Rams' Steven Jackson vs. Chiefs' Larry Johnson
 

I'd like to hear a few comments (from those more knowledgable than me) about why Jackson is considered the future of the Rams after Faulk retires and Johnson is considered a bust.

Based on their build alone, both players seem to Eddie George-type RBs (which isn't in the Faulk/Priest/Blaylock mold). Both were late 1st round draft picks. Both were considered the #1 RB in the draft that season.

Johnson has had fewer opportunities than Jackson, but on the surface the two guys seem to have a LOT in common.

Without getting too technical, Steven Jackson is the shit, Larry JOhnson just looks like it.

we def. lose another LJ needs to get some carreis in.

As long as Rich Scanlon is not a member of the Kansas City Chiefs active roster on game day, Larry Johnson isn't worth the time it takes to type La

See?

In general I agree, but Johnson has done a number of things to not endear himself to fans. Also, i think MOST people around here feel that Priest will still be here another year or two, which means that the Chiefs will have wasted Johnson's youthfull years -- unless they deal him, in which case they're not going to get much, making him a bust. Faulk, on the other hand, is definitely on the down side of his great career and Jackson is getting chances to play NOW. Plus, Faulk probably will retire at the end of this year, making Jackson was more useful.

Johnson is a bust because he gets no playing time it's that simple. How could he ever become a NFL runningback if they don't give him any carries. Sometimes you just have to let a player sink or swim but the Chiefs coaching staff are afraid to let him play. They made him a bust.

Stephen Jackson is a fast agile and a BIG back. Larry Johnson is just big. Jackson makes one move and he is in the secondary, johnson makes one move and he is running right into the back of Willie roaf

I'd suggest spending more time in the film room Mister...

:shake:

Other than the fact that they were both first round picks, they have virtually nothing in common. Jackson's a big bruising back with speed and Johnson's a little bitch with the speed of a DLineman running backwards. Johnson was actually drafted after an injured Willis McGahee, eventhough Willis might've never stepped on an NFL field. That shows you how much the Bills thought of LJ.

Really, I've watched both play in college and in the NFL, and they're not comparable at all.

Given their current standing, I would hope that the Chiefs run LJ a lot to see once and for all what they have.

I agree. I don't really care for LJ but if you have used a first rounder on a player you better atleast play him.

As much as I'd like to use this against Johnson, I think it says more about how strongly the Bills felt about McGahee than about how poorly they felt about LJ. They had a very decent starting RB (Henry) and drafted McGahee anyway because they believed he could be an uber-stud in the future. Very different situation than us, who drafted a RB because Priest was hurt and he may need to be able to step and play right away.

Well, LJ sucks for one thing.

We ruined Larry Johnsons career.

There was a very good chance that McGahee would've never even played a down though. If LJ was that good, they would've taken him over a guy who had just tore his ACL.