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: May 30, 2008
Posted on: March 10, 2010 12:28 pm
 

Chiefs and Jones: Not a good idea

This is not about taking carries away from Charles. This is about perserving JC longer than LJ or Holmes. It be nice to have great JC in 2011, and that same great JC in 2015, 2016, or 2017. TJ isn't going to be the starter. He is beign brought in to compliment JC. If we kept all the RBs we had at the end of 2009; we still be doing the same thing. Just that it would be Jackie Battle, Javarris Williams, or Kolby Smith taking Jones' role in the offense. Someone's going to have the job to help preserve Charles. Might as well get a talented runningback.

KC is going to use a Two-Back System to keep their RBs fresh and going longer at a consistent basis for 2-5 extra seasons. If you don't like it; have your team run a One-Back System; than you can watch your star RBs fall one by one after 2-3 good seasons; followed by another 2-3 bad seasons before you cut them, and their huge contracts. KC has tried the one-back system long enough to know that all the system has been doing is wearing our star RBs out rather quickly.



Since: Aug 16, 2006
Posted on: March 10, 2010 12:06 pm
 

Chiefs and Jones: Not a good idea

Charles can't carry the load? Charles was beat up at the end of the season? What, are you high? Charles got better at the end of the season. In his last four games, he ran for 658 yards on 94 carries (7 ypc) and 4 TDs. But even if they are bringing in Jones just to help take some of the load off of Charles, they could get a young guy to do that. Big guys like Anthony Dixon, Ben Tate, and LaGarrett Blount will be available in rounds 4-6. Why not get one of them? It would serve the same purpose plus those guys would actually contribute on special teams.



Since: Sep 19, 2007
Posted on: March 10, 2010 11:53 am
 

Chiefs and Jones: Not a good idea

Adding a good player is a bad idea.  What a moron.



Since: Jun 28, 2009
Posted on: March 10, 2010 11:21 am
 

Chiefs and Jones: Not a good idea

Taking carries?  From who, Jackie Battle and Kolby Smith?  Man, linebackers everywhere are grateful they don't have to face that duo.Lol. I peed a little when I read this.





Since: Sep 6, 2009
Posted on: March 10, 2010 11:16 am
 

Chiefs and Jones: Not a good idea

while I'm a big Thomas Jones fan and disagree with Judge's article implying Jones is ready for the scrap heap, as a Jets fan, I can say that only signing Jones for 10 carries a game would probably would be a misuse of his talent. Jones is a tough physical, runner whose productivity increases the more he handles the ball. True, a lot of that is a function of game situation (playing with a lead, wearing down the D, etc...), but what really seperates Jones is his physical conditioning. He may have lost a step, but due to his superior conditioning, the drop off as the game progressed was less than the players around him. I think if you really want Jones to be effective in KC, he will need closer to an even split of carries with Charles. At his age, it might make more sense to limit his first half touches and use him more like a closer in baseball... of course, that plan only works if the Chiefs have a lead to protect. Still, I think this was a good signing. You can never have too many guys like Thomas Jones on your team.



Since: Jun 28, 2009
Posted on: March 10, 2010 11:15 am
 

You have got to be kidding me.

What is the point of this article.  The Chiefs picked up one of the NFL's leading rushers for the price of a kicker, and more importantly are protecting one of the NFL's future leading rushers, by taking carries away from him, instead of running him into the ground like our other talented running backs.  Happy trails priest and LJ.  Its not like they paid a whole bunch of old players a ton of money.  Not to mention Jones was voted the most inspirational player in the Jets locker room twice, and can mentor the young running back Charles.  Does Judge even watch football let alone the Chiefs in the last 10 years.  He is arguing that Charles should get more carries?  That Jones is taking away from that?  Duh. Thats the whole point man so we dont have to watch Charles limping to the sideline because he played three 25 plus carry games in a row.  
I like how he wrote a 2 paragraph blurb with no real analysis about a fairly major free agent acquisition.  Must be nice having that job.  I have his next article.  "(Insert any free agents name)  is old.  Why would they pay an old guy when they could play a young guy more minutes.  I have no stats or actual analysis for you. I'm going to get a mochachino."



Since: Mar 27, 2007
Posted on: March 10, 2010 11:13 am
 

Chiefs and Jones: Not a good idea

Yeah.. he was so beat up that he racked up KC Chiefs records and knocked the Denver Broncos out of the playoffs.   Jamal Charles hasn't proved anything.. but he has a lot more upside than a 32 year old RB.  



Since: Jan 28, 2010
Posted on: March 10, 2010 11:09 am
 

Chiefs and Jones: Not a good idea

I certainly agree with you.There are no short-cuts to success in the NFL,
you build with the draft and then you can add the missing parts through
free agency.By the time the Chiefs are good again,Jones will be retired.



Since: Sep 10, 2008
Posted on: March 10, 2010 10:35 am
 

Its all about the OL

Only one thing is missing from all of these comments:

TJ's success was mostly due to the strength of the Jets' OL. That is also why Greene will be successful, plus his youth, makes him better for NYJ. KC has no OL to speak of. You are about to watch TJ in his final year becuase of the abuse he will take while fighting for those 1 yd. gains and getting knocked back 3 yds.

I'd take him back in NY in a second, but only becuase our OL will allow him to be successful.



Since: Sep 14, 2008
Posted on: March 10, 2010 10:23 am
 

Chiefs and Jones: Not a good idea

this makes NO SENSE for the Chiefs to sign Jones!
Did they see the type of year (or 9 games) Jamal Charles had last year? the guy was unstopable and now he has touches taken away by a guy who lets call it like it is washed up. it was proven on the JEts when Greene started taking touches away! i'm not even a chiefs fan and i'm annoyed!


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