PDA

View Full Version : Chiefs Teicher: Haley says Chiefs’ backfield balancing act is not a problem


Tribal Warfare
09-23-2010, 12:31 AM
Haley says Chiefs’ backfield balancing act is not a problem (http://www.kansascity.com/2010/09/22/2243998/haley-says-chiefs-backfield-balancing.html)
By ADAM TEICHER
The Kansas City Star

There’s plenty of angst in Kansas City over the Chiefs and their liberal use of Thomas Jones as their featured running back instead of Jamaal Charles.

The one place where it’s seemingly not much of an issue is at the Chiefs’ coaching offices at their Truman Sports Complex practice facility.

“It is in no way a problem for us,” coach Todd Haley said. “So far, through two games in the first quarter of the season, I would grade us as being successful.”

That’s a reference to their 2-0 record as the Chiefs prepare for Sunday’s game against San Francisco at Arrowhead Stadium. But because the Chiefs are having problems passing consistently, there’s an awareness they may need to squeeze even more from their running game.

The Chiefs are undefeated in part because of what they’ve been able to accomplish on the ground. They’re fifth in the league in rushing yardage.

But they’ve been more efficient when giving the ball to Charles, who is averaging 6.4 yards per carry and has Kansas City’s only rushing touchdown, than when they’ve handed it to Jones, who gets 3.7 yards per carry. Charles also delivered the Chiefs’ only pass reception of longer than 20 yards.

Jones, though, has far more carries than Charles. Jones has 33, Charles 22.

Haley acknowledged the problem in preparing a game plan that heavily involves both players.

“That’s not easy,” he said. “It’s easier on some teams. We have a clear-cut plan going in on how we want to do things with each guy. But this is a fluid game, and there are a lot of variables involved. We saw some (inclement) weather in the first game, and we saw some different conditions in the second game and different situations. Then you must be able to adjust in the way you see fit that gives you the best chance to win.

“As I’ve said couple of times, from a depth standpoint, we don’t have a ton. One of our deeper positions is running back. That means we’ve got a couple of real good players in my opinion, maybe three and maybe four. We’ll see as we go forward. Some way we need to figure a way for them to contribute.”

That’s easier for the third and fourth backs, Dexter McCluster and Jackie Battle.

“Dexter McCluster is contributing some returns on special teams, he’s playing some receiver, he’s playing some running back,” Haley said. “Jackie Battle is playing 19, 20-some plays a game on special teams. We saw him in the preseason that he clearly looked like he was making progress and has got a chance to be a running back in this league. But right now it’s those 20-some plays he’s contributing (on), not to say he won’t have some plays on offense to contribute.

“Now you get into the other two, Jamaal and Thomas. We need to do similar-type things. We feel like they’re two of our real good players that have a chance (again) to be real good players and have proved it at different times in each of their careers, one a little longer career than the other.

“We’ve got to utilize the weapons we have and those guys are both weapons. That’s part of this process we’re in, figuring out what each week gives us the best chance to win.”

For years the Chiefs haven’t had much of a decision about whom to place in their backfield or whom to give the ball. First it was Priest Holmes, then Larry Johnson and last year, Charles, who ran for almost 1,000 yards over the season’s final eight games.

This year they added Jones, who knowingly entered the situation.

“We’ve got more and more guys that are understanding that it’s not about who starts and it’s not about who finishes,” Haley said, “but it’s about the result and about what they can do to help that result.”

For his part, Charles at least publicly stated he’s OK sharing with Jones, though that speech may have been on orders from his superiors. At times Charles seems to be pressing by trying to make the big play every time he touches the ball.

“Not to get too deep into it because I know it’s such a hot-button subject right now, but I don’t get concerned about it,” guard Brian Waters said. “We’ve had situations in the past where there’s been some animosity between the guys, but that’s not the case in this particular situation. Both guys understand their roles. I think both guys like each other. They like being around each other. They support each other.

“That’s why I don’t think it’s a big situation in this locker room.”

Tale of the tape

<table class="story-table" border="0"><tbody><tr class="story-table-even-row" valign="top"><td>Charles</td><td> </td><td>Jones</td></tr> <tr class="story-table-odd-row"><td>22</td><td align="center">Att.</td><td align="left">33</td></tr> <tr class="story-table-even-row"><td>141</td><td align="center">Yards</td><td align="left">122</td></tr> <tr class="story-table-odd-row"><td>6.4</td><td align="center">Avg.</td><td align="left">3.7</td></tr> <tr class="story-table-even-row"><td>70.5</td><td align="center">Yds/gm</td><td align="left">61.0</td></tr> <tr class="story-table-odd-row"><td>1</td><td align="center">TDs</td><td align="left">0</td></tr> <tr class="story-table-even-row"><td>12</td><td align="center">NFL rank</td><td align="left">20</td></tr></tbody></table><div_prefs id="div_prefs"></div_prefs>

sportsman1
09-23-2010, 12:36 AM
Hmm its really hard to see what he is seeing there. Anytime the more statistically talented back is not getting the ball more.. I would obviously say there is a problem!

Fruit Ninja
09-23-2010, 01:03 AM
Its all coachspeak. They all see it, the fans see it, the NFL tv programs see it, the internet see's it.

Phobia
09-23-2010, 01:28 AM
Its all coachspeak.

It's ALWAYS coachspeak. I don't know why I read any of it any longer. Those guys have Masters degrees in talking for an hour without saying anything at all.

Thig Lyfe
09-23-2010, 02:34 AM
If Haley opens his mouth again, I'm gonna shit in it.

Tribal Warfare
09-23-2010, 02:55 AM
If Haley opens his mouth again, I'm gonna shit in it.

He always sounds like he just came off a bender too mumbling and shit.

michaelj_58
09-23-2010, 03:37 AM
give the ball to charles this week,were going to need him.

the Talking Can
09-23-2010, 04:27 AM
.
[SIZE=5]

Tale of the tape

<table class="story-table" border="0"><tbody><tr class="story-table-even-row" valign="top"><td>Backup</td><td> </td><td>Starter</td></tr> <tr class="story-table-odd-row"><td>[B]22</td><td align="center">Att.</td><td align="left">33</td></tr> <tr class="story-table-even-row"><td>141</td><td align="center">Yards</td><td align="left">122</td></tr> <tr class="story-table-odd-row"><td>6.4</td><td align="center">Avg.</td><td align="left">3.7</td></tr> <tr class="story-table-even-row"><td>70.5</td><td align="center">Yds/gm</td><td align="left">61.0</td></tr> <tr class="story-table-odd-row"><td>1</td><td align="center">TDs</td><td align="left">0</td></tr> <tr class="story-table-even-row"><td>12</td><td align="center">NFL rank</td><td align="left">20</td></tr></tbody></table><div_prefs id="div_prefs"></div_prefs>

LaChapelle
09-23-2010, 05:04 AM
Mother: Why are you not eating little Johnnie?
Little Johnnie: The peas are touching the mashed potatoes
Little Suzy: Oh yuk. I'm not going to eat them either
neighbor kid: My mom don't let the peas touch the taters. I'm not eating this slop
MIL: I'm calling childern's services(dialing 9-1-1)
Dog: Starts barking and corners the mother near the sink

blazzin311
09-23-2010, 05:43 AM
It's ALWAYS coachspeak. I don't know why I read any of it any longer. Those guys have Masters degrees in talking for an hour without saying anything at all.

I like you and probably many others here on this board have noticed that as well...makes me sick really, but at the same time what can ya do right? :banghead:

Hog Farmer
09-23-2010, 05:49 AM
It's a wonderful situation we have here. I still think making Jones the workhorse and keeping Charles somewhat fresh is smart. I can envision Charles dominating the second half of games when the D is getting tired. We really need that game where we are up two scores at half.

Reerun_KC
09-23-2010, 05:53 AM
Man this is getting old..... I really wish that we had something else to talk about...

Everythread, its best player or Cassel...

Marcellus
09-23-2010, 05:56 AM
Take Charles 1 56 yard TD run away and he has 21 caries for 81 yards and a 3.8 avg.

I understand he is in there to make that 56 yard TD or that type play but his other 21 runs haven't been too impressive.

Marcellus
09-23-2010, 05:57 AM
Man this is getting old..... I really wish that we had something else to talk about...

Everythread, its best player or Cassel...

Should we tun this in to a Cassel bashing? ;)

Reerun_KC
09-23-2010, 05:58 AM
Should we tun this in to a Cassel bashing? ;)

:banghead:

It will eventually..

LOL

the Talking Can
09-23-2010, 06:06 AM
Take Charles 1 56 yard TD run away and he has 21 caries for 81 yards and a 3.8 avg.

I understand he is in there to make that 56 yard TD or that type play but his other 21 runs haven't been too impressive.

so, if you take away his touchdown run (and really, it is unfair to count that, Jones can't make that run), he still has a higher ypc than Jones...


that was the point you wanted to make?

Marcellus
09-23-2010, 06:09 AM
so, if you take away his touchdown run (and really, it is unfair to count that, Jones can't make that run), he still has a higher ypc than Jones...


that was the point you wanted to make?

Yes and the difference is so HUGE. Also keep in mind many of JC's yards are from garbage time draws at the end of the half last week so his numbers aren't even at 3.8 when it matters.

I think it has been said many times already, TJ and JC's splits are not the issue with the offense. It's Cassel. You guy are bitching about something that really isn't an issue right now.

JC will get his carries.

jjjayb
09-23-2010, 06:17 AM
Take Charles 1 56 yard TD run away and he has 21 caries for 81 yards and a 3.8 avg.

I understand he is in there to make that 56 yard TD or that type play but his other 21 runs haven't been too impressive.

So I guess if we take away all his big carries last year he wasn't really that good then either? :rolleyes:

Marcellus
09-23-2010, 06:21 AM
So I guess if we take away all his big carries last year he wasn't really that good then either? :rolleyes:

I am not bashing him, I want to see him get the ball more as well, I am just looking at the comparison.

Everyone keeps showing the stats so far this year and saying "look JC is obviously out performing Jones".

This year, aside from the 1 run, a BIG IMPORTANT run, he hasn't. 2 games I know.

He will get his carries and end the year with more yards than Jones. Book it.

There is just no reason to make this the big issue when the big issue is Cassel.

the Talking Can
09-23-2010, 06:21 AM
Yes and the difference is so HUGE. Also keep in mind many of JC's yards are from garbage time draws at the end of the half last week so his numbers aren't even at 3.8 when it matters.

I think it has been said many times already, TJ and JC's splits are not the issue with the offense. It's Cassel. You guy are bitching about something that really isn't an issue right now.

JC will get his carries.


we saw what Charles can do as a starter

how does Jones compare as a starter?

Marcellus
09-23-2010, 06:23 AM
we saw what Charles can do as a starter

how does Jones compare as a starter?

1,400 yards and 14 TD last year.

They are the perfect combo and they need to be better balanced, but don't act like JC is handing Jones his jock. He isn't.

As has been stated Jone's play is not what's killing this offense. It's Cassel and IMO the play calling.

DeezNutz
09-23-2010, 06:34 AM
Take Charles 1 56 yard TD run away and he has 21 caries for 81 yards and a 3.8 avg.

I understand he is in there to make that 56 yard TD or that type play but his other 21 runs haven't been too impressive.

85 yards on 21 carries without the 56-yarder.

Or, 4.0 yards per carry.

the Talking Can
09-23-2010, 06:35 AM
1,400 yards and 14 TD last year.

They are the perfect combo and they need to be better balanced, but don't act like JC is handing Jones his jock. He isn't.

As has been stated Jone's play is not what's killing this offense. It's Cassel and IMO the play calling.

answer my question

how did Charles starting for the Chiefs compare to Jones starting for the Chiefs?


I understand the Chiefs think Jones is a better RB....if you think so, just say it

rad
09-23-2010, 06:42 AM
85 yards on 21 carries without the 56-yarder.

Or, 4.0 yards per carry.

No, it's 3.85.

If we count touches, which is more accurate to production, since we have a dump-off master at QB, Charles is averaging 5 yards per touch.

DeezNutz
09-23-2010, 06:44 AM
3.85? You're joking, obviously?

rad
09-23-2010, 06:48 AM
3.85? You're joking, obviously?

No. I used 81 yds instead of 85. My bad.

Marcellus
09-23-2010, 07:06 AM
85 yards on 21 carries without the 56-yarder.

Or, 4.0 yards per carry.

Yea bad math somehow. Must be too early. Keep in mind that many of those yards were on garbage time draws at the end of the 1st half last week.

I am not advocating that Charles shouldn't play more. I want to see him more. I want to see him start.

I am saying he hasn't played appreciably better than Jones and that is a concern.

KC Tattoo
09-23-2010, 07:11 AM
What upsets me is that Jones will get the first three series of plays & results have been punts. I'd like to see Charles a lot sooner before the end of the first quarter. Coach is talking out his ass & insulting the intelligence of the fans. We need better starts to games, score quick and keep the throttle on. If we get a good lead then go to Jones for poundedge.
Other words...

Cassel Sucks

Jamaal needs more carries

Reerun_KC
09-23-2010, 07:36 AM
1,400 yards and 14 TD last year.

They are the perfect combo and they need to be better balanced, but don't act like JC is handing Jones his jock. He isn't.

As has been stated Jone's play is not what's killing this offense. It's Cassel and IMO the play calling.

Lynching Cassel is the cool thing to do, even if you dont know what the QB does on the field...

But the play calling is becoming very suspect at best. I am very dissappointed in Weis at this point. I thought he was some one that could work with less talented people and work with what they do best. Even if it is suck by Cassel and the WR's. I was under the impression that he could put these players into positions to succeed.

So far this offense as a whole stinks. The running game is a mess, the passing game is non existant, the play calling makes you :spock: on sundays.

So until Weis pulls his head out of his cheeseburger'd ass... Were going to see the same shit week in and week out.

Swanman
09-23-2010, 07:43 AM
1,400 yards and 14 TD last year.

They are the perfect combo and they need to be better balanced, but don't act like JC is handing Jones his jock. He isn't.

As has been stated Jone's play is not what's killing this offense. It's Cassel and IMO the play calling.

Jones had an offensive line to run behind last year, this year he doesn't. We need to have the ball in the hands of a guy that can create something out of nothing, and that is Charles, not Jones. I see the use of splitting the carries and keeping both guys relatively fresh but you cannot have Jones getting 2/3 of the carries for this team. At the very least, if you are not going to hand the ball off the Charles, get him involved with some short passes, as he is deadly when he gets the ball in space.

Demonpenz
09-23-2010, 09:45 AM
Without reading the thread, the problem is cassel doesn't stretch the field enough

DBOSHO
09-23-2010, 10:14 AM
Take Charles 1 56 yard TD run away and he has 21 caries for 81 yards and a 3.8 avg.

I understand he is in there to make that 56 yard TD or that type play but his other 21 runs haven't been too impressive.

I bet if you took every rbs carries that went for over 10yds out of the equation that theyd look poor too. I get where you're coming from, but your logic is busted.

bobbything
09-23-2010, 10:21 AM
But they’ve been more efficient when giving the ball to Charles, who is averaging 6.4 yards per carry and has Kansas City’s only rushing touchdown, than when they’ve handed it to Jones, who gets 3.7 yards per carry.
I want Charles to play more, just as much as anyone else around here, but his choice of words to describe Charles is inaccurate. Charles has been more explosive, not more efficient.

Hug it Out Dan
09-23-2010, 11:00 AM
It's a wonderful situation we have here. I still think making Jones the workhorse and keeping Charles somewhat fresh is smart. I can envision Charles dominating the second half of games when the D is getting tired. We really need that game where we are up two scores at half.

:shake:

Coogs
09-23-2010, 11:03 AM
Man this is getting old..... I really wish that we had something else to talk about...

Everythread, its best player or Cassel...

I guess we could do a Berry is a bust thread! :rolleyes:

suds79
09-23-2010, 11:13 AM
Take Charles 1 56 yard TD run away and he has 21 caries for 81 yards and a 3.8 avg.

I'm not trying to bash you Marcellus but I can't stand this argument.

Reminds me of DV's well if the D didn't give up that one big play......

But they DID give up that big play. And Jamaal DID break a 56 yarder for a TD.

You don't get to take that away from him. Can we take away Thomas Jone's best runs also?

Lets stick with reality here and what did actually happen.

Lbedrock1
09-23-2010, 11:22 AM
Take Charles 1 56 yard TD run away and he has 21 caries for 81 yards and a 3.8 avg.

I understand he is in there to make that 56 yard TD or that type play but his other 21 runs haven't been too impressive.

That is stupid to say, if you take away cassels touchdown to our tight end, we lose the game. The point is you can't take it away it is apart of what makes up his stats. You want a back that can break it for 56 yard. When you compare overall stats you dont care how it breaks down.

Just Passin' By
09-23-2010, 11:23 AM
I bet if you took every rbs carries that went for over 10yds out of the equation that theyd look poor too. I get where you're coming from, but your logic is busted.

How so? It's only a 2 game season so far, and Charles has one run that's a statistical outlier.

go bowe
09-23-2010, 11:28 AM
I'm not trying to bash you Marcellus but I can't stand this argument.

Reminds me of DV's well if the D didn't give up that one big play......

But they DID give up that big play. And Jamaal DID break a 56 yarder for a TD.

You don't get to take that away from him. Can we take away Thomas Jone's best runs also?

Lets stick with reality here and what did actually happen.spoilsport...

DeezNutz
09-23-2010, 11:30 AM
How so? It's only a 2 game season so far, and Charles has one run that's a statistical outlier.

Nonsense.

Top-10 players in rushing yards thus far:

7 have runs of 30 yards or longer.
5 have runs of 40 yards or longer.

4.0 yards per carry, without the 56-yarder, is still more than respectable. Mendenhall and C. Johnson (with their big runs included, 50 and 76 yards respectively) are averaging 4.2 and 4.1 yards.

But really, we should take away their big plays because it's not fair to include them.

Marcellus
09-23-2010, 11:52 AM
Nonsense.

Top-10 players in rushing yards thus far:

7 have runs of 30 yards or longer.
5 have runs of 40 yards or longer.

4.0 yards per carry, without the 56-yarder, is still more than respectable. Mendenhall and C. Johnson (with their big runs included, 50 and 76 yards respectively) are averaging 4.2 and 4.1 yards.

But really, we should take away their big plays because it's not fair to include them.

Before we all talk about how dumb it is to take away that 1 play, look at how many of his other yards were on draw plays to end the half last week with no timeouts. About 30 if I recall correctly.That is the only reason his ypc is not worst than TJ's. His other 18-19 runs look bad.

That 1 play is about the only effective play he has had running the ball this season. To deny that is being one sided.

And for the record, I want him to start too I just think people throwing those stats up like it shows some great difference between him and Jones so far is BS.

DeezNutz
09-23-2010, 11:56 AM
I think everybody missed the entire point of my post. Minus 1 play, 1 play, his numbers aren't that great. And they aren't.

Before we all talk about how dumb it is to take away that 1 play, look at how many of his yards were on draw plays to end the half last week with no timeouts. About 30 if I recall correctly.

That 1 play is about the only effective play he has had running the ball this season. To deny that is being one sided.

Though I understand what you're saying about the draw plays at the end of the half, I believe that's starting to go down a slippery slope.

Even minus the 56-yarder, a 4 YPC average is solid by any measure.

jjjayb
09-23-2010, 12:19 PM
Though I understand what you're saying about the draw plays at the end of the half, I believe that's starting to go down a slippery slope.

Even minus the 56-yarder, a 4 YPC average is solid by any measure.

Especially with less carries and not having the opportunity to get into a rythym.

Calitozoni
09-23-2010, 12:23 PM
I am not bashing him, I want to see him get the ball more as well, I am just looking at the comparison.

Everyone keeps showing the stats so far this year and saying "look JC is obviously out performing Jones".

This year, aside from the 1 run, a BIG IMPORTANT run, he hasn't. 2 games I know.

He will get his carries and end the year with more yards than Jones. Book it.

There is just no reason to make this the big issue when the big issue is Cassel.

This argument cracks me up. Let's take away all of the big runs for Barry Sanders, Emmit Smith, Eric Dickerson, Walter Payton, Gale Sayers, OJ Simpson, Jim Brown, et al, and see how they size up.ROFL

JC would likely have more big runs if he could stay on the field. Maybe not 56 yards (although possible), but 10-20 plus.

Calitozoni
09-23-2010, 12:26 PM
How so? It's only a 2 game season so far, and Charles has one run that's a statistical outlier.

And all of last years long runs were outliers too?

Sweet Daddy Hate
09-23-2010, 12:48 PM
Motherfuck this shit. All of it. Can we just get on to the next game, for fuck's sake?

:facepalm:

Marcellus
09-23-2010, 12:52 PM
This argument cracks me up. Let's take away all of the big runs for Barry Sanders, Emmit Smith, Eric Dickerson, Walter Payton, Gale Sayers, OJ Simpson, Jim Brown, et al, and see how they size up.ROFL

JC would likely have more big runs if he could stay on the field. Maybe not 56 yards (although possible), but 10-20 plus.


Look, I think JC should start I am just trying to look at what he has done on the field to this point. It is somewhat concerning to be honest. Everyone is screaming for him to get more carries I am fine with that but......

JC had a 20 yard run on a draw to end the half in Cleveland. Garbage time numbers no more important than garbage time passing numbers against a defense in prevent when they have a 17 pt lead.If you say otherwise you are a hypocrite.

His other 10 carries in that game netted 29 yards or a 2.9 yard average. Not good.

His 56 yard run came in a game where his other 10 carries netted 36 yards. Do the math.

So you have 1 huge play, 1 garbage play and 20 carries for 3.25 yards.

I am just looking at the numbers. Don't be concerned if you don't want to be.

Calitozoni
09-23-2010, 01:03 PM
Look, I think JC should start I am just trying to look at what he has done on the field to this point. It is somewhat concerning to be honest. Everyone is screaming for him to get more carries I am fine with that but......

JC had a 20 yard run on a draw to end the half in Cleveland. Garbage time numbers no more important than garbage time passing numbers against a defense in prevent when they have a 17 pt lead.If you say otherwise you are a hypocrite.

His other 10 carries in that game netted 29 yards or a 2.9 yard average. Not good.

His 56 yard run came in a game where his other 10 carries netted 36 yards. Do the math.

So you have 1 huge play, 1 garbage play and 20 carries for 3.25 yards.

I am just looking at the numbers. Don't be concerned if you don't want to be.

I'm not concerned at all. Almost every running back will tell you that the more you carry the ball, the more you get into a rhythm. JC's carries are so intermittent he has no chance to get into any kind of groove. I think if he got more carries, particularly on 1st and 2nd down, he'd be just as effective as last year. I also think his presence on the field would help the passing game.

Just Passin' By
09-23-2010, 01:12 PM
And all of last years long runs were outliers too?

That was last year. The "Tale of the tape" was about this year's numbers. This year, that one run is currently an outlier.

Calitozoni
09-23-2010, 01:21 PM
That was last year. The "Tale of the tape" was about this year's numbers. This year, that one run is currently an outlier.

I think it's reasonably safe to say that based on his historical performance more of these types of runs can be expected if he's on the field.

Pasta Giant Meatball
09-23-2010, 04:00 PM
Jones had an offensive line to run behind last year, this year he doesn't. We need to have the ball in the hands of a guy that can create something out of nothing, and that is Charles, not Jones. I see the use of splitting the carries and keeping both guys relatively fresh but you cannot have Jones getting 2/3 of the carries for this team. At the very least, if you are not going to hand the ball off the Charles, get him involved with some short passes, as he is deadly when he gets the ball in space.

Complete bull shit. KC's OL is not the problem this year.

Sweet Daddy Hate
09-23-2010, 04:25 PM
Complete bull shit. KC's OL is not the problem this year.

Word.

GordonGekko
09-23-2010, 05:02 PM
I like Charles,

he came into the league as a Chief, the organization developed him.

I don't see a problem with a heavy 2 RB punch, in fact it will add longevity to Charles' career, as long as he stays fit and hungry.

What I would rather see is the reverse of the overall carries statistic, where Charles gets what Jones is getting, and vice-versa.

As a Chief fan I don't want to see to Charles what happened to LJ, where the carry load 'broke' him prematurely. But he should get more carries, simple as that. He has proven he can get 200+ yards in a game and I don't see how this would relegate him to backup. If Haley wants the best chance to win, he should be looking at this also.

BigMeatballDave
09-23-2010, 05:19 PM
Even if you throw out JCs 56 yd run he has a higher YPR average.

chiefzilla1501
09-23-2010, 05:25 PM
Though I understand what you're saying about the draw plays at the end of the half, I believe that's starting to go down a slippery slope.

Even minus the 56-yarder, a 4 YPC average is solid by any measure.

That depends on your strategy. If you're playing to pile up points, then you care a lot about the home run and the big run. If you're playing ball control, then it's a very big fucking deal what your YPC is minus outliers. The Chiefs beat the Browns in Time of Possession by 7 minutes. Pretty impressive, given that the QB did nothing whatsoever to extend drives.

I'm interested to see who gets the ball more against SF. I'm especially interested to see how they break out carries against offensive powerhouses like Indy and Houston.

kstater
09-23-2010, 05:27 PM
we saw what Charles can do as a starter

how does Jones compare as a starter?


How about 6300 yards over the last 5 seasons.

BigMeatballDave
09-23-2010, 05:48 PM
Man this is getting old..... I really wish that we had something else to talk about...

Everythread, its best player or Cassel...This place will go Nuclear if the Chiefs lose Sunday with Cassel playing like shit and JC not getting the carries.

Chiefs Pantalones
09-23-2010, 05:50 PM
This place will go Nuclear if the Chiefs lose Sunday with Cassel playing like shit and JC not getting the carries.

lol it would go crazy even if we won, Cassel played well and Charles got enough carries. Chiefsplanet is like an old nagging cat lady.

Pasta Giant Meatball
09-23-2010, 05:51 PM
I think the frustrating part is that before Charles started last year KC was one of the worst offensive teams in the league. After he took over the team scored 22 points a game and that was with Cassel playing very poorly. This year he's a "backup" again and KC has struggled on offense. IMO if the Chiefs score 22 points a game this year there is a very good chance at making the postseason with this schedule.

DeezNutz
09-23-2010, 05:52 PM
That depends on your strategy. If you're playing to pile up points, then you care a lot about the home run and the big run. If you're playing ball control, then it's a very big ****ing deal what your YPC is minus outliers. The Chiefs beat the Browns in Time of Possession by 7 minutes. Pretty impressive, given that the QB did nothing whatsoever to extend drives.

I'm interested to see who gets the ball more against SF. I'm especially interested to see how they break out carries against offensive powerhouses like Indy and Houston.

First, scoring is always fairly important. Second, fine; let's play ball control. Therefore, it would be best to play the RB who averages more YPC.

DeezNutz
09-23-2010, 05:52 PM
How about 6300 yards over the last 5 seasons.

And the TTC was clearly talking about the Chiefs. And you know this.

BigMeatballDave
09-23-2010, 05:53 PM
It's Cassel and IMO the play calling.Some of the play calling has been very questionable, but I blame the offensive woes on Cassel. He still needs to execute.

chiefzilla1501
09-23-2010, 06:11 PM
First, scoring is always fairly important. Second, fine; let's play ball control. Therefore, it would be best to play the RB who averages more YPC.

If you're playing ball control, then Jamaal Charles gets you two big first downs and a bunch of 1-yard gains that lead to 3rd and longs.

I don't necessarily agree with the gameplan. But if your gameplan is to control the clock, Jones did a great job given that the Browns were putting 8-9 guys in the box consistently. He was supposed to extend drives, burn the clock, and set the Chiefs up for 3rd and shorts. He did all those things. You can blame Jones all you want, but it shouldn't be too much to ask for your QB to consistently convert on 3rd and short.

DeezNutz
09-23-2010, 06:13 PM
If you're playing ball control, then Jamaal Charles gets you two big first downs and a bunch of 1-yard gains that lead to 3rd and longs.

I don't necessarily agree with the gameplan. But if your gameplan is to control the clock, Jones did a great job given that the Browns were putting 8-9 guys in the box consistently. He was supposed to extend drives, burn the clock, and set the Chiefs up for 3rd and shorts. He did all those things. You can blame Jones all you want, but it shouldn't be too much to ask for your QB to consistently convert on 3rd and short.

Who is blaming Jones? Where is this made-up claim coming from?

Here's the fact: Charles did pretty damn well last year facing defenses that knew we had a shit QB then. Have Charles' skills diminished? If not, it's fucking stupid that he's not our featured back.

OnTheWarpath58
09-23-2010, 06:15 PM
I think the frustrating part is that before Charles started last year KC was one of the worst offensive teams in the league. After he took over the team scored 22 points a game and that was with Cassel playing very poorly. This year he's a "backup" again and KC has struggled on offense. IMO if the Chiefs score 22 points a game this year there is a very good chance at making the postseason with this schedule.

Exactly.

Pair this defense with the offense of Late 2009.

Amazing how all the talk went from Jamaal getting 1500 yards, to rationalizing him getting 12 touches a game.

'Hamas' Jenkins
09-23-2010, 06:17 PM
Most people will go to no end to rationalize decisions by those in charge because they don't want to consider the consequences if those same decision makers are wrong.

It doesn't matter whether it's Devard Darling with Herm, Ryan O'Callaghan, Thomas Jones, Damon Huard, Matt Cassel, Mike Goff, Jon McGraw, or Tyson Jackson.

This story really isn't all that interesting for how it may affect the team long term. I think eventually Charles will "win out" albeit in a far more protracted manner than he should. What is far more worth looking into are the ways in which people will betray common sense in order to kowtow to those who call the shots.

Honestly, if we started Javarris Williams next week there would be many would say it's a good reason, and they would then invent evidence (like his ability to take a PA fake) in order to justify that evaluation.

chiefzilla1501
09-23-2010, 06:21 PM
Most people will go to no end to rationalize decisions by those in charge because they don't want to consider the consequences if those same decision makers are wrong.

Works both ways, chief. I want Charles to get carries too and he's clearly a better back. But anyone who claims that he played better than Jones against Cleveland because of YPC is on crack.

'Hamas' Jenkins
09-23-2010, 06:23 PM
Works both ways, chief. I want Charles to get carries too and he's clearly a better back. But anyone who claims that he played better than Jones against Cleveland because of YPC is on crack.

What I'm talking about is obsequious behavior.

chiefzilla1501
09-23-2010, 06:26 PM
Exactly.

Pair this defense with the offense of Late 2009.

Amazing how all the talk went from Jamaal getting 1500 yards, to rationalizing him getting 12 touches a game.

I don't promote him getting 12 touches a game. Not by any stretch.

I want him to get 250-300 carries absolute max. That's all I care about. I don't care how you split that up throughout the season. If the Chiefs are truly going to give him less carries this week so he can get more carries another week when they like the matchup better, then it's okay with me. I don't know if that's what they're trying to do, but I'm willing to be patient to see if they do.

If we're 8 weeks into the season and he has less than 100 carries, that's when I'll start to get pissed.

KC Tattoo
09-23-2010, 06:30 PM
Teicher is right, the backfield balancing act isn't much of a problem for the opposing team.

chiefzilla1501
09-23-2010, 06:34 PM
Who is blaming Jones? Where is this made-up claim coming from?

Here's the fact: Charles did pretty damn well last year facing defenses that knew we had a shit QB then. Have Charles' skills diminished? If not, it's ****ing stupid that he's not our featured back.

Not blaming Jones, but making his performance look a lot worse than it actually was. His job was to control the clock and extend drives. The Chiefs' strategy was to win the Time of Possession game. Given that the Chiefs won that game by 7 minutes, that's pretty impressive given that they had no help whatsoever by the QB.

I'd be shocked if they use that same strategy against the 49ers. Will be really pissed if they use that strategy against the Texans or the Colts.

Sweet Daddy Hate
09-23-2010, 06:44 PM
Exactly.

Pair this defense with the offense of Late 2009.

Amazing how all the talk went from Jamaal getting 1500 yards, to rationalizing him getting 12 touches a game.

Charles and McCluster are our best hopes for winning or matching this game offensively. If they are not prominently featured against SF, there is some serious retardation afoot.

On a positive note; it's better to be bitching about who and what it will take for us to win as opposed to last year's overall "fuck it; no hope".