ChiefsPlanet
Page 2 of 4 1 2 34
Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

ChiefsPlanet (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)
-   Nzoner's Game Room (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=1)
-   -   Chiefs TJ was better than Charles in Cleveland. (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=233987)

bevischief 09-23-2010 09:49 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by KcChiefsKing (Post 7030314)
WHAT THE ****? DID YOU SERIOUSLY MAKE ANOTHER TOPIC? WTF?


Do you not see the 15 other JC threads?
This x 1000.

Brock 09-23-2010 09:49 AM
What's the record?

Reerun_KC 09-23-2010 09:50 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brock (Post 7030329)
What's the record?
Cassel 17-17

Croyle 0-9


thread hijack!

petegz28 09-23-2010 09:50 AM
People don't want to break down the numbers. They just want to look at the YPC and leave it at that. They don't want to break down the numbers because they love jizzing all over Charles regardless.

FTR, Charles is a great back and needs the ball more. There are reasons he isn't getting it more, some playcalling and mostly shitty QB play.

SenselessChiefsFan 09-23-2010 06:25 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reaper16 (Post 7030295)
And until someone gives me a convincing rebuttal to my assertion that IF Charles was less effective than TJ than it was only because the way that Charles was used made him so (in that the opposing defense sold out on the run on every Charles down because 1.) they know that Charles is the Chiefs' most explosive player, and 2.) since Charles was sparingly used, it meant that when he finally did see play that the ball would likely be going to him because no one expects a team to not use its best offensive threat) I will not agree with any post that comes close to suggesting that TJ is/was better.
The problem is that Charles isn't as good in pass protection, so of course the opposition keys on him getting the ball. I am hoping that this leads to two RB sets in the future.

SenselessChiefsFan 09-23-2010 06:26 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by booyaf2 (Post 7030296)
The game was in KC, not Cleveland. Get your facts straight.
Joke?

SenselessChiefsFan 09-23-2010 06:29 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Coogs (Post 7030303)
It has been beat to death, but with an offense that is struggling to score points, that 56 yard TD could come and any point in time. And it could come more than once per game.
I don't think that Charles is used enough and I don't like the way he is being used. But, with that said, TJ has played as well or better than Charles. Especially on a down by down basis. And, I think the key to getting Charles more carries is keeping the offense on the field.

Hammock Parties 09-23-2010 06:31 PM
Quote:
Charles got the ball on 3-1 at the Cleveland six at 9:31 to go in the third quarter. At that point, TJ had one more carry than Charles. One.

Charles took a two yard loss. At that point, the Chiefs started going to TJ more and more down the stretch.
The elephant in the room, fully exposed.

Pioli Zombie 09-23-2010 07:07 PM
Bishop Eddie Long sucks cock.

sedated 09-23-2010 07:16 PM
I agree.

This whole thing has been blown out of proportion by a whiny skeptical fan-base full of arm-chair GMs.

Hog's Gone Fishin 09-23-2010 07:28 PM
Could we please just put McCluster in and forget about those two !!!!

CrazyHorse 09-23-2010 07:31 PM
So you guys would rather have Jones over Charles?

Yeah......me either. Given 20 carries a game would solve all these debates. Jones had 5 mediocre carries in one game and everyone forgets the half season Charles put together.

Charles did nothing to lose his starting job to Jones. Now were back to rbbc. Yee ****ing haw

Saul Good 09-23-2010 07:33 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by SensibleChiefsfan (Post 7030285)
I will also note that if you take the 56 yard run out of the San Diego game, TJ and JC have the same yards per carry.
If you take away the homeruns, Mark McGwire had a pretty pedestrian season in 1998.

Saul Good 09-23-2010 07:33 PM
If you take away the getting shot in the head, Abraham Lincoln enjoyed the play.

Saul Good 09-23-2010 07:34 PM
If you take away the nudity and sex, Debbie Does Dallas wasn't a very good movie.


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 04:47 PM.
Page 2 of 4 1 2 34
Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.