View Full Version : DV's Take on the RB's

07-18-2001, 07:12 AM
VERMEIL: "I see Priest Holmes as a complete package. I don't see him as a Marshall Faulk because there's only one of those guys. But I do see him as a guy that's very reliable, very aggressive, that runs the ball well, blocks for other people carrying the ball well and in pass protection, and catches the ball very well. I see competition. I see (RB) Mike Cloud being a better football player than I came here thinking he was because he didn't get to play much. I see (RB) Frank Moreau maybe being the real sleeper of the whole group. He's about 15 pounds lighter than he was a year ago and has shown real grace and speed. I see (RB) Derrick Blaylock, a rookie that we drafted, as being the most explosive of all of them. Of course, (RB/FB) Tony Richardson might be the most underrated player on the whole football team."

If he is such a good judge of talent, I don't think we should worry too much about our RB's, but we will see.

07-18-2001, 08:59 AM
Vermeil's RB talent evaluation credibility went out the window with the well publicized Lawrence Phillips debacle.

I'd take anything he has to say about RB's with a grain of salt.

I will, however, take Al Saunders word.... Wishing that offensive coordinators got more press time.

Bob Dole
07-18-2001, 09:10 AM
Bob Dole doesn't think DV ever lauded LP as a great back. DV saw him as a back with talent and ability that had huge personal problems and thought he could "save" him. LP <b>did</b> have talent and ability. Unfortunately, he also has a walnut-sized brain and the "save" failed.

Bob Dole doesn't see the situation as a demerit to DV's ability to evaluate running back talent.

07-18-2001, 09:13 AM
You question Vermeil's credibility, which I agree on, but you seem to think that Saunders' words carry more weight.


What,exactly, has he done to warrant such faith?

07-18-2001, 09:18 AM
LOL milkman

It's not necessarily what Saunders has done as what much as it is what he has NOT done.

He has not touted a 3 team loser top 5 pick as RBOTF when proven otherwise over and over.

Certainly, there are much better judges of talent in the NFL and possibly even on the KC payroll, but I was just taking my candidates from the top dogs in KC....

07-18-2001, 09:37 AM
Hopefully we'll find out as we go along that Saunders is a talent evaluator.

You know, if we did hear more from coodinators (defense and offense), I wonder if we would have gotten a glimpse into Gun's inconsistent and insecure personality, and what the overall fan reaction would have been when Gun was named HC?

Pitt Gorilla
07-18-2001, 12:13 PM
Who are you referring to? I don't remember DV naming LP as the "RBOTF." He also was not a three team bust when he was drafted. When had he proved an incapable back over and over BEFORE he joined the Rams?

07-18-2001, 12:23 PM
Vermiel inherited Phillips and had to at least try to make the Lamb's 6th overall pick work out. Just remember, the "Genius" Bill Walsh also thought Phillips had talent. Marty was also going to bring him in for a tryout too before he realized the public outcry wouldn't be worth it...

07-18-2001, 01:00 PM
Sticking with the original topic...

I am jacked about what we might have in Blaylock. It has been exactally 20 years after
Joe Delaney became a member of the Chiefs, and Joe was the most exciting back the
Chiefs have ever had. I somehow feel it is destiny that Blaylock is now on our squad. We
are due to catch a BIG break when it comes to RB's, and courtesy of the Detroit Lions,
Blaylock is on our team. Were it not for the Lions trading up to one spot in front of us, we
would have McMahon from Rutgers instead. Like I stated earlier, I just have a hunch that
this is going to turn out to be a big break for our side.

No, I have never seen Blaylock play. But I like what DV's comment on him is - "being the
most explosive of them all". It has been 20 years since we have had an "explosive" back.
It's been a long wait, but my gut feeling is that come some point in this season, we are
going to be thanking the Lions!

Just a side note to this discussion. DV also stated that Green is been well excepted already
in the lockerroom. Wildcard, here we come!!!

07-18-2001, 01:17 PM
I am also excited about his words on Moreau.

I will never forget his performance in preseason and his explosiveness turning the corner on sweeps.

With an offense actually set up to run the perimiter, he might do very well.

convinced that coaching, playbook, gameplanning, and game day decisions were our problem ~ not personnel...

Lightning Rod
07-18-2001, 01:23 PM
DV is starting to remind me of a politician. He seems to like every thing and every body. Now I don't expect him to be dogging anyone but, I would be nice to at least hear him say something like "he has a lot to prove".

07-18-2001, 02:25 PM

The structure of the sentence in question leaves much to be desired. LP was a miserable failure and did very little in the NFL. Of course much of this happened after he departed StL, but DV still backed both him and Banks up after they proved to be failures while with the team. That was my point and it stands even though I've previously failed to properly convey as much.

Baby Lee
07-18-2001, 03:17 PM
KPhobia - that's properly to convey. . . :)

Otherwise, you are right on the money. At least so far as the past is concerned. One aspect of DV's 'comaraderie' approach is that he develops much love for his players, and suffers in his ability to be critical of them.

07-18-2001, 04:20 PM
The "complete package" Priest Holmes was so great that Baltimore drafted his replacement last year. So much for being "complete". Granted, Holmes is an upgrade to the garbage the Chiefs have had in the backfield the last couple of years. But I have to be honest. Watching film of Priest Holmes reminds me of Donnell Bennett. Donnell Bennett wasnt the answer. I doubt Holmes will be either.

Tribal Warfare
07-18-2001, 04:42 PM
My thoughts on the RB issue, are that Holmes will have to fight off Blaylock all season. Holmes is good but he isn't special,when KC gets that special RB the dimension of the whole offense will expand dramatically. Derrick Blaylock could be that special player.

07-18-2001, 04:54 PM
I guess you have film of Holmes just lying around the house that you can just check out any time.

Watching film of Holmes reminds you of Donnell Bennett?
Uhhh.....That comparison really lends credibility to your knowledge of football.

Oh, and before you start telling me how as a Chief fan I just put on my blinders and just pimp all players that the Chiefs sign, I am not one that thinks Priest is the answer to the Chiefs RB woes, so don't waste effort using that to tell me how I don't know anything about football.

07-18-2001, 05:11 PM
Two words:



07-18-2001, 05:48 PM
Originally posted by KCJohnny
Two words:



Two more words: Decent Fullback.

California Injun
07-18-2001, 06:10 PM
Well this certainly clears up the RB positional depth chart.

This sounds like a freaking RBBC all over again!!!:mad:

07-18-2001, 07:30 PM
NoCal said it, not me (I thought it, but decided against providing another opportunity for the planet party line to smother me).
Innocent bystander:eek:

07-19-2001, 12:23 AM
Watching film of Priest Holmes reminds me of Donnell Bennett.

I truly do not know what game film you have been watching(personally I don't think you watched any) Preist Holmes reminds you of Donnell Bennett, how? Donnell Bennett 6'0 240lbs has caught a grand total of 51 balls in his 7yr pro career, Bennett has a inside run mentality with inside running skills, Holmes 5'9 205lbs on the other hand caught 32 balls last year alone being a b/u, Holmes prefers to work in space out on the edge of the field. I am sorry but really I have not seen someone so incompetent on players in such along time

07-19-2001, 12:33 AM
I just figured out what the Planet party line is that Johnny keeps refering to.
Disagree with anything and everything that Johnny spews.

But why wasn't I told about this?
Guess since I was already so diageeable with Johnny, you didn't feel the need to include me, right?

07-19-2001, 12:35 AM
We won't see Blaylock much as a rookie, but maybe later. As for now, Priest (who is nothing at all like Bennett) will carry the load and be spelled by Moreau. Richardson will get a bunch of carries at Fullback, but the reason we haven't been good lately, is all of this one back set crap. there are NO LEAD BLOCKERS IN A ONE BACK SET. T Rich was making a name for himself as a great lead blocker and all around fullback untill this two tight end crap. Watch the tapes. Linebackers fill the gaps in a one back set and the running back gets met at the line. 2 yard gain. With a decent lead blocker and a good O line in the mix ANY running back can get 3-4 yards. That's why Marcus was so good. He knew better than anyone how to follow his blockers. he wasn't fast or shifty or powerful. He was smart, and Paul Hackett knew how to run the ball. The only good part about a one back set, is when the linebackers go to fill the gaps, it leaves them vulnerable to the play action passes. Again, watch the games and you'll see what I mean.

keg in kc
07-19-2001, 12:51 AM
Mark my words and feel free to use them against me in 6 months, for I'm confident enough in this to say the following:

The only way we will have RBbC in Kansas City in 2001 is as a result of injuries.

The winner of the starting HB job, almost certainly Priest Holmes at this point, will get about 65-70% of the touches. Tony Richardson will still have a role, albeit at fullback and playing singleback with Holmes split wide (they'll both be on the field a lot).

Is Holmes the long-term answer?

No. I don't think so.

But he's the 2001 answer, and RBbC is d-e-a-d (again, barring injury).

I see the following:

HB1 Holmes 225-250 carries and 50-60 receptions total, or, roughly, 18 touches/game (15 carries, 3 receptions)
HB2 Moreau 25 carries, 5-10 receptions
HB3 Blaylock 15 carries, 5 receptions

FB1 Richardson 80-100 carries and 25-35 receptions total, or, roughly, 7 touches/game (5 carries, 2 receptions)
FB2 Layne 15 carries

I do see it as possible that the bridge between Holmes and Richardson may be slightly closer, say 225 to 125 (carries), but I am of the opinion that we will have a featured back in 2001.

IMHO the Cloud talk is in the hopes that some team (New England?) will bite on a trade involving a mid to low round pick.

No matter how Holmes performs (good or bad) I believe the 2002 draft will see us draft a running back in the first two rounds (and a QBotF).

This will be a fun training camp to watch though, especially at running back. ;)

07-19-2001, 01:11 AM
Can't wait to see Tony....he should THRIVE in this offense!

-Tony Richardson......Better than decent Fullback

07-19-2001, 07:11 AM
I for one think this will have to play itself out.. Wish this debate was about two or three great talents that no matter who was picked would be a stud, but I don't see it. It sure is interesting reading though. I think this debate will continue all through the year. Everone seems to have a valid argument (with the exception of the Bennett versus Holmes comparision) although I see little support for Cloud. So I am going to jump in his corner for fun...

07-19-2001, 07:29 AM
You don't tote the party line.
You hate everything equally.

07-19-2001, 07:31 AM
cooter, milk,

I saw highlights from last year and I watched Neb-Texas on ESPN classics. To me, Priest looks like Bennett. Who does he look like to you guys? Barry Sanders?

Just once, I would like to see the Chiefs play one of their runningbacks that they drafted. They have spent a lot of picks on RBs that never get an honest chance. Either they just dont believe in playing younger guys, or Carl did a horrible job of scouting/drafting and these guys (Sheehee, Hill, Moreau, ect) suck.

07-19-2001, 08:13 AM
Com'on Pac.
Priest Holmes resembles Bennnett about as much as a motorcycle resembles a tank.
It's a stupid comparison.

You want to make a comparison.
How about Adrian Murrel.
Both solid jouneyman RBs with some talent and somewhat similiar attributes and style, that have had some success, but should not be asked to carry the load.

Holmes shouldn't be the featured back, IMO, but a combination of him and and T-Rich could be an effective duo.

Thunderbolt and Lightfoot! :p

07-19-2001, 08:20 AM
I don't think Moreau sucks. Look at some game film from last season and you'll notice he was much improved late in the season (Denver for instance) than he was earlier. I, for one, noticed he was cutting back into the hole and hitting it fairly strongly and showed some nice speed. I agree with Vermiel when he says Moreau is a real darkhorse.

As for his comments on Cloud, I'll believe it when I see it.

07-19-2001, 08:29 AM

You describe Holmes and Murrell as "both solid journeyman runningbacks with some talent and similar attibutes that have had some success, but shouldnt be asked to carry the load...."

That sounds like something I would read on Donnell Bennets bio.

Lets face it, you give Bennett, Murrell, and Priest Holmes the same amount of carries, you are probably going to get similar production. They are all interchangeable.

07-19-2001, 08:36 AM
Not real similar in numbers Holmes had a 1000 yards one year and more yards last year as a backup than every back we had. Bennett seemed to max out a 500 yards. They would not be similar in where they ran, and Holmes can catch the ball and move in space Bennett could not. He basically ran up the backs of his offensive line. And if you base it on last year Bennett was not even in the same league as Holmes. He was averaging less than 1 yard a carry for most of the year. Is he a star no.. Murrell is a good comparison, I agree. I was sifting through the backs looking for a comparable back also.

07-19-2001, 08:39 AM
No Pac,
I'm comparing style and production.

If I give each 200 carries, I would expect somewhere in the area of 700 yards from Holmes an Murrel.
Bennett would give me maybe 400 yards.

Once again, there is no comparison, in size, style, or production.

To suggest that there is, is just spinning.

07-19-2001, 09:23 AM
Really have you ever seen Donnell Bennett run with the football? What really makes Holmes talents like Bennett's? You say that they are similar. Similar in what way? Bennett is an below average runner and reciever, above average blocker and has absolutely no lateral movement whatsoever. His vision is basically nonexsistent.

Holmes has the atributes of a big scat back. Above average vision, above average speed, pass recieving ability, makes people miss out in the open field. Let me ask you a simple question. If you were the HC of a team would you prepare your DEF to play Holmes and Bennett fairly the same?

As far as comparing Holmes to other backs not exact but simillar talents, here is my list.

Tiki Barber
Tim Biakabutuka
Warrick Dunn
Marshall Faulk
Ahman Green
Micheal Pittman
Paul Smith
Charlie Garner
Duce Staley
Micheal Wiley

and yes our very own

Derrick Blaylock

07-19-2001, 10:42 AM
I wonder if you have ever seen Donnell Bennett run with the football. Donnell Bennett is strictly a below average runner that lacks no vision, lateral movement, poor recieving ability, the lack of ability to make people miss. He is Marty type of ball player, all power no heart.

Holmes on the other hand is just a big scat back. One with above average vision, good recieving ability, able to make plays out in the open field, above average speed with good lateral movement.

As far as the comparisions go, My list will include several RB's that all have similar skills as Holmes

Marshall Faulk
Charlie Garner
Micheal Wiley
Warrick Dunn
Micheal Pittman
Curtis Martin

and yes the Chiefs very own

Derrick Blaylock

07-19-2001, 12:05 PM

A little premature to throw Blaylock in with that group. He has not proven himself really even at a major college level. I would say he has Dunn potential (or so I hear). But like all our other backs that are huge bargins (Haynes, Shea, etc) I will believe it when I see it.

07-19-2001, 04:22 PM

and right now Freeman is a better reciever than Bubba Franks. Franks is too heavy, to slow, and doesn't run crisp routes.

Holiday isn't a solid blocker, doesn't get a good push off the line, and doesn't seem to know where the play is going.

Know why?


Bennett was a Fullback! NOT a half back, and he ran like a fullback. Now, I can see comparing Richardson to Bennett, both are fullbacks at least. Why not just belittle Ahman Green for not being the quarterback Favre is? Bennett got plugged into half back because of injuries and stupidity by the coaching staff. HE'S not a half back.

MOve Antonio Freeman to rb and see how good he does. I bet Holliday wouldn't make a good offensive lineman either. Different positions, and TOTALLY different types of runners....:rolleyes:

07-19-2001, 04:43 PM
DV's summary of his take on Priest Holmes was concluded with "I see
Make of that what you will, but the way he speaks about his other RBs makes
me think that he is not going to name a starter a priori. He is willing to
see how each responds in camp and preseason with Saunders' offense. I still
see Tony Richardson being on the field for the majority of sets, especially
if he is listed as a FB. Then he will be in the 2-back sets and and is the
best pass-protect blocker in the 1-back sets.

As for Bennett, he's a career 3.7-8 RB. When you look at how many carries
he was given strictly between the tackles, that's not bad at all. As for
last year, he disappointed everyone, himself included, I am sure.


07-19-2001, 07:37 PM
The Rams used one back sets predominantly.

I think TRich can excel in the one back set. He caught 58 balls last year and had the second highest yard per touch in the AFC. He gained over 1,100 yard running and receiving.

TRich needs the fuggin ball 20+ times per game.

They need to see what this Layne kid has. If he's any good, they can let Tony start at HB and still use one back predominantly IMO.

BTW, I had no idea that Layne was a white guy. I was very surprised when I saw his pic on the official site.

5'10", 243 lbs that's a big fuggin kid. He used to open up holes for Tomlison at TCU. I will be very interested to him perform in preseason.

Chiefs Pantalones
07-19-2001, 08:04 PM

From what I recall, the Rams use the 2-back set mostly in goal-line situations. If not 2, they call the 1 and give it to Holcombe, right?

All of this is based on if they don't score already.

07-19-2001, 08:11 PM
The Rams run a one back set w/ Marshall Faulk for the bulk of the their plays.

Holcombe doesn't get a whole lotta action running or blocking.

Chiefs Pantalones
07-19-2001, 08:19 PM
Why?(wink, wink, hint, hint)

I would give it to Holcombe all of the time down in the redzone, and take Faulk out!:rolleyes:


is hoping Cannibal gets the hint this time..

07-19-2001, 08:21 PM
Were you being sarcastic towards the fans of RBBC (Proctor) ?

I guess it went over my head.

Chiefs Pantalones
07-19-2001, 08:25 PM
Yes I was.:D

It did not go over your head, it was my fault, I forgot to post the sarcastic smilie in thread #39.


sorry, my fault! I didn't notice until recently that I forgot to post the sarcastic smilie.

07-19-2001, 08:27 PM
I gotcha now:)

Chiefs Pantalones
07-19-2001, 08:30 PM
And what are you talking about!:mad:

I er we all love RBBC!!!!!:rolleyes: :D


07-19-2001, 11:16 PM
I wasn't comparing what each RB has proven in the NFL. I want to clarify the bit about Blaylock, I said Blaylock and the other RB's listed have similar skills and talents as those other RB's I listed.

07-19-2001, 11:50 PM
come on man take it back...
You think Donnel has no heart? That hurts man, he has been with us through thick and thin. He does his job, and doesn't raise a fuss in the locker room. He doesn't get in trouble with the law, and has taken PAY CUTS several times so the team can stay competitive. He has been a willing backup, when he would probably start at fullback for most other teams. He will probably get cut, and flourish as a great blocker/goalline runner for some other team. Plus, last year he got hurt early, and when he came back (vs St Louis) the running game was in dis array and the team was pass happy. Plus, Gunther was really hot on the 2 tight end/one back sets, which really isn't Bennet's cup O tea. he is a darn good football player. Not a star, but makes a good contribution.
Sorry for the long post, but I gotta stick up for the guys who get the short end of the stick.

Bob Dole
07-20-2001, 06:13 AM
Donnell has already been released and picked up by Washington, mmccann.

07-20-2001, 07:02 AM
McCann: Good post on Donnell! That's what I call a positive, affirming football fan. Great thoughts!

Cannibal: T-Rich was #1 in the AFC in ypt, NOT #2. The order was Faulk (6.6), Barber (6.1) and Richardson (5.7).

I agree with you: Give Richardson the #@%$ ball! He is a threat on every down, pass, run or block, is the fastest RB on the team, and weighs 235 (hehehehee). And he gained 1,100+ yards last year, so he's no fluke. And if you've picked up on DV's subtle comments, I think he realizes that T-Rich is the best all round back he has. The good thing for me is, Al Saunders was on the Chiefs staff during the years the Chiefs merged the Left Coast O with the smashmouth attack, and hopefully he won't forget that KC was a perennial rushing leader with Okoye, Word, Anders, Allen, Hill, etc...


07-20-2001, 07:40 AM

Edgerrin James was # 1 in the AFC in ypt.

TRich was number 2.

07-20-2001, 08:19 AM
If Donnell took pay cut after pay cut, why was his cap number $3 Million dollars in 2001? I'd say that's a little much for a #4 option who averages less than 1 ypc.

Now, if you want to say that he restructured his contract multiple times, I'll accept that, but he did NOT take pay cuts - not in the big picture.... Most times a restructured contract either defers some money or gives a massive signing bonus and allows that money to be absorbed over the life of contract - I'm sure you know all that, though.

07-20-2001, 08:51 AM
I got my stats from kcchiefs.com, the official team website, and they said that TR was #1. Even if he is #2, that says VOLUMES about his potential in a featured role, or even a c0-featured role w/Holmes.

07-20-2001, 10:49 AM
Can we please stop talking about Donnell Bennett, you guys are making KCJ fell "funny" down there... :D

07-20-2001, 04:48 PM
Bennett will succeed in Marty's system.:p

07-20-2001, 04:49 PM

If you are advocating TRich being used as the primary back then I am in complete agreement with you.

Priest Holmes is not a "feature" back.

07-20-2001, 05:31 PM
Cannibal, we agree (egads!) but for different reasons. I want Tony because of what he IS (explosive) and not because of what Priest isn't (__________________).

TR averaged more yards per touch than any RB in the AFC and massed over 1,100 yds in rushing/receiving in a wildly inconsistent offense that could have taken MUCH more advantage of his talents.

GO TONYs!!!! (Richardson, Gonzales, Horne)

Tony fan

07-20-2001, 05:36 PM
I am still positive that James had a higher yards per touch average.

However, I agree about TRich's talent. Why they haven't exploited it more in the past is beyond me.

TRich could be a top 10 back [or higher] in this league if given a fuggin chance.

07-20-2001, 05:41 PM
Can you imagine TR in a role similar to Edge James or Faulk?
I could, and he blocks better...

07-20-2001, 05:43 PM
Kimble Anders talents weren't exploited more earlier in his career.
T-Rich's haven't been exploited.

Why?, you ask.

Could it be incompetent coaching?
Paul Hackett, OC, and Jimmy Raye, RB coach and later, OC?


07-20-2001, 05:46 PM
Going off the stats on Vegas Insider:

TRich avg per touch = 5.68

Edge avg per touch = 5.11

07-20-2001, 05:49 PM
Thanks, JL!!!!

Go Tony Richardson!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

(I like this guy...)

07-20-2001, 05:52 PM

The coaches should have used TRich more, I give you that.

But if you remember correctly, TRich was the starting HB at the beginning of the year. But because we did not have a backup FB besides TR, TR had to move back to FB when Bennett was injured.

That is the fault of the GM.

07-20-2001, 05:55 PM
With the all out passing scheme we were running, we could have done without a FB...Something very similar to what Indy does...

Chiefs Pantalones
07-20-2001, 08:48 PM

I hope Holmes gets the ball because his last name begins with the letter "h.":rolleyes:

Who cares who it is, as long as we have a balanced gameplan and we are...WINNING!!!!!!

I don't care anymore if its Greg Hill, just as long as we WIN!!!!


lets get it!!!!!!!!!!!

07-20-2001, 09:55 PM
Who will chew up the Raiders for more real estate on 9 September?
I believe that is Tony Richardson.


Tribal Warfare
07-20-2001, 10:35 PM
If Blaylock dominates in the preseason, he'll start by the 6th or 7th game. What I've read, the kid has all the intangables.He has good field vision, hands, great quickness, and speed these are qualities that excite me.Will Shields seems to be astonished by his abilities and character. The determining result could be that Derrick Blaylock that diamond at RB that KC has been searching for.

07-21-2001, 04:47 PM
But if you remember correctly, TRich was the starting HB at the beginning of the year. But because we did not have a backup FB besides TR, TR had to move back to FB when Bennett was injured. That is the fault of the GM

Why is it the GM's fault? We had 2 FB's under contract and neither was being considered for the starting HB role. We gave all the HB's camp and pre-season touches and then at the last minute we give the job to our starting FB?

Bonehead move by the Coaching staff.