PDA

View Full Version : Chiefs Todd Haley doesn’t want Jamaal Charles to be a feature back. Here’s why he should.


Tribal Warfare
08-23-2011, 12:09 PM
Todd Haley doesn’t want Jamaal Charles to be a feature back. Here’s why he should. (http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/blog/shutdown_corner/post/Todd-Haley-doesn-8217-t-want-Jamaal-Charles-to-?urn=nfl-wp5673)

Kansas City Chiefs head coach Todd Haley has been getting heat for a while now about one subject that universally frustrates any fan or fantasy player who follows his team: Because it is so obvious that Jamaal Charles(notes) is Kansas City's best running back, why does Charles not get more carries or other opportunities to make the offense go?

In 2010, Charles got 230 carries to Thomas Jones'(notes) 245. And while we'll be bringing some more advanced stats to this argument presently, we'll start simple: Charles averaged 6.4 yards per carry, while Jones averaged 3.4. Oh, but Jones is the short-yardage back, you say? YPC isn't supposed to matter? Fine, but if that's the case, and Jones' job is to get those valuable first downs, how is it that he only picked up 39, while Charles blew it up with an amazing 70? Think about that — Jamaal Charles was good for a first down on 30.4 percent of his carries. Adrian Peterson tied Charles for fourth-most first downs in the NFL last year behind Arian Foster(notes), Maurice Jones-Drew(notes) and Michael Turner(notes), but it took Peterson 53 more carries to do that, which bumped his first-down percentage down to 24.7 percent.

We'll continue the argument for more of Charles in a second, but first, we thought we'd let Haley try and explain himself. This is what he told SI.com's Peter King last week:

"We led the league in rushing,'' Haley said, "and all I ever hear is how we don't run the ball the right way because Jamaal's not getting it 25 times a game. It's anti-TEAM. The way fans looked at what we did on offense was so fantasy football driven. You know, the curse of the NFL -- the scroll on the bottom of the screen, with all the individual stats. Fortunately for us, Jamaal's such a good team player. He says, 'Coach, I get it. Whatever you want me to do, I'm here.'''

King adds that "Haley's theory is he's eating the clock and keeping Charles healthy for 16 weeks, and he has zero regrets." And of course, that's all well and good. Charles is in a good situation in a lot of ways. He's got a great zone-blocking line in front of him that sets his talents up very nicely — it's almost impossible for an edge defender to contend with Charles if he gets a clean burst to the sideline — and the Chiefs gave a nice new contract last year. But the myths about Charles are so flawed. You can't look at him as the typical speed back. He may be 5-foot-11 and 199 pounds, but not every smaller back needs to be put in a box in favor of a lumbering and decidedly less effective second (or in Jones' case, first) option.

Todd Haley doesn’t want Jamaal Charles to be a feature back. Here’s why he should.Haley has said that Charles is still learning blitz pickup? Well, according to Football Outsiders' game-charting numbers, Kansas City went with two tight ends 38 percent of the time, third-highest in the league. You've got blockers, dude. He's not an every-down back? Charles was actually one of the few backs in the league to put up positive DVOA (FO's primary opoponent-adjusted efficiency metric) on every down, while Jones racked up negative DVOA on every down. Haley's afraid of burning him out? From carries 11 through 20 per game, only Oakland's Darren McFadden(notes) (7.3) had a higher yards-per-carry average than Charles' 6.9.

We understand the importance of protecting your best assets. But there are exceptions, and here's one: When you have the next Chris Johnson in your backfield, and you're short on explosive plays overall (take away the 36 plays of 20 yards or more authored by Charles and receiver Dwayne Bowe(notes), and the rest of the team totaled 19 in 2010), it behooves you to throw caution to the wind and ride that very special horse as long as he'll go. Haley's preference is to color outside the lines — on one preseason play this year, the call seemed to be for the 170-pound Dexter McCluster(notes) to cut back inside on a third-and-long, a play that should have been burned in a public ceremony.

It's hard to see outliers sometimes. Coaches think conservatively for a number of reasons, and as much as they say they'll assess each player differently, it's hard for them not to get caught up in types. Charles would seem for all the world to be that split-off back — a fantasy handcuff who's better off in a rotational role. But when you're dealing with this kind of talent, the landscape changes. The Chris Johnson comparison is apt with Charles — both backs far exceed the expected means of production you normally get from their body types, because their skill sets are so freaky.

Todd Haley is fortunate enough to have a very special offensive weapon. There's no doubt that he's a great offensive coach, but why does he refuse to see the potentially enormous benefits of Jamaal Charles' rare palette? I talked to Haley about Charles on a conference call last year, and I know that he believes in the way he's using his best player. I don't think it's stubbornness or anything like that.

But when so much evidence flies in the face and leans to the contrary ... underutilizing Jamaal Charles seems to be a tougher sell every day.

Bump
08-23-2011, 12:12 PM
longevity is good

Chris Meck
08-23-2011, 12:13 PM
-because we'd like Charles to be able to finish the season.


end of story.

Hammock Parties
08-23-2011, 12:14 PM
He was second in the league in yards from scrimmage, Doug, you idiot.

You can force feed Charles the ball more but that doesn't mean he's going to produce at the same rate as his touches go up. It's called the law of diminishing returns.

Hammock Parties
08-23-2011, 12:17 PM
Super Bowl teams don't have bell cow running backs anymore.

The last bell cow running back to win a Super Bowl was Corey Dillon in 2004.

BigMeatballDave
08-23-2011, 12:18 PM
I'm good with the way Charles is used now.

Sofa King
08-23-2011, 12:26 PM
Narrow minded article.

Fansy the Famous Bard
08-23-2011, 12:29 PM
Simply put, Haley and Pioli are still building. And they know they are still a season away. Burn out one of hte best players in the league on a team that has no shot of making the SB? Or save him for when the rest of the team is good and we do?

I think Haley\Pioli is correct with the approach.

T-post Tom
08-23-2011, 12:32 PM
WTH is going on at The KC Star Sports Department? Lead paint chips? Lobotomies? Peyote? Slow news day?

DMAC
08-23-2011, 12:32 PM
If we didnt lead the league in rushing...I would have a problem with how he is being utilized.

But we did, so I dont.

Hammock Parties
08-23-2011, 12:33 PM
Simply put, Haley and Pioli are still building. And they know they are still a season away. Burn out one of hte best players in the league on a team that has no shot of making the SB? Or save him for when the rest of the team is good and we do?

I think Haley\Pioli is correct with the approach.

I would not even attempt to burn him out if the team was stacked like the 92 Cowboys.

You give him much more over his current workload and something could snap or twist the wrong way at any time.

With McClain on the team there's zero reason to give Charles even as much as 300 carries and I wouldn't even give him that many.

Amnorix
08-23-2011, 12:35 PM
Simply put, Haley and Pioli are still building. And they know they are still a season away. Burn out one of hte best players in the league on a team that has no shot of making the SB? Or save him for when the rest of the team is good and we do?

I think Haley\Pioli is correct with the approach.


This.

Amnorix
08-23-2011, 12:39 PM
There were only 8 RBs in teh NFL with 300 carries (including Jones-Drew, who had 299). Charles was 14th with 230. Add 45 receptions and you're at 275 touches.

You want to break him? Go ahead and give him those extra 70 carries.

Misplaced_Chiefs_Fan
08-23-2011, 12:43 PM
WTH is going on at The KC Star Sports Department? Lead paint chips? Lobotomies? Peyote? Slow news day?

That's a Yahoo blogger's post.

2bikemike
08-23-2011, 12:46 PM
Damn Amnorix and I can agree on some things.

Reaper16
08-23-2011, 01:23 PM
Charles could get 2-3 more carries a game. Thomas Jones being not-good is a bigger problem, though.

Thig Lyfe
08-23-2011, 01:33 PM
Give Charles just a few more carries per game, have Dex come in when he needs a breather, use TJ as a change of pace back, and give McClain the ball on short yardage situations.

THE ULTIMATE RBBC!!!!!!!!!

ForeverChiefs58
08-23-2011, 01:47 PM
Super Bowl teams don't have bell cow running backs anymore.

The last bell cow running back to win a Super Bowl was Corey Dillon in 2004.

Bell cow? Are you sure you didn't mean cow bell? Cause...

Guess what? I got a fever...And the only prescription, is more cow bell.


<iframe width="420" height="345" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/q4royOLtvmQ" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

chiefzilla1501
08-23-2011, 07:16 PM
Even with his limited carries, there were a few games late in the season where he limped off the sidelines.

That's stuff you see from watching games vs. looking at statistics.

BigMeatballDave
08-23-2011, 08:12 PM
Give Charles just a few more carries per game, have Dex come in when he needs a breather, use TJ as a change of pace back, and give McClain the ball on short yardage situations.

THE ULTIMATE RBBC!!!!!!!!!I'd rather cut TJ and give those carries to McClain.

DTLB58
08-23-2011, 08:22 PM
It's not about age anymore for RB's it's about carries. He is just trying to keep him around a little longer and in the end we will all be happier and thankful for it.

Thread over. Now everyone just stop it. :D

Extra Point
08-23-2011, 08:28 PM
I'd rather cut TJ and give those carries to McClain.

You may get your wish.

Ace Gunner
08-23-2011, 08:36 PM
Right argument, wrong time. If Jamaal had taken more carries last season and during the playoff game, would the Chiefs go championship? no. This isn't the time. When it is, I'm pretty fucking sure Haley will give the game all he and his team has.

DBOSHO
08-23-2011, 08:42 PM
Right argument, wrong time. If Jamaal had taken more carries last season and during the playoff game, would the Chiefs go championship? no. This isn't the time. When it is, I'm pretty ****ing sure Haley will give the game all he and his team has.

So why even play the games if we arent going to win them?By that logic, we might as well go 0-16, grab luck, and wait a few years to make a superbowl run.

Demonpenz
08-23-2011, 08:43 PM
wait is this chiefsplanet? Are there smart football comments? What kind of world is this>?!

Pablo
08-23-2011, 09:27 PM
Charles just need like 30-35 touches a game.

And get Dex like 15 a game.

Think of how unstoppable our offense would be.

CHAMPIONSHIP.

Extra Point
08-23-2011, 10:14 PM
Charles just need like 30-35 touches a game.

And get Dex like 15 a game.

Think of how unstoppable our offense would be.

CHAMPIONSHIP.

The 4 RBSs and 3 QBs with the right 53 might be a stretch, but it could work. The distribution of % touches and looks to me like:

35% JC
27% RM
23% TJ
15% DM

Haley has to out-Stram Stram to make this season work with this scenario.

BossChief
08-23-2011, 10:19 PM
Charles just need like 30-35 touches a game.

And get Dex like 15 a game.

Think of how unstoppable our offense would be.

CHAMPIONSHIP.detect sarcasm

what would we do in week 5 or 6 when they are both broken?

Jones needs moar carries?

Pablo
08-23-2011, 10:22 PM
detect sarcasm

what would we do in week 5 or 6 when they are both broken?

Jones needs moar carries?Submit application to nearest law enforcement agency.

BossChief
08-23-2011, 10:23 PM
Submit application to nearest law enforcement agency.

reported

SDChiefs
08-24-2011, 12:23 AM
Damn Amnorix and I can agree on some things.

Anytime you agree with pioli you agree with amnorix. They are one and the same.

Thig Lyfe
08-24-2011, 12:38 AM
I'd rather cut TJ and give those carries to McClain.

That would be good too!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

WarPath
08-24-2011, 03:37 AM
I agree that you should spare Charles. The team has good enough backs to save some of the abuse.

Dave Lane
08-24-2011, 11:30 AM
Damn Amnorix and I can agree on some things.

Amnorix is an extremely sharp dude.

Mama Hip Rockets
08-24-2011, 11:42 AM
Right argument, wrong time. If Jamaal had taken more carries last season and during the playoff game, would the Chiefs go championship? no. This isn't the time. When it is, I'm pretty ****ing sure Haley will give the game all he and his team has.

They may not have won the Super Bowl, but Charles definitely should have had more carries in the playoff game. He was the only player on the team that was even remotely a factor in that game, but he only got 9 carries, I believe.

Reerun_KC
08-24-2011, 11:44 AM
They may not have won the Super Bowl, but Charles definitely should have had more carries in the playoff game. He was the only player on the team that was even remotely a factor in that game, but he only got 9 carries, I believe.

IIRC, he gave the ball back to Balitmore...

Ball security would be nice...

Ace Gunner
08-24-2011, 11:50 AM
They may not have won the Super Bowl, but Charles definitely should have had more carries in the playoff game. He was the only player on the team that was even remotely a factor in that game, but he only got 9 carries, I believe.


the problem with this argument is you and others continue to ignore the fruits of such an endeavor while also ignoring the fact it only takes one play to end a season or player's career. I believe Jamaal is the only legit offense the Chiefs have. Proof in the pudding - Balt playoff game, Jamaal - 7, other Chiefs - zero.You're not going anywhere great with that. Haley knew it, knows it and it won't happen on his watch.

If this team emerges with total offensive this season and they win the division, you will get your wish during post season.

Chiefnj2
08-24-2011, 12:21 PM
IIRC, he gave the ball back to Balitmore...

Ball security would be nice...

He was the only threat and should have touched the ball more.

Payoff of Charles breaking another TD run was greater than Cassel finding and hitting open receivers.

Chief Faithful
08-24-2011, 12:31 PM
So, King is explaining Haley's theory is the foundation of his decision to keep Jones as the feature back. The only problem, I don't remember Haley ever explaining or justifying to anyone in the media his rational or theory to why he uses them the way he does. I'm not even sure Haley would agree to the use of the term "feature back" to describe Jones. It seems this whole article is built on a flawed supposition.

Reerun_KC
08-24-2011, 12:59 PM
He was the only threat and should have touched the ball more.

Payoff of Charles breaking another TD run was greater than Cassel finding and hitting open receivers.

Oh of course it was....

patteeu
08-24-2011, 01:10 PM
Keep Charles' touches about the same.

Give some of TJ's touches to McClain.

Focus efforts to improve the running game on short yardage situations (hopefully McClain makes a difference here, either as a blocker or as a runner).

Sweet Daddy Hate
08-25-2011, 02:52 PM
"Fans looking at the situation like fantasty fucking football"???

Really, Todd???

No, it has nothing to do with Charles being the better back and Jones being a sack of fucking dung that has neither the power required for Marcus Allen-style puch-throughs in the red zone, or the acceleration and ability to read the field on longer runs between the 20's like Charles.

Yeah, that's the ticket.

JFC, Todd.

Sofa King
08-25-2011, 02:54 PM
"Fans looking at the situation like fantasty ****ing football"???

Really, Todd???

No, it has nothing to do with Charles being the better back and Jones being a sack of ****ing dung that has neither the power required for Marcus Allen-style puch-throughs in the red zone, or the acceleration and ability to read the field on longer runs between the 20's like Charles.

Yeah, that's the ticket.

JFC, Todd.

Most fans nowadays ARE looking at it like it's fantasy football.

-King-
08-25-2011, 03:19 PM
"Fans looking at the situation like fantasty fucking football"???

Really, Todd???

No, it has nothing to do with Charles being the better back and Jones being a sack of fucking dung that has neither the power required for Marcus Allen-style puch-throughs in the red zone, or the acceleration and ability to read the field on longer runs between the 20's like Charles.

Yeah, that's the ticket.

JFC, Todd.

So how many carries would you like Charles to get?

Easy 6
08-25-2011, 03:48 PM
longevity is good

Succinctly summed up in the first post.

Charles isnt just any workhorse back with a nice speed/size combo that come along by the dozen every single year... he's a special talent, worthy of finessing to ensure he's around for a while.

Game to game, situation to situation i agree that an argument can be made to make him the focus but overall i think he's being handled just right... you dont drive a Ferrari down a dirt road.

BigMeatballDave
08-25-2011, 03:51 PM
"Fans looking at the situation like fantasty fucking football"???

Really, Todd???

No, it has nothing to do with Charles being the better back and Jones being a sack of fucking dung that has neither the power required for Marcus Allen-style puch-throughs in the red zone, or the acceleration and ability to read the field on longer runs between the 20's like Charles.

Yeah, that's the ticket.

JFC, Todd.Typical LMAO

Sweet Daddy Hate
08-25-2011, 05:09 PM
So how many carries would you like Charles to get?

65 to 70% of the total touches per game.

Typical LMAO

Yep, typically fucking AWESOME.

Thig Lyfe
08-25-2011, 05:13 PM
Direct snap it to Charles on every play. Takes Cassel out of the equation!