PDA

View Full Version : Chiefs WTF is Charles????


Molitoth
09-19-2010, 03:01 PM
2 games in a row and this team manages to mis-use the best player on the team. What are your thoughts? Why don't they put him in the game and give him the ball on a non-predicatable play?

Chiefs Rool
09-19-2010, 03:03 PM
I don't understand it either. I think it's inexcusable.

Munson
09-19-2010, 03:11 PM
I can't believe they waited til the end of the first half to really start using him. Terrible first half play calling.

Deberg_1990
09-19-2010, 03:13 PM
Jones had 84 yards rushing.....not bad.

-King-
09-19-2010, 03:13 PM
I can't complain. TJ had a good fucking game.

Hoover
09-19-2010, 03:13 PM
Yeah, kills my Fantasy Team, but the Chiefs are 2-0 so I'll deal

kstater
09-19-2010, 03:14 PM
They're 2-0 the way they're using TJ and JC

Mr. Laz
09-19-2010, 03:15 PM
2 games in a row and this team manages to mis-use the best player on the team. What are your thoughts? Why don't they put him in the game and give him the ball on a non-predicatable play?repost

DeezNutz
09-19-2010, 03:15 PM
Hey, I think it's great that our best offensive player is given half the carries as Pioli's guy. 12 touches per game is more than enough. Who cares if we didn't score an offensive touchdown?

Trust the process.

Dave Lane
09-19-2010, 03:15 PM
Charles looked hurt to me when he was in there or slow or something. In a close game they are going to go with Jones who had 0 fumbles the whole of last year. That's huge in a very tight game.

LaChapelle
09-19-2010, 03:16 PM
They won
so it does not matter

FAX
09-19-2010, 03:16 PM
I've been apologetic about the decision to use Charles sparingly, but after this game, I have to say this is getting damn mysterious. He had 11 rushes for a 4.5 average. No chance to get in a rhythm ... there's something going on here that I do not understand.

It makes sense to me to wear down the enemy defense a tad, then allow Charles to attack the edges or run that sprint draw or screen him ... what doesn't make sense is barely using him at all. I wonder what's going on behind the scenes?

FAX

DeezNutz
09-19-2010, 03:17 PM
Charles looked hurt to me when he was in there or slow or something. In a close game they are going to go with Jones who had 0 fumbles the whole of last year. That's huge in a very tight game.

Imagine how much more exciting last week would have been without Charles' 50-yard TD run? I was pissed he got the ball there, though, because it was rainy, and fumbles make rain come from my eyes.

DeezNutz
09-19-2010, 03:17 PM
I've been apologetic about the decision to use Charles sparingly, but after this game, I have to say this is getting damn mysterious. He had 11 rushes for a 4.5 average. No chance to get in a rhythm ... there's something going on here that I do not understand.

It makes sense to me to wear down the enemy defense a tad, then allow Charles to attack the edges or run that sprint draw or screen him ... what doesn't make sense is barely using him at all. I wonder what's going on behind the scenes?

FAX

"He's starting to get it."

Mr. Laz
09-19-2010, 03:18 PM
i definitely want to see Charles catch the ball out of the backfield more.

Reaper16
09-19-2010, 03:19 PM
I don't have a problem with Jones getting carries. He improves this team. I do have severe problems with Charles not being the #1 RB, with not getting a small majority of the touches, with only using Charles on plays where it is obvious that he'll get the rock. Charles can play on all three downs. He's the team's best offensive threat, he can be effective in the passing game, he blocks for the QB well. Charles will be all the more effective when he's used in a way that isn't predictable.

Marcellus
09-19-2010, 03:20 PM
I agree I want more Charles but Jones didn't exactly shit the bed when he was needed.

DeezNutz
09-19-2010, 03:21 PM
A 60-40, Charles-Jones split would make far more sense.

crazychiefsfan
09-19-2010, 03:22 PM
I need him for my fantasy team :cuss:

Bane
09-19-2010, 03:23 PM
Fuck stupid ass fantasy football.KC wins bitches!

Simply Red
09-19-2010, 03:23 PM
I agree here, Moli... it was sort of odd, what are they doing?

tk13
09-19-2010, 03:23 PM
I said it in the game thread... I think Cassel deserves a lot of the blame. The offense isn't in rhythm with any of our RB's because we had a hard time getting first downs passing the ball. At least until the end there.

Charles needs more touches... but so does Bowe, McCluster, Moeaki. It's not just Charles... but they aren't getting those touches because we couldn't get first downs. All of those guys are weapons.

kcpasco
09-19-2010, 03:23 PM
TJ was good today

threebag02
09-19-2010, 03:24 PM
I want Charles to put an exclation mark on last years perfomance.

FAX
09-19-2010, 03:24 PM
There has to be some reason why he's not getting the touches.

I cannot bring myself to believe that Haley and Weis don't realize that he's capable of making the big play ... when we obviously can't seem to get chunks through the air ...

I expected him to get at least half the opportunities today ... not a third.

FAX

DJ's left nut
09-19-2010, 03:24 PM
I don't want to be the bearer of bad tiding here, but Jones has been the better ball-carrier thus far.

Charles has been a great HR hitter and will continue to be, but Jones has been running the ball extremely well for us and was better than Charles across the board today.

If you're willing to look closely, you'll notice that Charles has been running fairly tentatively. Maybe it's because of his shoulder, maybe it's just that he's out of rhythm, but it's there. Jones has been hitting the hole hard and getting the tough yardage we need in these close ballgames.

I'd like to see Charles at 15 carries and Jones at 10, but today Jones earned more playing time than Charles and that's all there is to it.

Kraus
09-19-2010, 03:25 PM
A 60-40, Charles-Jones split would make far more sense.

I'm down with this.

FAX
09-19-2010, 03:26 PM
I don't want to be the bearer of bad tiding here, but Jones has been the better ball-carrier thus far.

Charles has been a great HR hitter and will continue to be, but Jones has been running the ball extremely well for us and was better than Charles across the board today.

If you're willing to look closely, you'll notice that Charles has been running fairly tentatively. Maybe it's because of his shoulder, maybe it's just that he's out of rhythm, but it's there. Jones has been hitting the hole hard and getting the tough yardage we need in these close ballgames.

I'd like to see Charles at 15 carries and Jones at 10, but today Jones earned more playing time than Charles and that's all there is to it.

4.5 is a greater number than 3.8. And that's in a circumstance in which Charles isn't getting a "feel" for the game.

FAX

Dave Lane
09-19-2010, 03:27 PM
i definitely want to see Charles catch the ball out of the backfield more.

This I really agree with. In space he's dangerous as fuck.

Mr. Laz
09-19-2010, 03:27 PM
Charles with identical touches in starting 2 weeks

week 1 11 carries, 1 rec
week 2 11 carries, 1 rec

can't just be coincidence

BigChiefFan
09-19-2010, 03:27 PM
When you get the win, second guessing the amount of JC's touches seems a bit trivial to me. I said it earlier, wear 'em down with Thomas and let Charles come in with the speed to light 'em up. Enjoy the win.

FAX
09-19-2010, 03:28 PM
Although, Mr. DJ's left nut, maybe what the staff is looking for is "consistency" ... they're definitely getting that out of Jones ... maybe that's the deciding factor.

FAX

Simply Red
09-19-2010, 03:28 PM
There has to be some reason why he's not getting the touches.

I cannot bring myself to believe that Haley and Weis don't realize that he's capable of making the big play ... when we obviously can't seem to get chunks through the air ...

I expected him to get at least half the opportunities today ... not a third.

FAX

I can't seem to figure it out, unless they're trying to win without him in order to save him, i don't think that's the case, but I bet some coaches HAVE tried that number, but overall, he seems healthy enough.

DJ's left nut
09-19-2010, 03:29 PM
4.5 is a greater number than 3.8. And that's in a circumstance in which Charles isn't getting a "feel" for the game.

FAX

There's more to a RBs performance than raw yards per carry.

Charles had that one long run and then a lot of nothing.

Meanwhile, he also pissed down his leg on 3rd and 1 near the endzone and stuttered in the backfield to get dropped. Jones would've put his head down and plowed forward. It was power running from Jones that got us all the way down there and a little more power running likely gets us in.

Jones was picking up a steady 3.5 yards when he touched the ball. Charles would get 15 then 0 and 0, forcing us into a tough spot.

Jones was the better runner today.

LaChapelle
09-19-2010, 03:30 PM
Chiefs fans
to insecure to enjoy a win
pop that top button and just breathe

KChiefs1
09-19-2010, 03:30 PM
Jones was very good today but they have to get Charles in the open field more...

tk13
09-19-2010, 03:31 PM
I agreed with DJ in the game thread on that point too. It's not like we're talking about playing broken down LJ over Charles. People are acting like that, that's BS. Jones is one of the most reliable RB's in the league.

The problem is we have too many weapons to get them all the ball with the number of offensive plays we run a game due to our inability to get first downs.

keg in kc
09-19-2010, 03:32 PM
After last week's game I thought it was a matter of number of plays. After this week I think they have zero faith in the offensive line, and they'd rather Jones take a beating than Charles.

FAX
09-19-2010, 03:33 PM
There's more to a RBs performance than raw yards per carry.

Charles had that one long run and then a lot of nothing.

Meanwhile, he also pissed down his leg on 3rd and 1 near the endzone and stuttered in the backfield to get dropped. Jones would've put his head down and plowed forward. It was power running from Jones that got us all the way down there and a little more power running likely gets us in.

Jones was picking up a steady 3.5 yards when he touched the ball. Charles would get 15 then 0 and 0, forcing us into a tough spot.

Jones was the better runner today.

Yeah ... I thought about it after I posted that silly post thing. It's probably Jones' consistency that's driving the decision.

FAX

DJ's left nut
09-19-2010, 03:33 PM
Jones was very good today but they have to get Charles in the open field more...

I agree, going forward this isn't an ideal timeshare, IMO.

However, today the power game was working well and Jones was doing some nice work for us.

When the offense is working better, Jones will do a little more 'wearing' and we'll see Charles looking for HRs in the 3rd and 4th.

But when the O is stalling consistently and we're in a grinder of a game where the opponent isn't exactly burning up the field on offense, we can't afford a turnover and we want some steady time of possession. Jones fit the bill today.

There may be times to complain about the usage, but today (and last Monday) are not those times, IMO.

chiefzilla1501
09-19-2010, 03:38 PM
I don't want to be the bearer of bad tiding here, but Jones has been the better ball-carrier thus far.

Charles has been a great HR hitter and will continue to be, but Jones has been running the ball extremely well for us and was better than Charles across the board today.

If you're willing to look closely, you'll notice that Charles has been running fairly tentatively. Maybe it's because of his shoulder, maybe it's just that he's out of rhythm, but it's there. Jones has been hitting the hole hard and getting the tough yardage we need in these close ballgames.

I'd like to see Charles at 15 carries and Jones at 10, but today Jones earned more playing time than Charles and that's all there is to it.

Agreed.

Here's the deal. Until Cassel proves himself, defenses are going to stack against the run. even when Charles gets the ball, he's ineffective. I don't care about Charles not getting enough carries. I care about the fact that defenses are DARING us to pass and Matt Cass-hole continues to shit his pants. With average QB play, we could actually be pretty dangerous.

Molitoth
09-19-2010, 03:43 PM
Chiefs fans
to insecure to enjoy a win
pop that top button and just breathe

I posted this well before the game was over....

O.city
09-19-2010, 03:46 PM
Exactly if Cassel could consistently make throws like he did half the time today, our offense would be hella good

DJ's left nut
09-19-2010, 03:46 PM
I posted this well before the game was over....

So before Jones gained 10 tough yards against an 11 man front to win the ballgame for us?

Hold your load next time and some of this stuff will make more sense for you.

Molitoth
09-19-2010, 03:47 PM
So before Jones gained 10 tough yards against an 11 man front to win the ballgame for us?

Hold your load next time and some of this stuff will make more sense for you.

After watching the games its obvious this staff is not using Charles to it's potential. Quit being a dumb homer and thinking I'm wrong just because the team won a sloppy game.

DJ's left nut
09-19-2010, 03:53 PM
After watching the games its obvious this staff is not using Charles to it's potential. Quit being a dumb homer and thinking I'm wrong just because the team won a sloppy game.

Take a poll and ask anyone on this board if I qualify as a "dumb homer".

I'm as hard on this team as anyone here.

But unlike the guy with Barry Sanders in his avatar, I actually recognize that sometimes football isn't about just hitting the HR play. For all the reasons I've already stated and you've already ignored, Jones was the right play today.

In this game, at this time, you were dead fucking wrong and if you don't recognize that, I'm not terribly inclined to be concerned that you think I'm being less than intelligent.

Third Eye
09-19-2010, 03:53 PM
I guess I don't understand this opinion. I mean look, we aren't nor are we going to be contenders this year. Why on earth would we want to overuse a potential superstar and risk injury and wear when ultimately it's going to mean nothing? I am completely fine with using him sparingly until we field a team that can compete with the big boys.

The Pedestrian
09-19-2010, 03:54 PM
Some of those Jones plays got too damn predictable...should've played Charles during a few of those.

Reaper16
09-19-2010, 03:55 PM
@kentbabb (http://twitter.com/kentbabb) For the first time, Jamaal Charles referred to himself as the Chiefs' "backup" running back. He said that's his role. Which is unfortunate. half a minute ago (http://twitter.com/kentbabb/status/24966019866) via web

Correct. It is unfortunate.

donkhater
09-19-2010, 03:56 PM
Kent Babb just tweeted this:

kentbabb For the first time, Jamaal Charles referred to himself as the Chiefs' "backup" running back. He said that's his role. Which is unfortunate.

ugh.

donkhater
09-19-2010, 03:57 PM
@kentbabb (http://twitter.com/kentbabb) For the first time, Jamaal Charles referred to himself as the Chiefs' "backup" running back. He said that's his role. Which is unfortunate. half a minute ago (http://twitter.com/kentbabb/status/24966019866) via web

Correct. It is unfortunate.

Dammit Reaper!!!

Molitoth
09-19-2010, 03:58 PM
Correct. It is unfortunate.

Yep, but it's ok.... because we won. And because we didn't waste his ability in a year when we aren't a contender..

DeezNutz
09-19-2010, 03:58 PM
@kentbabb (http://twitter.com/kentbabb) For the first time, Jamaal Charles referred to himself as the Chiefs' "backup" running back. He said that's his role. Which is unfortunate. half a minute ago (http://twitter.com/kentbabb/status/24966019866) via web

Correct. It is unfortunate.

Why? Jones is the better RB. :rolleyes:

Complete fucking nonsense. Nonfuckingsense. But whatever.

DJ's left nut
09-19-2010, 03:59 PM
I guess I don't understand this opinion. I mean look, we aren't nor are we going to be contenders this year. Why on earth would we want to overuse a potential superstar and risk injury and wear when ultimately it's going to mean nothing? I am completely fine with using him sparingly until we field a team that can compete with the big boys.

I don't actually understand this line of reasoning.

Any player is only ever 1 play away from done for good.

Matthews didn't go down today because he was overused, he went down today because football is a nasty, violent game full of short careers.

You use your players to whatever extent necessary to win ballgames for however much time you have them. You don't 'save' Jamal Charles because he's more likely to be seriously injured by a fluke play than he is to just slowly run the wheels off.

Today Thomas Jones was a better runningback for winning this game. Against the 49ers, perhaps Charles will be and if that's the case, you give him 30 carries if necessary.

Win when you can because nothing in this game is guaranteed.

DeezNutz
09-19-2010, 04:00 PM
2-0. Doesn't this make us "contenders" now? Or have we been mathematically eliminated and I was unaware?

Sure-Oz
09-19-2010, 04:04 PM
@kentbabb (http://twitter.com/kentbabb) For the first time, Jamaal Charles referred to himself as the Chiefs' "backup" running back. He said that's his role. Which is unfortunate. half a minute ago (http://twitter.com/kentbabb/status/24966019866) via web

Correct. It is unfortunate.

Charles has to be pissed

DJ's left nut
09-19-2010, 04:05 PM
2-0. Doesn't this make us "contenders" now? Or have we been mathematically eliminated and I was unaware?

I had us starting 2-0 and ending 7-9.

That said, 'nothing is guaranteed' cuts both ways.

Just like Ryan Matthews wasn't guaranteed week 3, the Chiefs aren't guaranteed only 17 weeks of football. It's a funny league - the Chiefs could sneak into the post-season.

You play your guys while you have them. There's no 'saving' talent in this league.

Reaper16
09-19-2010, 04:09 PM
Charles has to be pissed
Absolutely. And for a guy who has aspirations to start to be limited to a backup role, with few chances to demonstrate that he has earned the starting spot, what is going to happen? Naturally, he will begin to press. He'll begin to try and hit a home run every time.

The Chiefs are absolutely using their best offensive player incorrectly. Every single thing that you like about Charles is diminished in his current role and everything you don't like about Charles (tentative stutter-steps, fumbles b/c of no rhythm) has the potential to be exacerbated by his current role.

Third Eye
09-19-2010, 04:09 PM
I don't actually understand this line of reasoning.

Any player is only ever 1 play away from done for good.

Matthews didn't go down today because he was overused, he went down today because football is a nasty, violent game full of short careers.

You use your players to whatever extent necessary to win ballgames for however much time you have them. You don't 'save' Jamal Charles because he's more likely to be seriously injured by a fluke play than he is to just slowly run the wheels off.

Today Thomas Jones was a better runningback for winning this game. Against the 49ers, perhaps Charles will be and if that's the case, you give him 30 carries if necessary.

Win when you can because nothing in this game is guaranteed.
While it's completely true that it is possible that any player can sustain a career ending injury at anytime, you have to admit that the greater the exposure, the greater the probability. Simply cannot be denied.

DeezNutz
09-19-2010, 04:11 PM
You play your guys while you have them. There's no 'saving' talent in this league.

Indeed.

Hug it Out Dan
09-19-2010, 04:17 PM
They won
so it does not matter

Had Phil Dawson made that FG, it still wouldn't change the fact the way JC and TJ are being mis-used.

Reerun_KC
09-19-2010, 04:19 PM
Actually I am just glad we are 2-0 and we finally have something to bitch about. I was getting worried there for awhile.

DJ's left nut
09-19-2010, 04:20 PM
Had Phil Dawson made the FG, I'm betting you'd have seen a little more Charles.

Had Cleveland shown more of an offense in the 2nd half, that might've changed how they'd have used him.

Every game's not the same. The Browns were only going to win this game if KC turned the ball over and gave them a short field or if they couldn't keep the clock rolling.

Jones doesn't fumble and is a more consistent back. He was a perfect fit for this ballgame.

The same old saws don't work every game. "Charles should be starting" simply doesn't fly here. Charles didn't run as well as Jones and didn't fit the way the game was progressing as well as Jones did.

We won in large part becaues of TJ, not in spite of him. Give some credit where it's due.

Reerun_KC
09-19-2010, 04:21 PM
BTW, Weis's play calling is a freaking joke. Buttfront needs to get his shit together.

The second half was much much better, but fuck we cant wait until the second half for buttfront to realize that he is being a complete moron on in the booth.

Molitoth
09-19-2010, 04:24 PM
Dude, nobody is knocking Jones... he ran fine. We are knocking the mis-use of Charles.

FAX
09-19-2010, 04:31 PM
Had Phil Dawson made the FG, I'm betting you'd have seen a little more Charles.

Had Cleveland shown more of an offense in the 2nd half, that might've changed how they'd have used him.

Every game's not the same. The Browns were only going to win this game if KC turned the ball over and gave them a short field or if they couldn't keep the clock rolling.

Jones doesn't fumble and is a more consistent back. He was a perfect fit for this ballgame.

The same old saws don't work every game. "Charles should be starting" simply doesn't fly here. Charles didn't run as well as Jones and didn't fit the way the game was progressing as well as Jones did.

We won in large part becaues of TJ, not in spite of him. Give some credit where it's due.

Okay. I understand that point.

However, the fact remains that some guys are "play makers" ... big play guys. Charles has proven that he has the ability to change momentum and alter, not only the outcome but the flow of the game. Our offense has a very conservative feel right now ... most likely due to the lack of confidence in our quarterback ... and Jones provides the kind of consistency and dependability that a conservative play-caller or coach appreciates.

Nevertheless, it's impossible to know how the game might or might not unfold were Charles to be provided with sufficient opportunities to allow him to get into a rhythm and acquire a "feel" for the game. He breaks big runs for big chunks and scores. That kind of play maker can dramatically affect how the game plays out ... for both sides.

Maybe it's the concern over fumbling ... maybe it's his ability to pass-protect ... maybe it's how he practices, but we know he is and can be dangerous when he has the football. Given that, it only makes sense to work him into the game plan to maximize his potential positive contribution.

FAX THE ARGUMENTATIVE

crazycoffey
09-19-2010, 04:33 PM
I don't know if it was said or not, but I had the feeling before the first half and certainly all the first quarter, that Weis was trying to get Matt involved by the play calling. I think he felt like that was a good opportunity to get him a chance during a real game and they still had Charles and the run game to fall back on sort of. And it seems to be the thought process because before the half we stepped up the run game and when we needed it at the end we ran it, so that's just my thoughts....

Lbedrock1
09-19-2010, 05:18 PM
2 games in a row and this team manages to mis-use the best player on the team. What are your thoughts? Why don't they put him in the game and give him the ball on a non-predicatable play?

Seems to me that Haley does not like players he didn't select. Every good player we had that he didnt select he treated with discontent. I don't know if Charles did anything, but I don't get how the way he has palyed for Haley why he is not starting. The way Cassel is playing at least our backup should get a chance but he wasn't chosen by Haley so he sits the bench no matter how Cassel plays.

beach tribe
09-19-2010, 06:49 PM
Seems to me that Haley does not like players he didn't select. Every good player we had that he didnt select he treated with discontent. I don't know if Charles did anything, but I don't get how the way he has palyed for Haley why he is not starting. The way Cassel is playing at least our backup should get a chance but he wasn't chosen by Haley so he sits the bench no matter how Cassel plays.

They gave Derrick Johnson a first round tender, resigned Studebaker etc etc etc.

I honestly don't think Todd Haley gives a fuck where a player came from as long as he can help him win games. Hell 60% of the roster are guys he didn't pick.

redgoldexpress
09-19-2010, 07:26 PM
charles stats for his career (3 Years):
2008: (16 games) 67 attempts for 357 yards which equals to an average of 5.3 yards per carry. 0 touchdowns
2009: (15 games) 190 attempts for 1120 yards which equals to an average of 5.9 yards per carry. 7 touchdowns
2010 (2 games) 22 attempts for 141 yards which equals to an average of 6.4 yards per rush. 1 touchdown
http://www.nfl.com/players/jamaalcha...s?id=CHA561428

Now lets take a look at Thomas Jones for the past 3 years:
2008: (16 games) 290 attempts for 1312 yards which equals to an average of 4.5 yards per rush. 13 touchdowns
2009: (16 games) 331 attempts for 1402 yards which equals to an average of 4.2 yards per rush. 14 touchdowns
2010: (2 games) 33 attempts for 122 yards which equals to an average of 3.7 yards per rush. 0 touchdowns
http://www.nfl.com/players/thomasjon...s?id=JON755755

Now with the stats here to show you that Charles is the better back. When we first signed Thomas Jones the Chiefs were saying that he was going to be our 3rd down and short yardage back. To me it looks an awful lot like the roles have been switched. The reason I believe that Charles has had as many negative yards plays that he has had is because football is a game of momentum which you cannot build when you are only one about 1 every 7-10 plays. What I think the Chiefs need to do is make a formation in which Castille is lined up as a fullback then have both Jones and Charles in the backfield so that way the defense will be guessing what one will receive the ball on a running play.

dannybcaitlyn
09-19-2010, 08:14 PM
I don't want to be the bearer of bad tiding here, but Jones has been the better ball-carrier thus far.

Charles has been a great HR hitter and will continue to be, but Jones has been running the ball extremely well for us and was better than Charles across the board today.

If you're willing to look closely, you'll notice that Charles has been running fairly tentatively. Maybe it's because of his shoulder, pmaybe it's just that he's out of rhythm, but it's there. Jones has been hitting the hole hard and getting the tough yardage we need in these close ballgames.

I'd like to see Charles at 15 carries and Jones at 10, but today Jones earned more playing time than Charles and that's all there is to it.

I disagree . Our running game or offense wasn't going anywhere til charles stepped on the field in chargers game. To mention TJ is the better ball carrier is absurd. TJ did decent today but it would have nice to see the roles reversed and seen the numbers then without putting charles in predictable situations. Plus it looked like on a few of jones runs, i wish it were charles with the ball because he would most likely taken them to house. I guess haley wants a dink and dunk running game to match our passing game.

Lbedrock1
09-19-2010, 08:18 PM
They gave Derrick Johnson a first round tender, resigned Studebaker etc etc etc.

I honestly don't think Todd Haley gives a **** where a player came from as long as he can help him win games. Hell 60% of the roster are guys he didn't pick.

Well he can't sit everyone. He traded some decent players we had and let one go out right and they seemed to be doing just fine on the other teams. He does have a problem with players he didnt pick. D. Johnson should have started last year but haley's stupid azz let his ego get in the way. J. Charles goes out and give him 1100 yards in 9 games and how is he rewarded? Brings in T. Jones (which is a good pickup) and starts him over Charles. You explained to me why then if he doesn't care where the player comes from why isnt his best players always out on the field?

Kyle DeLexus
09-19-2010, 09:53 PM
Well he can't sit everyone. He traded some decent players we had and let one go out right and they seemed to be doing just fine on the other teams. He does have a problem with players he didnt pick. D. Johnson should have started last year but haley's stupid azz let his ego get in the way. J. Charles goes out and give him 1100 yards in 9 games and how is he rewarded? Brings in T. Jones (which is a good pickup) and starts him over Charles. You explained to me why then if he doesn't care where the player comes from why isnt his best players always out on the field?

How do you explain Larry Johnson? He wasn't a Haley pickup yet he still had to basically force these guys to cut him last year.

DBOSHO
09-19-2010, 10:26 PM
Yep, but it's ok.... because we won. And because we didn't waste his ability in a year when we aren't a contender..

You realize that giving jamaal say, 5 or 6 of Jones' carries isnt going to break him, right?

bevischief
09-19-2010, 10:32 PM
We are 2 and 0!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!