Why is Blaylock starting this week?
 

Why not just give the nod to Johnson since he is under contract for a few more years and played well last week?

It's clearly an attempt to flood this website with 17 thread variations of this weekly topic.

Umm....maybe because Vermeil is a crabby old bastard?? Too set in his ways to admit that LJ might be a decent back?

Because he is on my fantasy team!!!!!!!!

...or, because maybe they want to reduce the risk of injury to LJ???????
They are gonna need him next year.

Blaylock i bet will start every game the rest of the season, but LJ will probably get a pretty good amount of carries.

That will work. :thumb:

We have a winner! DV isn't about to admit he's been wrong all this time.

:clap:

I don't think D.V. is wrong to start Blaylock. First of all Blaylock is an all around better back right now. I say this in the light that L.J. still hasn't picked up the blocking aspect of being a NFL runningback yet, and Blaylock has not done anything wrong that would make D.V. not start him.

WHY DON'T WE RUN THE 3-4

You make a good point in regards to his blocking. But this also says to me that we haven't given up on the idea of retaining Blaylock. I've said before that I don't think there will be a big bidding war to get him. As long as KC can get him at a reasonable price and it doesn't hinder our ability to address the real problem areas, I can live with it. Keeping Blaylock does bring the LJ pick that much closer to a wasted pick though.

If we aren't keeping Blaylock, now is the time for LJ to learn blocking...in game.

We don't have enough decent linebackers to run a 4-3, let alone a 3-4.

From an insider email Bob Dole just received

We don't have enough for a 6-1. :shake:

:clap::clap::clap::thumb: