LJ's Problem - Page 3

Jilly · 10-09-2006, 01:55 PM

This may have been addressed in another thread and if so, point me there... But, what do you think LJ's problem is this year?

Is it that he isn't running angry?
Is it that Herm's loudly proclaimed our offense to be a running offense and so it's predictable?
Is it that we have no good lead blocker?
Is it that we miss Willie Roaf?

I'm sure it's a combo, but...what do you think?

**HemiEd** · 10-10-2006, 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by frazod

His problem - fucking butterfingers. Cost us one game we damn well should have won (Denver) and almost cost us another.

To hell with analysis and excuses. He's paid millions of dollars to carry the ball. Hold onto the goddamn thing.

Very well said Tim.

GoHuge · 10-10-2006, 03:03 PM

Obviously all of the above are contributing factors, Roaf, Richardson, patchwork line, etc. But LJ is still 20 yards a game better than the next guy in yards from scrimmage. At least the Chiefs are finding a way to utilize him when they are stacking the box. He's still getting 150 per game. Not as exciting as 150 rushing yards per game but like I said he's 20 yards per game better than the next guy in the league and most of those are YAC. When he gets the ball he's getting it done. Can't understand all the fumbles right now, but it's not really fair to ask whats wrong with LJ. He's not a bowling ball that is going to knock down ten pins lined up directly in front of him like teams are doing without some help. That HOF, All Pro help he's had is either retired, injured, getting old, or playing for the Vikings.

trndobrd · 10-10-2006, 03:04 PM

If we just had someone who could be a consistent threat between 10-15 yards across the middle of the field. The possibility of 3 or 4 long shots down field isn't going to keep opposing defenses from stacking the box, and is still difficult considering out pass protection problems. What we need a sure handed player that can consistently get open at about 10 yards, right behind the linebackers so the safeties aren't as aggressive in moving up for run support and the LB have to think about short routes in addition to stopping the run.

Maybe someday Herm and Solari will find a player like that.

vailpass · 10-10-2006, 03:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by trndobrd

If we just had someone who could be a consistent threat between 10-15 yards across the middle of the field. The possibility of 3 or 4 long shots down field isn't going to keep opposing defenses from stacking the box, and is still difficult considering out pass protection problems. What we need a sure handed player that can consistently get open at about 10 yards, right behind the linebackers so the safeties aren't as aggressive in moving up for run support and the LB have to think about short routes in addition to stopping the run.

Maybe someday Herm and Solari will find a player like that.

If they find that guy and use him to catch passes Croyle will see action a lot sooner than you might like.

trndobrd · 10-10-2006, 03:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by vailpass

If they find that guy and use him to catch passes Croyle will see action a lot sooner than you might like.

I have no desire to see Croyle get any more action, unless it's similar to the 49ers game and I understand the need for better pass protection. But someone needs to find a player that goes short across the middle more than twice a game.

Dark Horse · 10-10-2006, 03:29 PM

It seems to me that LJ has looked tentative at times this year. Instead of getting low and taking the 2 or 3 yards the defense will give he has stayed too upright and allowed himself to be pulled down instead of leaning forward and driving with his legs. In the Denver game I think he knew going in he was not going to break many 20 yard runs so he stayed low and attacked and he looked a lot like he did last year. He just needs to settle down and take whats there and forget about all that 2000 yard nonsense.

Kyle401 · 10-10-2006, 04:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dark Horse

It seems to me that LJ has looked tentative at times this year. Instead of getting low and taking the 2 or 3 yards the defense will give he has stayed too upright and allowed himself to be pulled down instead of leaning forward and driving with his legs. In the Denver game I think he knew going in he was not going to break many 20 yard runs so he stayed low and attacked and he looked a lot like he did last year. He just needs to settle down and take whats there and forget about all that 2000 yard nonsense.

Yep. He may have bought into his own hype a little and he seems to be carrying himself a little bit high this year. That just makes what he has been able to accomplish that much more impressive. Hopefully he will get back to picking up the tough 3 yards when there is no hole. He's definately going to need to get lower to do it though.

FAX · 10-10-2006, 04:43 PM

LJ is fine. If he can stop fumbling the ball and we can get some cleaner blocking from the interior line, you'll start seeing more yardage from the run. That will come.

The biggest problem I see is that we seem to be unable to run classic Chief sweeps, stretch plays, and outside handoffs. Obviously, it would be best to have a tackle or two to do that, but we should be able to spread defenses if we can employ our TEs to assist in those types of plays. Solari appears to be trying reverses to keep defenses honest, but it's not an ideal solution by any means.

Right now, everything is in the middle and there's only so much fun you can have doing that when the enemy's box is stacked.

FAX

Crashride · 10-10-2006, 04:46 PM

Yea he needs to cover up that ball when he runs into those walls, but given the circumstances larry is perfect for this offense. He makes the big plays when it matters and hes patient.

FAX · 10-10-2006, 04:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Crashride

Yea he needs to cover up that ball when he runs into those walls, but given the circumstances larry is perfect for this offense. He makes the big plays when it matters and hes patient.

That was also, I believe, the only screen we ran that day, Mr. Crashride.

I think the Cards were waiting for him to bang his head into Shield's ass again. It was a very good call.

FAX

HIChief · 10-10-2006, 06:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rising Sun

Trent is out, but Huard has shown an ability, but the coaches are scared shitless of turning the ball over, so they wont let him try.

How about gameplanning against a stacked front? Maybe spread them out to open up some running lanes? No, we play right into their hands and run tight formations to keep everything in a tiny area.

Blaylock looked like ass even behind our oline. Remember before we drafted LJ and Priest went down, and Blaylock laid out that embarrassing performance to end the season?

How stacked against the run can a 3-4 defense be--ala Pittsburg? Would LJ have a better day against this scheme? What would our O-line have to do to help LJ crack some decent runs against the Steelers?

10-09-2006, 01:55 PM
Jilly MVP Join Date: Nov 2005 Location: Lee's Summit Casino cash: $10004925	LJ's Problem This may have been addressed in another thread and if so, point me there... But, what do you think LJ's problem is this year? Is it that he isn't running angry? Is it that Herm's loudly proclaimed our offense to be a running offense and so it's predictable? Is it that we have no good lead blocker? Is it that we miss Willie Roaf? I'm sure it's a combo, but...what do you think?
Posts: 8,461

10-10-2006, 03:03 PM	#32
GoHuge The Truth Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Overland Park Casino cash: $10006072	Obviously all of the above are contributing factors, Roaf, Richardson, patchwork line, etc. But LJ is still 20 yards a game better than the next guy in yards from scrimmage. At least the Chiefs are finding a way to utilize him when they are stacking the box. He's still getting 150 per game. Not as exciting as 150 rushing yards per game but like I said he's 20 yards per game better than the next guy in the league and most of those are YAC. When he gets the ball he's getting it done. Can't understand all the fumbles right now, but it's not really fair to ask whats wrong with LJ. He's not a bowling ball that is going to knock down ten pins lined up directly in front of him like teams are doing without some help. That HOF, All Pro help he's had is either retired, injured, getting old, or playing for the Vikings.
Posts: 3,991

10-10-2006, 03:04 PM	#33
trndobrd 'Stachecicle Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: The Tolerance Box Casino cash: $4945087	If we just had someone who could be a consistent threat between 10-15 yards across the middle of the field. The possibility of 3 or 4 long shots down field isn't going to keep opposing defenses from stacking the box, and is still difficult considering out pass protection problems. What we need a sure handed player that can consistently get open at about 10 yards, right behind the linebackers so the safeties aren't as aggressive in moving up for run support and the LB have to think about short routes in addition to stopping the run. Maybe someday Herm and Solari will find a player like that. __________________ "I don't really think there is a need to raise or debate this point." -jAZ
Posts: 7,077

10-10-2006, 03:29 PM	#36
Dark Horse Veteran Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Kansas Casino cash: $8665015	It seems to me that LJ has looked tentative at times this year. Instead of getting low and taking the 2 or 3 yards the defense will give he has stayed too upright and allowed himself to be pulled down instead of leaning forward and driving with his legs. In the Denver game I think he knew going in he was not going to break many 20 yard runs so he stayed low and attacked and he looked a lot like he did last year. He just needs to settle down and take whats there and forget about all that 2000 yard nonsense.
Posts: 1,383

10-10-2006, 04:43 PM	#38
FAX testing ... 1, 2, 3 Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Tennessee Casino cash: $6753759	LJ is fine. If he can stop fumbling the ball and we can get some cleaner blocking from the interior line, you'll start seeing more yardage from the run. That will come. The biggest problem I see is that we seem to be unable to run classic Chief sweeps, stretch plays, and outside handoffs. Obviously, it would be best to have a tackle or two to do that, but we should be able to spread defenses if we can employ our TEs to assist in those types of plays. Solari appears to be trying reverses to keep defenses honest, but it's not an ideal solution by any means. Right now, everything is in the middle and there's only so much fun you can have doing that when the enemy's box is stacked. FAX
Posts: 44,492

10-10-2006, 04:46 PM	#39
Crashride We got DANCERS in tampa Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Tampa, FL Casino cash: $10004900	Yea he needs to cover up that ball when he runs into those walls, but given the circumstances larry is perfect for this offense. He makes the big plays when it matters and hes patient.
Posts: 1,964