back".

eazyb81
08-30-2006, 01:28 PM
Wisen up........Larry Johnson looks like an elite back, sure Denver gets production but you can see a difference from when they had Portis to now that they don't. It's just not wise to get a player who has ability that doesn't come along very often and blow it by working him to much.

When you have players that are elite like that you don't run them into the ground you pace them so they're great for 8 years instead of 3....

THERE'S NO GUARANTEE THAT HE WILL BE GREAT FOR 8 YEARS.....that's my entire point. You're making the assumption that he will be awesome the rest of his career if we don't run him a lot, which is impossible to accurately predict.

We know what we have right now, let's allow him to run us into the playoffs. Knock the Denver system all you want, but they continue to be a league leader in rushing every year and it certainly isn't hurting their chances of making the playoffs. LJ is now the 3rd RB that has shown he can be ultra successful running in this system...whos' to say that there can't be a 4th or 5th guy that will surpass him?

rad
08-30-2006, 01:29 PM
Or we could wisen up and realize the careers of RBs in this league are short, and we should use LJ up while we have him and replace him with a younger guy once he starts to fall off. Denver has done it for years, why can't we do the same thing?
I haven't once mentioned 400+ carries for LJ, all I have said is that i'm not really worried about his long-term career. Only three players have had 400 carries in a season, and I think it's a long shot for LJ to reach that mark this year.


Because we're not Denver. Don't go there.

No one here is saying preserve LJ at the cost of losing games or rushing attempts. We have a decent backup that can give him a rest once in a while, on third and short, whatever.

Why shouldn't LJ have a long productive career?

milkman
08-30-2006, 01:30 PM
I'm not sure how realistic it is to expect LJ to be a "stud RB" for the next 7-8 years.....RBs break down, that's just the way of the NFL. Let's ride him while he's in his prime, and then replace him with a younger version once he starts to break down. It might not be the most sympathetic thing to do, but it's the smart football decision.

If you haven't noticed, we HAVE been a RB factory the past few years. LJ, Priest Holmes, and Derrick Blaylock have dominated the past few years in this system.

Blaylock looked like a good B/U behind this line, but I never thought he was dominating.

And this line is beginning to transition.

Would Blaylock have looked as behind a line without Roaf?

Premier backs last a longer time.

Yeah, you want to ride a stallion, but even stallions need to be paced in order to maximise their efficiency.

eazyb81
08-30-2006, 01:31 PM
The offensive line is breaking down too........You should be able to work your RB at a good rate and get 6-8 years....Tomlinson is still going strong of course no one is giving him 400 carries either. I don't like this attitude of "oh well run LJ into the ground we can just get another back".

What? San Diego has worked LT to death his 5 years in this league. He averages around 340 carries a year but also has never had less than 51 receptions in a year....he is a workhorse.

Mecca
08-30-2006, 01:32 PM
THERE'S NO GUARANTEE THAT HE WILL BE GREAT FOR 8 YEARS.....that's my entire point. You're making the assumption that he will be awesome the rest of his career if we don't run him a lot, which is impossible to accurately predict.

We know what we have right now, let's allow him to run us into the playoffs. Knock the Denver system all you want, but they continue to be a league leader in rushing every year and it certainly isn't hurting their chances of making the playoffs. LJ is now the 3rd RB that has shown he can be ultra successful running in this system...whos' to say that there can't be a 4th or 5th guy that will surpass him?

The Kansas City Chiefs don't have the best line in football.......we are not going to make the likes of Derrick Blaylock look awesome anymore.

No it's not proven that he'll be great for 8 years but it is proven if a player runs the ball 400+ times in 1 year, you will ruin his career.

Mecca
08-30-2006, 01:33 PM
What? San Diego has worked LT to death his 5 years in this league. He averages around 340 carries a year but also has never had less than 51 receptions in a year....he is a workhorse.

Like I said 350 should be the max carries for Larry Johnson.....330-350 is fine, when you start approaching 400 that's a problem.

eazyb81
08-30-2006, 01:33 PM
Because we're not Denver. Don't go there.

No one here is saying preserve LJ at the cost of losing games or rushing attempts. We have a decent backup that can give him a rest once in a while, on third and short, whatever.

Why shouldn't LJ have a long productive career?

Show me where I said LJ shouldn't have a long career? I would love for him to be productive for 10+ years, but i'm not willing to cut down on his touches when we need him just for the sake of possibly extending his career a couple more years when he might not even be on our team anymore.

rad
08-30-2006, 01:35 PM
THERE'S NO GUARANTEE THAT HE WILL BE GREAT FOR 8 YEARS.....that's my entire point. You're making the assumption that he will be awesome the rest of his career if we don't run him a lot, which is impossible to accurately predict.

We know what we have right now, let's allow him to run us into the playoffs. Knock the Denver system all you want, but they continue to be a league leader in rushing every year and it certainly isn't hurting their chances of making the playoffs. LJ is now the 3rd RB that has shown he can be ultra successful running in this system...whos' to say that there can't be a 4th or 5th guy that will surpass him?


Let's ride him while he's in his prime, and then replace him with a younger version once he starts to break down


There's also no guarantee another back like LJ will just "come along".

A bird in the hand....

dirk digler
08-30-2006, 01:36 PM
The Kansas City Chiefs don't have the best line in football.......we are not going to make the likes of Derrick Blaylock look awesome anymore.

No it's not proven that he'll be great for 8 years but it is proven if a player runs the ball 400+ times in 1 year, you will ruin his career.

yep.

Most Attempts, Season
410 Jamal Anderson, Atlanta, 1998
407 James Wilder, Tampa Bay, 1984
404 Eric Dickerson, L.A. Rams, 1986

kregger
08-30-2006, 01:36 PM
I wonder what Trent thinks of this offensive strategy. On one hand, his body will feel better just handing the ball off 35 times a game. The guy is a 4000 yd passer and there is a certain amount of pride in continuing a passing philosophy.
Of course he may just want the ring and riding the coattails of LJ sits fine with him.
I'm all for using LJ a lot and easing the load as the season ends if we look like a playoff team. In the playoffs, give him the ball 40 times.

eazyb81
08-30-2006, 01:36 PM
Like I said 350 should be the max carries for Larry Johnson.....330-350 is fine, when you start approaching 400 that's a problem.

I'm not sure why you keep mentioning 400 rushes to me, i've already mentioned that I have never brought up LJ and 400 carries. I could care less how many carries he gets this season, I just think it's silly to limit him or worry about what he will be like in 2014 if we rush him too much this season.

Mecca
08-30-2006, 01:36 PM
Show me where I said LJ shouldn't have a long career? I would love for him to be productive for 10+ years, but i'm not willing to cut down on his touches when we need him just for the sake of possibly extending his career a couple more years when he might not even be on our team anymore.

If you want him to carry it 400 times he'll be done when he's still on our team........We'll be replacing him in 2 years, that's the kind of effect it will have.

milkman
08-30-2006, 01:38 PM
THERE'S NO GUARANTEE THAT HE WILL BE GREAT FOR 8 YEARS.....that's my entire point. You're making the assumption that he will be awesome the rest of his career if we don't run him a lot, which is impossible to accurately predict.

We know what we have right now, let's allow him to run us into the playoffs. Knock the Denver system all you want, but they continue to be a league leader in rushing every year and it certainly isn't hurting their chances of making the playoffs. LJ is now the 3rd RB that has shown he can be ultra successful running in this system...whos' to say that there can't be a 4th or 5th guy that will surpass him?

Your and idiot.

LJ looks like he could be that rare back that combines speed, athleticism, vision, and power that could dominate for years.

Those kind of backs don't come around every day.

But go ahead, burn him out in 2-3 years.

I'm sure you'll just be able to find a replacement that's as good, or better.

No problem. :rolleyes:

Mecca
08-30-2006, 01:38 PM
I'm not sure why you keep mentioning 400 rushes to me, i've already mentioned that I have never brought up LJ and 400 carries. I could care less how many carries he gets this season, I just think it's silly to limit him or worry about what he will be like in 2014 if we rush him too much this season.

Because if you keep pounding him over and over he'll get an ungodly amount of carries. If the Chiefs plan on running the ball almost 600 times Michael Bennett should be thrilled because he should see over 200 carries in that type of ridiculous amount of running.

rad
08-30-2006, 01:39 PM
Show me where I said LJ shouldn't have a long career? I would love for him to be productive for 10+ years, but i'm not willing to cut down on his touches when we need him just for the sake of possibly extending his career a couple more years when he might not even be on our team anymore.


My point is we don't need him to have alot of touches (if he maintains or stays close to his 5.2 avg.) when we have a proven backup.

eazyb81
08-30-2006, 01:42 PM
Your and idiot.

Awesome joke, that's only the 50th time i've seen that on here the last week.....you're pretty clever.

LJ looks like he could be that rare back that combines speed, athleticism, vision, and power that could dominate for years.

Those kind of backs don't come around every day.

But go ahead, burn him out in 2-3 years.

I'm sure you'll just be able to find a replacement that's as good, or better.

No problem. :rolleyes:

Yes, he will be "burned" in 2 years because we gave him 20 more carries.....where do you come up with this crap?

milkman
08-30-2006, 01:42 PM
What? San Diego has worked LT to death his 5 years in this league. He averages around 340 carries a year but also has never had less than 51 receptions in a year....he is a workhorse.

Tomlinson has had one season with over 350 rushes.

dirk digler
08-30-2006, 01:43 PM
Your and idiot.

LJ looks like he could be that rare back that combines speed, athleticism, vision, and power that could dominate for years.

Those kind of backs don't come around every day.

But go ahead, burn him out in 2-3 years.

I'm sure you'll just be able to find a replacement that's as good, or better.

No problem. :rolleyes:

Couldn't agree more.

The question becomes would anyone run LJ into the ground for a SB ring?

eazyb81
08-30-2006, 01:45 PM
My point is we don't need him to have alot of touches (if he maintains or stays close to his 5.2 avg.) when we have a proven backup.

And my point is that we should worry about this season, not how LJ's career MIGHT turn out in 7-8 years. If we need to give him 360 carries this year, so be it. If we need to give him 300 carries this year, again, so be it. I want what's best for this team this year, not what might be best for LJ at the end of his career. Just my 2 cents.

Mecca
08-30-2006, 01:45 PM
I can't believe this guy really thinks that an excessive amount of touches won't take years off LJ's career.

Also if he gets a huge load his YPC won't be as high either seeing as he's going to be dead by the end of the year.

Hoover
08-30-2006, 01:45 PM
I think LJ would tell you he would run himself into the ground for a SB ring.

Mecca
08-30-2006, 01:46 PM
Couldn't agree more.

The question becomes would anyone run LJ into the ground for a SB ring?

Do you think this team can win the Bowl? We aren't guarenteed winning the Bowl even if we do that.......what if we run him into the ground for nothing......

Brock
08-30-2006, 01:47 PM
I can't believe this guy really thinks that an excessive amount of touches won't take years off LJ's career.

Also if he gets a huge load his YPC won't be as high either seeing as he's going to be dead by the end of the year.

The point is moot. That isn't going to happen. They brought Bennett in to keep that from happening.

eazyb81
08-30-2006, 01:47 PM
Tomlinson has had one season with over 350 rushes.

.......And?

Before you even mention it, I'M NOT ADVOCATING HIM RUSHING 400+ TIMES THIS YEAR.

dirk digler
08-30-2006, 01:48 PM
Do you think this team can win the Bowl? We aren't guarenteed winning the Bowl even if we do that.......what if we run him into the ground for nothing......

Anything is possible. Since this team is quite a bit older and this maybe the last year for some of these guys would you risk it to get Will Shields, Trent Green, TonyG a SB ring?

kregger
08-30-2006, 01:48 PM
Do you think this team can win the Bowl? We aren't guarenteed winning the Bowl even if we do that.......what if we run him into the ground for nothing......
We have to make the playoffs before any of this SB crap starts. As Pburg showed last year, you only got to get there.

Mecca
08-30-2006, 01:49 PM
The point is moot. That isn't going to happen. They brought Bennett in to keep that from happening.

I know but if they really run the ball that many times either LJ is going to have more than he should or Bennett is going to have almost 200 carries which is obscene for a backup.

eazyb81
08-30-2006, 01:50 PM
I can't believe this guy really thinks that an excessive amount of touches won't take years off LJ's career.


And I can't believe you're so in love with LJ that you would rather cap his carries this year, rather than do whatever it takes to make a playoff run.

If LJ were reading this thread he would want to bitch slap you.

Mecca
08-30-2006, 01:50 PM
Anything is possible. Since this team is quite a bit older and this maybe the last year for some of these guys would you risk it to get Will Shields, Trent Green, TonyG a SB ring?

I need to see the team play in a real game first...notable the defense. If they aren't dramatically better this team isn't going to be able to win a bowl even with Larry Johnson running it 35 times. So right now I'd say I don't think it's worth it.

dirk digler
08-30-2006, 01:50 PM
The point is moot. That isn't going to happen. They brought Bennett in to keep that from happening.

I don't know about that Brock, as I said earlier in the thread in 2004 Herm ran Curtis Martin 371 times with LaMont Jordan as the backup.

LJ is alot younger than Martin was so I could easily see him getting over 400 carries.

milkman
08-30-2006, 01:52 PM
Awesome joke, that's only the 50th time i've seen that on here the last week.....you're pretty clever.

It's not a joke.



]Yes, he will be "burned" in 2 years because we gave him 20 more carries.....where do you come up with this crap?

You're posting in a thread that's talking about the Chiefs attempting to run the ball 580 times, and are suggesting that we ride LJ for most of that.

I don't get the concern over "running LJ into the ground" and "shortening his career"....who cares? Most starting RBs have short careers anyways, why not get the most out of him while we can, then let some other team take him off our hands in a few years after he's past his prime. I want what is best for KC, not what is best for LJ's long-term career aspirations.

So unless a "handful of carries" is equal to or greater than 200, then, without specifically stating numbers, you are implying that we should give LJ the ball 400+ times.

And you also said you don't care about shortening his career.

[QUOTE=idiot}Also, I think Bennett will get a handful of carries this year, but I think he will play an even larger role in the passing game. I expect to see him line up in the slot and and take a lot of screen passes so we can take advantage of his speed in the open field.[/QUOTE]

Reerun_KC
08-30-2006, 01:53 PM
You know, everyone presumes we are going to be leading every game and we can run the ball that way.

Remember we still are the KC Chiefs, Hermie (throw my OC under a bus before the season starts) Edwards is our Coach, I wouldnt read to much into that.

I have a feeling we are going to send a Tynes to the Pro Bowl for the most FG's ever by a team during a season.

rad
08-30-2006, 01:53 PM
And my point is that we should worry about this season, not how LJ's career MIGHT turn out in 7-8 years. If we need to give him 360 carries this year, so be it. If we need to give him 300 carries this year, again, so be it. I want what's best for this team this year, not what might be best for LJ at the end of his career. Just my 2 cents.

Look, my only point is we don't need to run LJ into the ground to win games because Bennett can lighten the load. It's just stupid to run 1 back that many times when you don't have to. Not looking 5 yrs. down the road, looking towards December. January. When we may have must- win games to make the playoffs and the playoffs themselves. It's a luxury to have the running backs we have.

tk13
08-30-2006, 01:56 PM
Personally, with Trent having audible power, I don't think we'll reach these numbers. But maybe we will. I think once we get into the games it's easy to get carried away with LJ though. I mean, the guy's a beast, why wouldn't you want to give him the rock. It will be interesting to watch, you know LJ is never going to want to come out of the game.

milkman
08-30-2006, 01:58 PM
.......And?

Before you even mention it, I'M NOT ADVOCATING HIM RUSHING 400+ TIMES THIS YEAR.

And the next season he struggled through aches and pains, missing a game due to issues.

Had he carried the ball the same number of times that year, he would have flamed out by this time.

eazyb81
08-30-2006, 02:02 PM
It's not a joke.

I hope it was a joke, or else you have the spelling skills of a 3 year old. Your And Idiot.....haha, awesome dude! Kudos on the sweet burn!


You're posting in a thread that's talking about the Chiefs attempting to run the ball 580 times, and are suggesting that we ride LJ for most of that.

Obviously you have severe reading comprehension issues, so I will post my point yet again for the slow guy. IT IS STUPID TO CAP LJ'S CARRIES AT THIS POINT IN HIS CAREER. No, I am not suggesting LJ should have 400 carries, nor am I suggesting any set amount of carries. It's football, players careers are over in an instant. We shouldn't concern ourself with worrying about LJ's career in 7,8 years, we should do what's best for the Chiefs RIGHT NOW.

eazyb81
08-30-2006, 02:04 PM
And the next season he struggled through aches and pains, missing a game due to issues.

Had he carried the ball the same number of times that year, he would have flamed out by this time.

Umm, actually, while he only carried the ball 313 times the following season, he also had 100 receptions. 413 touches in the season, but somehow, someway, he's still going strong.....weird, huh?

Mecca
08-30-2006, 02:04 PM
I hope it was a joke, or else you have the spelling skills of a 3 year old. Your And Idiot.....haha, awesome dude! Kudos on the sweet burn!




Obviously you have severe reading comprehension issues, so I will post my point yet again for the slow guy. IT IS STUPID TO CAP LJ'S CARRIES AT THIS POINT IN HIS CAREER. No, I am not suggesting LJ should have 400 carries, nor am I suggesting any set amount of carries. It's football, players careers are over in an instant. We shouldn't concern ourself with worrying about LJ's career in 7,8 years, we should do what's best for the Chiefs RIGHT NOW.

Until the Chiefs show any kind of defense they won't be winning the Superbowl so explain to me how it's a good move to burry Larry Johnson if he gets us nothing.......

jspchief
08-30-2006, 02:05 PM
400 carries isn't some magical number that kills a RB.

A lot of RBs have surpassed the 400 carry mark by the time you include the playoffs. Alexander had 430 attempts last year.

Of course you'd like to limit the amount of carries your RB gets to prolong his career. But it's not like LJ's going to get 400 carries just for the sake of doing it. If that happens, it will because of an injury to Bennett or Green that forces LJ to put the team on his shoulders. Who here would be willing to stop using our only offensive weapon, in the middle of the playoff hunt, just because he's approaching an "attempts in a season" benchmark?

I think a lot of these comments from Herm are being taken too literally. It's not his gameplan won't be fluid enough to alter the chances of getting to his "ideal attempts per game" if the game dictates taking a different path.

Iowanian
08-30-2006, 02:06 PM
If 580 carries a year for the next 3 seasons gets my eyes a look at the Chiefs in the superbowl....or a 3rd playoff game in a season.....let it be done.

Johnson already feels he is a year or two behind his goals, and wants the rock....when you've got a horse that wants to pull the wagon, and will pull it harder than the others...get out the lash.

HI YAAAAAAAH 27! Hiii YAAAAAAAAAaaaaaaah 27!


"saving him" and not accomplishing anything, doesn't do anything for this fan.


I think game situations will dictate the carries alot more than any of herm's pregame planning.

If the team is up by 3tds...carries go up....vs a bomb throwing team....carries go up.

Mecca
08-30-2006, 02:08 PM
400 carries isn't some magical number that kills a RB.

A lot of RBs have surpassed the 400 carry mark by the time you include the playoffs. Alexander had 430 attempts last year.

Of course you'd like to limit the amount of carries your RB gets to prolong his career. But it's not like LJ's going to get 400 carries just for the sake of doing it. If that happens, it will because of an injury to Bennett or Green that forces LJ to put the team on his shoulders. Who here would be willing to stop using our only offensive weapon, in the middle of the playoff hunt, just because he's approaching an "attempts in a season" benchmark?

I think a lot of these comments from Herm are being taken too literally. It's not his gameplan won't be fluid enough to alter the chances of getting to his "ideal attempts per game" if the game dictates taking a different path.

Over the playoffs yes then they'll go over 400 especially a guy like Alexander who made the Superbowl but that's in 19 games. 400 in 16 games is a pretty ridiculous pace.

eazyb81
08-30-2006, 02:09 PM
"saving him" and not accomplishing anything, doesn't do anything for this fan.

Mecca
08-30-2006, 02:10 PM
And this team still doesn't have the defense to go to the Superbowl so we'd basically be blowing out Larry Johnson to not accomplish anything.

milkman
08-30-2006, 02:10 PM
I hope it was a joke, or else you have the spelling skills of a 3 year old. Your And Idiot.....haha, awesome dude! Kudos on the sweet burn!

The spelling is a part of the lexicon, but that doesn't change the fact that you are a ****ing idiot.

I am not trying to "burn", i'm just stating facts as I see them.

Obviously you have severe reading comprehension issues, so I will post my point yet again for the slow guy. IT IS STUPID TO CAP LJ'S CARRIES AT THIS POINT IN HIS CAREER. No, I am not suggesting LJ should have 400 carries, nor am I suggesting any set amount of carries. It's football, players careers are over in an instant. We shouldn't concern ourself with worrying about LJ's career in 7,8 years, we should do what's best for the Chiefs RIGHT NOW.

So, please define "handful" for me.

As I said, you stated that Bennett will get a "handful" of carries, which leaves a hell of a lot of carries on the table.

I would contend that your math skills are questionable, since you obviously can't figure out that a handful subtracted from 580 equals a shitload of carries.

Basileus777
08-30-2006, 02:12 PM
There is no way in hell we reach 580 carries, thats insane.

rad
08-30-2006, 02:13 PM
The spelling is a part of the lexicon, but that doesn't change the fact that you are a ****ing idiot.

I am not trying to "burn", i'm just stating facts as I see them.



So, please define "handful" for me.

As I said, you stated that Bennett will get a "handful" of carries, which leaves a hell of a lot of carries on the table.

I would contend that your math skills are questionable, since you obviously can't figure out that a handful subtracted from 580 equals a shitload of carries.


ROFL ROFL (damn, I hate that new smilie)

jspchief
08-30-2006, 02:13 PM
400 in 16 games is a pretty ridiculous pace.Of course it is. There's a reason it's only happened 3 times in history.

But it's still not some magical number that ruins a RB, regardless of what the trend shows. Hell, Eric Dickerson ran it 390 times his rookie year. Are you telling me 10 more carries would have ruined him?

I'd prefer LJ didn't get 400 carries. But if we're in the playoff hunt down the stretch, and our success is reliant on him running the ball a lot, I fully expect the coaches to ride him to the playoffs.

Mecca
08-30-2006, 02:15 PM
Of course it is. There's a reason it's only happened 3 times in history.

But it's still not some magical number that ruins a RB, regardless of what the trend shows. Hell, Eric Dickerson ran it 390 times his rookie year. Are you telling me 10 more carries would have ruined him?

I'd prefer LJ didn't get 400 carries. But if we're in the playoff hunt down the stretch, and our success is reliant on him running the ball a lot, I fully expect the coaches to ride him to the playoffs.

Like I said, I'd rather him be around the 350 area. And also like I said before, until this defense shows me it's good enough to win in the playoffs. I don't want to be burning out LJ to not accomplish anything, if we had a Superbowl team and could get there that way that's one thing, right now I don't think we have that team.

Iowanian
08-30-2006, 02:16 PM
So....all things being what they are, you'd prefer LJ have 325 carries/season to prolong his career and are willing to risk a half dozen more years of 8-8 9-7 10-6 to keep him healthy?

Every starting RB in the NFL risks injury with every snap they see in a game, or risk a CB/WR rolling into their knee on the sidelines.....

I say, Smokem if you gottem.


And this team still doesn't have the defense to go to the Superbowl so we'd basically be blowing out Larry Johnson to not accomplish anything.

milkman
08-30-2006, 02:16 PM
Umm, actually, while he only carried the ball 313 times the following season, he also had 100 receptions. 413 touches in the season, but somehow, someway, he's still going strong.....weird, huh?

Those catches get him out in space.

He's not taking the physical beating that he does running into the heart of the defensive line and linebackers.

rad
08-30-2006, 02:16 PM
Of course it is. There's a reason it's only happened 3 times in history.

But it's still not some magical number that ruins a RB, regardless of what the trend shows. Hell, Eric Dickerson ran it 390 times his rookie year. Are you telling me 10 more carries would have ruined him?

I'd prefer LJ didn't get 400 carries. But if we're in the playoff hunt down the stretch, and our success is reliant on him running the ball a lot, I fully expect the coaches to ride him to the playoffs.

.........which is why it's good we have a good backup to give him breaks when we can, earlier in the season.

eazyb81
08-30-2006, 02:17 PM
The spelling is a part of the lexicon, but that doesn't change the fact that you are a ****ing idiot.

I am not trying to "burn", i'm just stating facts as I see them.

Calling people names really gets people on your side and helps prove your point. It's certainly not the last attempt to save a losing argument.......really, it's not.


So, please define "handful" for me.

As I said, you stated that Bennett will get a "handful" of carries, which leaves a hell of a lot of carries on the table.

I would contend that your math skills are questionable, since you obviously can't figure out that a handful subtracted from 580 equals a shitload of carries.

I did say Bennett will get a handful of carries, but in case you're mistaken, I am not Herm Edwards or Michael Bennett. Thus, I never once mentioned 580 carries, 400 carries, 2 carries, or any set amount of carries. Since you obviously missed it AGAIN, I will repost my main point, AGAIN.

Obviously you have severe reading comprehension issues, so I will post my point yet again for the slow guy. IT IS STUPID TO CAP LJ'S CARRIES AT THIS POINT IN HIS CAREER. No, I am not suggesting LJ should have 400 carries, nor am I suggesting any set amount of carries. It's football, players careers are over in an instant. We shouldn't concern ourself with worrying about LJ's career in 7,8 years, we should do what's best for the Chiefs RIGHT NOW.

Make sure you think of a witty comeback or name to call me to help deflect the attention away from your awful argumentative skills.

Iowanian
08-30-2006, 02:18 PM
Iowanian Counter Trap right on 2 on 2.


Giving the arguement that conserving LJ's carries per game prolongs his career credibility.....those in this corner should be happy to assume that by increasing his carries, you're reducing the throws of Trent Green, thereby adding 3-5 years to his career in KC.

eazyb81
08-30-2006, 02:19 PM
Those catches get him out in space.

He's not taking the physical beating that he does running into the heart of the defensive line and linebackers.

Getting tackled after a rush and getting tackled after a reception are basically one in the same. You're still getting tackled, and it's taking a toll on your body each time.

Mecca
08-30-2006, 02:20 PM
Iowanian Counter Trap right on 2 on 2.


Giving the arguement that conserving LJ's carries per game prolongs his career credibility.....those in this corner should be happy to assume that by increasing his carries, you're reducing the throws of Trent Green, thereby adding 3-5 years to his career in KC.

That's apples and oranges.........I'm pretty sure you said that as a joke though. :)

rad
08-30-2006, 02:20 PM
So....all things being what they are, you'd prefer LJ have 325 carries/season to prolong his career and are willing to risk a half dozen more years of 8-8 9-7 10-6 to keep him healthy?

Every starting RB in the NFL risks injury with every snap they see in a game, or risk a CB/WR rolling into their knee on the sidelines.....

I say, Smokem if you gottem.

And I say, in 2 yrs. when Green has retired, we'll need LJ to carry this team alot more than we need him to now.

Besides, it's not to prolong his career, it's because we don't have to ride him like we have no one else to run the ball.

milkman
08-30-2006, 02:23 PM
Calling people names really gets people on your side and helps prove your point. It's certainly not the last attempt to save a losing argument.......really, it's not.




I did say Bennett will get a handful of carries, but in case you're mistaken, I am not Herm Edwards or Michael Bennett. Thus, I never once mentioned 580 carries, 400 carries, 2 carries, or any set amount of carries. Since you obviously missed it AGAIN, I will repost my main point, AGAIN.

Obviously you have severe reading comprehension issues, so I will post my point yet again for the slow guy. IT IS STUPID TO CAP LJ'S CARRIES AT THIS POINT IN HIS CAREER. No, I am not suggesting LJ should have 400 carries, nor am I suggesting any set amount of carries. It's football, players careers are over in an instant. We shouldn't concern ourself with worrying about LJ's career in 7,8 years, we should do what's best for the Chiefs RIGHT NOW.

Make sure you think of a witty comeback or name to call me to help deflect the attention away from your awful argumentative skills.

No, you didn't state 580 carries.
That was the subject number in the thread.
That's what we are discussing.

If you also intended to suggest that you didn't think that the Chiefs would approach that number, then you should have stated that, otherwise I'm assuming that you are working off that number.

rad
08-30-2006, 02:23 PM
Iowanian Counter Trap right on 2 on 2.


Giving the arguement that conserving LJ's carries per game prolongs his career credibility.....those in this corner should be happy to assume that by increasing his carries, you're reducing the throws of Trent Green, thereby adding 3-5 years to his career in KC.
ROFL
That's retarded.

(did I mention that I hate that stupid new smilie?)

jspchief
08-30-2006, 02:24 PM
.........which is why it's good we have a good backup to give him breaks when we can, earlier in the season.No doubt. It's why I hoped for the return of Holmes (still do) and why I wanted us to get Bennett.

Michael Bennett has had a 1300 yard season and been to a Pro Bowl. If he stays healthy, there's no reason to believe he won't get in the range of 10 carries per game.

But if him or Green go down, and this team still has a chance to make the playoffs, you can bet your ass that Larry Johnson is going to see 30+ carries a game no matter how much it totals up to.

milkman
08-30-2006, 02:27 PM
Getting tackled after a rush and getting tackled after a reception are basically one in the same. You're still getting tackled, and it's taking a toll on your body each time.

Getting tackled by one, maybe two smaller defenders doesn't take the same toll as getting piled on by 280-300 LB D-Lineman.

rad
08-30-2006, 02:28 PM
No doubt. It's why I hoped for the return of Holmes (still do) and why I wanted us to get Bennett.

Michael Bennett has had a 1300 yard season and been to a Pro Bowl. If he stays healthy, there's no reason to believe he won't get in the range of 10 carries per game.

But if him or Green go down, and this team still has a chance to make the playoffs, you can bet your ass that Larry Johnson is going to see 30+ carries a game no matter how much it totals up to.

I agree. He'll have to.

Iowanian
08-30-2006, 02:29 PM
right Rad....because there is absolutely no chance that in 2-3 seasons when Green is done, that the Chiefs will be able to retain the services of a reasonable starting NFL quarterback. They'll probably have Jeff George taking snaps on a Segway scooter.

"HUT! HUT HUUUUUUUUT! bpppppppppppppppppppp
http://money.cnn.com/2003/03/13/technology/segway/segway.jpg

Mecca
08-30-2006, 02:35 PM
right Rad....because there is absolutely no chance that in 2-3 seasons when Green is done, that the Chiefs will be able to retain the services of a reasonable starting NFL quarterback. They'll probably have Jeff George taking snaps on a Segway scooter.

"HUT! HUT HUUUUUUUUT! bpppppppppppppppppppp
http://money.cnn.com/2003/03/13/technology/segway/segway.jpg

We've been pretty spoiled with Green.......when you look around the league at the QB's that are starting, finding a good starting QB isn't easy.

rad
08-30-2006, 02:35 PM
right Rad....because there is absolutely no chance that in 2-3 seasons when Green is done, that the Chiefs will be able to retain the services of a reasonable starting NFL quarterback. They'll probably have Jeff George taking snaps on a Segway scooter.

"HUT! HUT HUUUUUUUUT! bpppppppppppppppppppp
http://money.cnn.com/2003/03/13/technology/segway/segway.jpg


Hahahah that's funny right there! (I refuse to use the new smilie anymore)

Hopefully Croyle will be ready by then, and we'll be spared Jeff George celebrating a touchdown by doing a few doughnuts on the field in that thing, getting dizzy, and then puking Ensure all over the place.

milkman
08-30-2006, 02:37 PM
Hahahah that's funny right there! (I refuse to use the new smilie anymore)

Hopefully Croyle will be ready by then, and we'll be spared Jeff George celebrating a touchdown by doing a few doughnuts on the field in that thing, getting dizzy, and then puking Ensure all over the place.

L M A O without the spaces.

LMAO

rad
08-30-2006, 02:41 PM
L M A O without the spaces.

LMAO

DUDE!?!?!

Where'd you get that smilie?!?!?!

Mecca
08-30-2006, 02:42 PM
DUDE!?!?!

Where'd you get that smilie?!?!?!

He made it........he's the board MacGyver.

milkman
08-30-2006, 02:43 PM
DUDE!?!?!

Where'd you get that smilie?!?!?!

Follow the instructiom

Type "L M A O" without quotations and spaces.

rad
08-30-2006, 02:45 PM
He made it........he's the board MacGyver.

Well I'm stealing it. I hate that new smilie, in case I forgot to mention that.



edit: I got it now-LMAO LMAO

dirk digler
08-30-2006, 03:19 PM
And this team still doesn't have the defense to go to the Superbowl so we'd basically be blowing out Larry Johnson to not accomplish anything.

We don't know about the D...yet.

Remember in 97 when everyone thought the D wouldn't be that good with young safties back there and we dominated.

I am kind of torn on the issue. If we run LJ 400+ times and win a SB for Green, Shields, Gonzo then I will be a happy mother****er.

But LJ is one of my favorite players and I hope he doesn't end up like Holmes.

wolfpack0735
08-30-2006, 04:20 PM
dont see that many carries this year EXCEPT if Trent goes down or we have alot of big leads. if the defense sucks this year then we`ll have to throw alot to play catch up.

Calcountry
08-30-2006, 04:38 PM
I realized that we ran the ball 520 times last year but you do realize that if LJ gets over 400 carries like they want him to do this may limit his career. So do decide to run him in the ground or not?

BTW this is what Petro was talking about today that when the last few RB's who reached the 400 carry plateau they have fallen off dramatically or their careers have ended.

Curtis Martin
Jamal Anderson
Terrell Davis
Jamal LewisI believe LJ has the chance to be a Walter Payton type back.

How long did he last?

Calcountry
08-30-2006, 04:39 PM
We don't know about the D...yet.

Remember in 97 when everyone thought the D wouldn't be that good with young safties back there and we dominated.

I am kind of torn on the issue. If we run LJ 400+ times and win a SB for Green, Shields, Gonzo then I will be a happy mother****er.

But LJ is one of my favorite players and I hope he doesn't end up like Holmes.He is a little bigger than Holmes.

milkman
08-30-2006, 05:25 PM
I believe LJ has the chance to be a Walter Payton type back.

How long did he last?

Walter Payton's highest total carries for a season was 381, and only had one other season in which he carried the ball over 350 times.

In every other season, he carried the ball 339 times or fewer.

Calcountry
08-30-2006, 05:57 PM
Walter Payton's highest total carries for a season was 381, and only had one other season in which he carried the ball over 350 times.

In every other season, he carried the ball 339 times or fewer.Fine then, thanks for checking all the stats. Lets try to keep him to 320 carries then.

On a side note, it seemed as if Walter carried the rock exclusively back in the day, as in, the Bears couldn't do anything else.

OldTownChief
08-30-2006, 06:58 PM
Herm's and IDIOT for babbling on and on about running the ball all the time and an even bigger idiot for targeting a yearly carries total. Here you've got a very balanced offense, proficient in both, run and pass. Use what you need to use in game situations in order to win those games and SHUT THE **** UP.

Remember MORON, the "last time you checked" we had a pretty good offense.

Logical
08-30-2006, 08:14 PM
LOL I told Parker I thought Herm wanted 610 carries this year and he thought I was nuts. Looks like I was pretty darn close.

bogie
08-30-2006, 08:22 PM
Herm's and IDIOT for babbling on and on about running the ball all the time and an even bigger idiot for targeting a yearly carries total. Here you've got a very balanced offense, proficient in both, run and pass. Use what you need to use in game situations in order to win those games and SHUT THE **** UP.

Remember MORON, the "last time you checked" we had a pretty good offense.

I agree with this. The feeling I get is one major way to fix this team is to change the strategy of the O. WTF? FIX THE D!!!! If you want to change the strategy of the O, fine, some of his points make sence but come on! Give us a soundbite that the O is a proven positive and we are mostly focused on fixing the D.

OldTownChief
08-30-2006, 08:32 PM
I agree with this. The feeling I get is one major way to fix this team is to change the strategy of the O. WTF? FIX THE D!!!! If you want to change the strategy of the O, fine, some of his points make sence but come on! Give us a soundbite that the O is a proven positive and we are mostly focused on fixing the D.

Every time I hear him speak it's almost like he's blaming the offense for the teams failures. I get a gut feeling that I'm going to wish Herm would fall into a iron smelt by game 5. Let Trent run the O and keep your ass out of it Herm.

rad
08-31-2006, 04:23 AM
I hope Herm reads the Planet.

htismaqe
08-31-2006, 08:40 AM
LOL I told Parker I thought Herm wanted 610 carries this year and he thought I was nuts. Looks like I was pretty darn close.

You are nuts.

So is Michael Bennett.