Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted

Didnt Houston blow out his ACL celebrating a meaningless sack

 

Wrong Houston as Matt in KC points out. But don't feel too bad, the Bears also got confused and only later realized which Houston they signed.

  • Replies 173
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted

Wrong Houston as Matt in KC points out. But don't feel too bad, the Bears also got confused and only later realized which Houston they signed.

Yup. That's where their "Problem? We have a Houston" plan really started to backfire.

Posted

I hope the Jets injure every one of their players - dont feel bad about saying it either....ill take a win against a limping team just as much as ill take one against a fully healthy playoff contender....

 

the ONLY thing that matters is throwing up those W's

 

as stated repeatedly throughout the thread....like last week this game will be won in the trenches, if we can plug gaps/holes and stop Charles, and we can pound the rock....we should win, if not, we will need to count on miracles (which we MIGHT be running out of our share by now)

Are you snoop dogg?

Posted

Charles in phenomenal. Since he returned from his ankle injury (last 4 games) he's gaining over a hundred yards per game (run/reception) with 5 yards per carry and 17 carries per game. There's no doubt he's a top 5 RB, and he's been looking great. I wouldn't be so fast to write him off.

I agree.

Posted

Matt Forte does all that and better than Jamaal Charles.

 

Debatable, but these are still two of the best all-around backs in the league.

Posted

Another thing, they currently have the nfl leader in sacks in Justin Houston. I hope we have a plan for him.

 

The three TE formation?

Posted

It's not really debatable if you look at their stats. If the Bills can beat Forte they can beat Charles.

I think you're missing the point. That the Chiefs have Jamaal Charles is not a reason we're going to beat them, the same as the Bears having Matt Forte wasn't a reason we beat the Bears.

 

Let's say Matt Forte is better. So what? Does that mean you think we'll beat the Chiefs because they don't have the single best RB on their team?

Posted

No, I think you're missing the point. The point is that we've already faced several of the best RBs in the league this season and Jamaal Charles is less of a threat than at least one of them. So who cares about Jamaal Charles?

 

Do you mean one of the best? Because Forte (and Charles) are leagues above the rest of the RB's we've faced. And Forte dominated in the short pass game. Which, is Charles forte (pun intended) in the KC offense. However, we probably won't get Cutler special brand of gift picks, or a McLuvin forced fumble. So uh, what?

Posted

Not only debatable. Incorrect.

 

Jammin Charles > Matt Forte. Much greater.

 

Let's take a look at their performances this season.

 

 

YARDS

 

Week 1

Charles: 19 rushing/15 receiving

Forte: 82 rushing/87 receiving

 

Week 2

Charles: 4 rushing/8 receiving

Forte 21 rushing/15 receiving

 

Week 3

Charles: OUT

Forte: 33 rushing/43 receiving

 

Week 4

Charles: 92 rushing/16 receiving yards

Forte: 122 rushing/49 receiving

 

Week 5

Charles: 80 rushing/4 receiving

Forte: 61 rushing/105 receiving

 

Week 6

Charles: BYE

Forte: 80 rushing/77 receiving

 

Week 7

Charles: 95 rushing/12 receiving

Forte: 49 rushing/60 receiving

 

Week 8

Charles: 67 rushing/44 receiving

Forte 114 rushing/54 receiving

 

What about any of those weeks supports your claim that Charles is better than Forte?

Posted

Charles has been hurt and Forte has not, the Chiefs have a great #2 and the Bears do not, The Bears throw to their bacs more by design. Charles and Forte were both considered around the league as top backs but I think that Charles, over his career, is rated a little better. He averages 1.2 yards per carry more over his career which is substantial. Forte to his credit (and luck) has been extremely durable.

 

I don't necessarily like one guy more than the other, but I think that if GMs or coaches had to choose one guy, they would choose Charles. He's extremely dangerous. It's possible they would choose Forte simply because of his durability. But I think Charles is considered a better player.

Posted

Let's take a look at their performances this season.

 

 

YARDS

 

Week 1

Charles: 19 rushing/15 receiving

Forte: 82 rushing/87 receiving

 

Week 2

Charles: 4 rushing/8 receiving

Forte 21 rushing/15 receiving

 

Week 3

Charles: OUT

Forte: 33 rushing/43 receiving

 

Week 4

Charles: 92 rushing/16 receiving yards

Forte: 122 rushing/49 receiving

 

Week 5

Charles: 80 rushing/4 receiving

Forte: 61 rushing/105 receiving

 

Week 6

Charles: BYE

Forte: 80 rushing/77 receiving

 

Week 7

Charles: 95 rushing/12 receiving

Forte: 49 rushing/60 receiving

 

Week 8

Charles: 67 rushing/44 receiving

Forte 114 rushing/54 receiving

 

What about any of those weeks supports your claim that Charles is better than Forte?

The key is this season. Charles is considered the better player career wise like Kelly states.

×
×
  • Create New...