Blog Entry

Chiefs and Jones: Not a good idea

Posted on: March 9, 2010 7:17 pm
 
There's an axiom I've long sworn by in the NFL, and that's this: If you're going to be bad, be bad young. Don't be bad old.

Translation: Give time to young and inexperienced players, not vets. You want players with bright futures, not long and storied pasts.  Unfortunately, that is not the way the Kansas City Chiefs are operating.

I don't get the Chiefs. A couple of years ago they had a terrific draft, understanding that they'd hit rock bottom and determined to retool from the ground up. But then they changed administrations and coaching staffs and started courting veteran players -- like running back Thomas Jones, who signed with the club Tuesday.

I know the guy was productive a year ago, and I know he scored 14 touchdowns, or five more than the Chiefs' Jamaal Charles. But he turns 32 this season, and, I'm sorry, I don't want any 32-year-old running backs taking up space on the roster of a 4-12 team.

Jones wasn't expensive. Reports have him signing for $3 million this season and $2 million in 2011, but that's not the point. He's old. He won't play special teams. And he's taking snaps from somebody with a future. If you're going to be bad, Kansas City, be bad with young players, not with Thomas Jones.

Category: NFL
Comments

Since: Sep 8, 2006
Posted on: March 11, 2010 1:50 am
 

Chiefs and Jones: Not a good idea

Clint,

Stole the words out of my keyboard.  I was just going to say that all people saying KC should go young have are not Chiefs fans because they have no idea how many holes we have and how idiotic it would be to even use the Mr. Irrelevant pick on a RB.  Even though we don't have that pick I don't think and hey he turned out good last year, but you get my point.  As I mentioned earlier in the comment that had lgreen peeing himself, TJ takes carries from Kolby Smith and Jackie Battle who are great 3rd and 4th backs nothing more.  I even like those guys but I would take Thomas Jones one one leg to be the backup over those 2.  They are what they are, there is no more developing them.  Plus, we have a young back to be our guy for 5-6 years. 



Since: Feb 11, 2010
Posted on: March 10, 2010 5:05 pm
 

Chiefs and Jones: Not a good idea

"Dixon, Tate, and Blount might be difference makers in a few years, after Jones has hung up the cleats."


Yes probably so but we can't afford to use any of our draft picks on a running back.  We have too many other needs right now.  Us drafting a running back would be a huge mistake when we can use that draft pick on OL, NT, LB, WR, S......etc.    
With that being said, Jones is an excellent pickup.



Since: Oct 2, 2008
Posted on: March 10, 2010 4:10 pm
 

Chiefs and Jones: Not a good idea

Clark all good teams have two good backs. Th ones that didnt came up short last year with injuries. Perfect example the Cinninati Bengals another the Chicago Bears and one more is the Houston Texans. In todays NFL in order to have a successful run in the regular season and playoffs teams need to good backs and one being great doesn"t hurt at all. The Chiefs did get an old back but he made there backfield better. Especially at that price.




Since: Mar 10, 2010
Posted on: March 10, 2010 2:47 pm
 

Chiefs and Jones: Not a good idea

Judge, please don't tell me you spent years in college to come out and produce something like this.  I generally like your articles, but this one is just seems so irrational.  Sit back and look at this situation.  They saved money and didn't go spending crazy for some big name players.  Instead, they signed a proven veteran for a cheap amount of money.  Not only does he provide mentor experience for Charles, but he also provides a short yardage guarantee, and a fresh mix at running back for this team.
Think back to those glorious days when you reflect upon Herman Edwards and Carl Peterson and try to remember the way they handled the running back situation in those days. <-- a point reiterated earlier in this message board



Since: Oct 2, 2008
Posted on: March 10, 2010 2:30 pm
 

Chiefs and Jones: Not a good idea

So, I take it that Clark would rather the Chiefs be bad young like they were in 2007 and 2008, when they posted the worst 2 year record in the league, instead of adding proven veterans to a young roster while waiting on young talent to develop in training camps, preseason, 2nd string etc.
Go ask the Lions, Chiefs, or any other bad team from 2009  if they want to add proven veterans that can make things happen on the field or keep being bad young.



Since: Jan 10, 2008
Posted on: March 10, 2010 2:29 pm
 

Chiefs and Jones: Not a good idea

Agreed 100%. Evidently Judge thninks having chris chambers and thomas jones is a terrible idea. we'll see in 2010



Since: Mar 4, 2010
Posted on: March 10, 2010 2:06 pm
 

Chiefs and Jones: Not a good idea

I'm in agreement that Judge is off target on his analysis. Thomas Jones is an extremely good professional football player. Any organization would benefit from having him on their team. He is an experienced well conditioned athlete.

K.C. doesn't know how well Jamaal Charles will handle an entire season's workload. The young running back would benefit from having T. Jones to learn what it takes to be a productive back year in and out in the N.F.L.

And, at the very least, in case Charles does have an extensive injury K.C. has a back on the sidelines who has gained over 2700 yards and scored 27 tds over the coarse of the last 2 seasons.

Honestly, it is standard procedure to have either a young up and coming talent put pressure on the older incumbent at a position or the opposite, the older veteran brought in to put pressure on the younger incumbent. Knowing that K.C. is bringing in Jones should motivate Charles to work out like a beast in the offseason which will only benefit the team this upcoming season.



Since: Aug 19, 2006
Posted on: March 10, 2010 1:35 pm
 

Chiefs and Jones: Not a good idea

Exactly...and Dixon, Tate, and Blount might be difference makers in a few years, after Jones has hung up the cleats.



Since: Jun 25, 2009
Posted on: March 10, 2010 1:18 pm
 

Chiefs and Jones: Not a good idea

Didn't Judge write the same thing about Favre last year?
Dear Stupid,

No.  Judge didn't write the same thing about Favre last year.  As a matter of fact nobody on this planet wrote anything similar about Favre last year.  Whether or not Judge liked Favre or not would have been for a completely different reason, not "the same thing" as you put it. 

The Vikings were not a bad 4-12 team the year before so that would never have been his logic regardless of his opinion.

KC is a bad team and if they are lucky will turn it around in 2-3 years.  By then there is no Thomas Jones and all they did was take playing time away from a younger player that could have still been there in 2 years.

Get it now?



Since: Oct 20, 2006
Posted on: March 10, 2010 12:43 pm
 

Chiefs and Jones: Not a good idea

Somewhere within CBS Sports there are management reports generated where suits are looking at numbers i.e. dollars. So, the report shows that X Sportswriter is getting X hits, X comments, and generating X advertising dollars.

That's the only purpose of this article because the story is nothing more than a random thought. That said. I know Judge has to eat to so I added to the hit list. You can thank me later.


The views expressed in this blog are solely those of the author and do not reflect the views of CBS Sports or CBSSports.com