Quote:
Originally Posted by SNR
I'd still rather have all those RBs I listed over Gore.
In the game of football, only one guy can carry the football at a time. If both Charles and Gore touch the ball 250 times in a season, the only thing that matters when comparing them is the talent. If Charles is the better back, then a huge chunk of each RB stable's total touches becomes affected.
Charles and Hillis are going to account for 90%+ of the Chiefs touches by RBs. I'd rather have those two guys toting the ball for me than a mixture of Gore, James, Hunter, and Jacobs.
Again, this is based on what we know now. If James or Hunter explode into elite RBs this season, then we're talking a completely different story. But from what we know from years past, Charles and Hillis as a combo are better than those four guys based solely on the distribution between the backs.
|
Jacobs will only be in on short-yardage situations. The majority of the carries will go to Gore/Hunter, with James being the change of pace guy. Hunter isn't elite, but he's not much of a drop-off from Gore (and we've already established he's pretty damn good).
Hillis is not a sure thing btw. Your post implies that he is. He's had one good year, and he was far from elite last year. I really hope he returns to 2010 form, but that's not a guarantee. Is Charles better than Gore? Yes. But the ability and versatility of Hunter/James is exponentially better than just having Hillis as your 2.