PDA

View Full Version : Chiefs JJ Arrington anyone?

Bill Lundberg
03-03-2009, 12:27 PM
Broncos | Arrington moving on
Tue, 03 Mar 2009 09:45:45 -0800 Mike Klis and Lindsay H. Jones, of The Denver Post (http://www.kffl.com/link/184), report the Denver Broncos (http://www.kffl.com/team/15/nfl)' deal for free-agent RB J.J. Arrington (http://www.kffl.com/player/11302/nfl) (Cardinals) has all but fallen apart. Arrington had a four-year, $10 million deal in place with the Broncos, but the deal fell apart. He has been drawing interest from other teams, including the Arizona Cardinals (http://www.kffl.com/team/6/nfl).




Haley knows as well as anyone what this kid could bring to the table. I think he could be a good 3rd down/situational back. Not to mention he's a pretty good return man.


Wonder if we'll have him in for a look?
Reerun_KC
03-03-2009, 12:29 PM
Wonder if we'll have him in for a look?

:clap:

Beautiful!
Mile High Mania
03-03-2009, 12:30 PM
I'm glad that whatever happened ... happened, I wasn't a fan of this one.
StcChief
03-03-2009, 12:30 PM
now he's worth a look.
ChiefRon
03-03-2009, 12:32 PM
Interesting...wtf are they doing over there in Denver anyway?

Sheesh.
58kcfan89
03-03-2009, 12:34 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't we have a 3rd down back/change of pace back with Charles? And wasn't Kevin Robinson drafted last year to return kicks? I'd like to see what he can do assuming he's healthy.

And ROFL @ Denver. The wheels are coming off & I love it!
Bill Lundberg
03-03-2009, 12:37 PM
Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't we have a 3rd down back/change of pace back with Charles? And wasn't Kevin Robinson drafted last year to return kicks? I'd like to see what he can do assuming he's healthy.

And ROFL @ Denver. The wheels are coming off & I love it!

I'm just throwing it out there as a possibility because of his history with Haley. As far as your points, I would take him over Dantrell Savage in a heartbeat. And I don't like the idea of Kevin Robinson. In my mind he's a one trick pony. IIRC, he was back there a few times last year and didn't do anything to make me remember him.
suds79
03-03-2009, 12:42 PM
I'm just not big on the idea of vet RBs. Not saying he's old or anything.

But they do have more wear & tear on them and change of pace RBs you can easily get in the mid to late rounds.

RB is just an easy position to fill IMO.
Bill Lundberg
03-03-2009, 12:44 PM
I'm just not big on the idea of vet RBs. Not saying he's old or anything.

But they do have more wear & tear on them and change of pace RBs you can easily get in the mid to late rounds.

RB is just an easy position to fill IMO.

He only has 183 carries in his 3 year career. I look at him like a Kevin Faulk in New England's offense.
Hog's Gone Fishin
03-03-2009, 12:47 PM
Rumor has it Arrington caught wind of McDaniels potentially trading Arrington to the lions for their 6th round draft choice.

And no, I'll pass !
DaneMcCloud
03-03-2009, 12:49 PM
Charles>Arrington
Bill Lundberg
03-03-2009, 12:53 PM
Arrington > Savage
Mr. Krab
03-03-2009, 12:54 PM
If your team can't draft running backs then you're really in trouble. Save free agency money for other positions.
htismaqe
03-03-2009, 01:03 PM
He only has 183 carries in his 3 year career. I look at him like a Kevin Faulk in New England's offense.

We've already got a faster version on the roster in Charles.
Micjones
03-03-2009, 01:48 PM
No thanks. Johnson isn't going anywhere and we have Smith and Charles behind him.
DaneMcCloud
03-03-2009, 02:08 PM
No thanks. Johnson isn't going anywhere and we have Smith and Charles behind him.

I wouldn't count on Smith. He's coming off of ACL surgery and wasn't exactly the fastest guy around before that.

The Chiefs will definitely need at least one new RB (if not two).

Just not Arrington.
htismaqe
03-03-2009, 03:06 PM
I wouldn't count on Smith. He's coming off of ACL surgery and wasn't exactly the fastest guy around before that.

The Chiefs will definitely need at least one new RB (if not two).

Just not Arrington.

We've talked alot about defensive players that may or may not fit the new system, but we haven't talked much about the offense.

Kolby Smith, I think, is a guy that might not fit the new offense.
DaKCMan AP
03-03-2009, 03:37 PM
We've talked alot about defensive players that may or may not fit the new system, but we haven't talked much about the offense.

Kolby Smith, I think, is a guy that might not fit the new offense.

I don't know about that. Kolby Smith, IMO, can play the role of Tim Hightower - a shorter, stout back that can run through tackles.
Rausch
03-03-2009, 03:39 PM
Nein...
DaneMcCloud
03-03-2009, 03:48 PM
I don't know about that. Kolby Smith, IMO, can play the role of Tim Hightower - a shorter, stout back that can run through tackles.

Maybe.

They're roughly the same size (KS is 5'11, 219 & TH is 6'0, 224) but I'd hardly call them "shorter".

Short to me is Emmitt Smith, Priest Holmes, Jamaal Charles, LT - 5'9-5'10 and built like a fireplug.
DaKCMan AP
03-03-2009, 03:56 PM
Maybe.

They're roughly the same size (KS is 5'11, 219 & TH is 6'0, 224) but I'd hardly call them "shorter".

Short to me is Emmitt Smith, Priest Holmes, Jamaal Charles, LT - 5'9-5'10 and built like a fireplug.

I guess I mean shorter in relation to their stockier build. Emmitt, Priest, Charles are short but they're more elusive, quick cut type players. Kolby and Hightower are more solidly built and run more physically.
htismaqe
03-03-2009, 03:57 PM
I don't know about that. Kolby Smith, IMO, can play the role of Tim Hightower - a shorter, stout back that can run through tackles.

Hightower seems to be alot shiftier than Smith.
The Buddha
03-03-2009, 03:58 PM
Oh god... Are we going to end up having a "running back by committee?"
htismaqe
03-03-2009, 04:03 PM
Oh god... Are we going to end up having a "running back by committee?"

The whole league seems to be going that way to a certain extent. The approach seems to be to have a 1-2 combo rather than a feature back.
The Buddha
03-03-2009, 04:06 PM
The whole league seems to be going that way to a certain extent. The approach seems to be to have a 1-2 combo rather than a feature back.

Sorry. I just had visions of Donnell Bennett and Bam Morris... :Lin:
htismaqe
03-03-2009, 04:07 PM
Sorry. I just had visions of Donnell Bennett and Bam Morris... :Lin:

Christian Okoye and Barry Word.

Marty wasn't a dinosaur, he was 20 years ahead of his time!
DaKCMan AP
03-03-2009, 04:09 PM
Sorry. I just had visions of Donnell Bennett and Bam Morris... :Lin:

Success is predicated on having two or more good backs, not two or more fat shitty backs.
Micjones
03-03-2009, 04:10 PM
I wouldn't count on Smith. He's coming off of ACL surgery and wasn't exactly the fastest guy around before that.

The Chiefs will definitely need at least one new RB (if not two).

Just not Arrington.

I don't think we have to count on Smith.
Charles was the backup anyway.

And if memory serves we signed Dantrell Savage to the PS, no?
DaneMcCloud
03-03-2009, 04:11 PM
Success is predicated on having two or more good backs, not two or more fat shitty backs.

Yep.

The Chiefs need "Thunder" to go along with "Lightening" (Charles).
DaneMcCloud
03-03-2009, 04:12 PM
I don't think we have to count on Smith.
Charles was the backup anyway.

And if memory serves we signed Dantrell Savage to the PS, no?

Savage is way too small to be an every down back. He's only 5'8 and is a situational guy at best.

Charles should definitely move ahead of Smith on the depth chart and should have been ahead of him last year.
The Buddha
03-03-2009, 04:14 PM
Yep.

The Chiefs need "Thunder" to go along with "Lightening" (Charles).

I remember an interview with Cowher about 5 years ago or so, and he said something along the lines of, "I've tried thunder and lightning, I've tried all combinations, but the best one I've found is two smashmouth backs."

So we get Bettis out of retirement, and then get Jamal Lewis... It'll work. :-)
Micjones
03-03-2009, 04:19 PM
Savage is way too small to be an every down back. He's only 5'8 and is a situational guy at best.

Charles should definitely move ahead of Smith on the depth chart and should have been ahead of him last year.

Savage would be the Third RB.
Why would he have to be an every-down back?
Charles is your back up (he's not an every-down back either though).

So if that's the point you're trying to make I understand.
HemiEd
03-03-2009, 04:22 PM
No mention of LJ? :evil:
Bill Lundberg
03-03-2009, 04:31 PM
I remember an interview with Cowher about 5 years ago or so, and he said something along the lines of, "I've tried thunder and lightning, I've tried all combinations, but the best one I've found is two smashmouth backs."

So we get Bettis out of retirement, and then get Jamal Lewis... It'll work. :-)

Yeah, that's why he won a Super Bowl with Bettis and Willie Parker (Thunder and Lightening).
The Buddha
03-03-2009, 04:32 PM
Yeah, that's why he won a Super Bowl with Bettis and Willie Parker (Thunder and Lightening).

Uh, this was before he won the Super Bowl. It was the year they had Bettis and Staley.

Its just an opinion.
Bill Lundberg
03-03-2009, 04:33 PM
Uh, this was before he won the Super Bowl. It was the year they had Bettis and Staley.

Its just an opinion.

I know. The irony is that he said that, then won the SB with the opposite.
The Buddha
03-03-2009, 04:36 PM
I know. The irony is that he said that, then won the SB with the opposite.

Yeah... It just goes to show you that chemistry has a lot to do with it.

Edited to add: And you have to admit that Cowher had a hard-on for bruiser backs.
Rausch
03-03-2009, 04:37 PM
I remember an interview with Cowher about 5 years ago or so, and he said something along the lines of, "I've tried thunder and lightning, I've tried all combinations, but the best one I've found is two smashmouth backs."

So we get Bettis out of retirement, and then get Jamal Lewis... It'll work. :-)

THE BEST ONE I'VE FOUND would be the point to concentrate on.

Everything about that SB win under Cowher would be contrary to his philosophies...