He also only carried the ball roughly 50 times a year too. That tells you everything about his role in the offense.

We get it, it doesn't support your arguement so it isn't important. You must be someone's wife.

Yup, so why can't we do that with Jones and Charles. Jones isn't a bad pass catcher, he just wasn't put in a situation to do it last year. I don't see why Chester is so much better than Jones just because he can catch a bit better. Jones can do everything else better so it's a moot point.

Charlie Weis took over Notre Dame in 2005. Here are Darius Walker's receiving numbers from 2004 until 2006.

2004 (Pre-Weis) : 10 receptions, 74 yards
2005 (Weis) : 43 receptions, 351 yards
2006 (Weis) : 56 receptions, 391 yards

LMAO

Oh, thanks.

if we have a rb catching passes i want it to be charles. our back up should get some carries, but why take your most explosive player out of the passing game? charles >taylor
Posted via Mobile Device

with our crappy offensive line we need to make sure and have a quality outlet to keep the QB from getting killed.

Jones got 1/2 the contract Taylor received.

The Chiefs were interested, but not for 4 years.

The whole point was to get a complimentary back who could help Charles prepare to be a full-time starter.

If you are asking me who I'd rather, it would be Thomas Jones every day of the year.

I agree with this.

However, it is kind of funny that you lambasted me for saying I wanted the Chiefs to sign Thomas Jones earlier in the process.

Thomas Jones was Chester Taylor on the Bears before Chester Taylor was even Chester Taylor. Thomas Jones helped the Bears go to a Super Bowl only a few years ago, basically playing a Taylor role while rushing for 1000 yards on top of it. Jones is the all around veteran RB that has experience with every role.

Yep plus we needed a back that can get the tough short yards and Jones fills that role perfectly.