via NFL.com
Larry Johnson returned to the Kansas City Chiefs last weekend after missing four games. He was given 19 carries and ran the ball for 67 yards. He showed a few flashes of the "old" Larry Johnson but his performance was, for the most part, underwhelming.
If the Chiefs stick with the spread offense, what will Larry Johnson's role in that offense be?
Contrary to what your initial thoughts about the spread may be, there is room for a substantial running game within this offense. Maybe not 30+ carries a game but getting the ball to running backs 20+ times a game is a definite possibility. The Chiefs have rushed the ball 20, 36, 18, and 24 times the last four games. Keep in mind that 15 of those carries have been by QB Tyler Thigpen.
Every NFL offense needs a running game, no matter how well you pass the ball. You can make the argument that an effective running back in a spread offense has the potential to be exponentially better than what was originally planned for.So, Larry Johnson can hypothetically get enough carries to be effective and keep him happy.
The next question involves Larry's running style, which requires more help from the offensive line and blockers than say Jamaal Charles' style or Kolby Smith's style.
This is where Larry Johnson doesn't appear to fit in the Chiefs' current offense. The spread offense, literally spreading players across the field, isn't conducive to allocating a lot of man power to aid the running game. And that's what Larry needs.
A great example of the difference between Larry Johnson and the Chiefs' other backs happened last weekend. A few minutes into the 4th quarter against the Saints, the Chiefs faced a 3rd and 10. Thigpen lined up in the shotgun, hiked the ball, shuffled his feet and quickly handed the ball to Jamaal Charles. Charles burned the Saints defense to the outside of the left hash marks and scampered 12 yards for a first down.
An effective running play, that would likely never be called for Larry Johnson.
If the Chiefs continue to use the spread offense in the future, a north-south, power runner like Larry Johnson is a liability. We won't be able to block appropriately for him and he's not exactly Priest Holmes coming out of the backfield to catch a pass. If he had better pass catching ability, then sure, he fits much better in this offense. You can put him in motion, in the slot, whatever Chan Gailey can think of.
Larry gets criticized for his pass blocking quite a bit and the running back's pass blocking skills are even more important in the spread offense. Larry needs to be able to line up next to Tyler Thigpen and block the appropriate player. Otherwise, the Chiefs will get sacked and drives will be killed. There can be no equivocation on this requirement of the running back. They must pass block very well.
The thing is Larry Johnson is a great running back in a system that is centered around him. His problem is that he's not adaptable to other styles of play. It's not that he's a bad player - just not versatile enough to change with Chan Gailey's offense. This post is less a criticism of LJ's potential and more about pointing how he's a square peg in a round hole.
The funny thing about this post is that Larry Johnson has the remaining six games of the season to prove me wrong. To prove all of us wrong about him. Maybe his pass blocking becomes fantastic. Maybe Chan Gailey comes up another offensive wrinkle that maximizes Larry's abilities in the spread offense. Maybe he becomes a respected player again.
The next six games will determine Larry Johnson's entire future with the Kansas City Chiefs. If he plays well within this offense, maybe there is a place for him on this team. Or maybe that strong play increases his trade value. Or maybe he plays poor enough that we cut our ties and forget about him.
Maybe. Maybe. Maybe.
If the Chiefs stick with Tyler Thigpen and take the spread offense into 2009, the Chiefs will have essentially chosen Tyler Thigpen over Larry Johnson.
To Carl Peterson and others- that's how you do it. Quarterback first, everything else second. Don't cater your offense to Larry Johnson. Cater to your starting quarterback.
0 recs | 51 comments
The Reason I Vote Yes
Is because the Chiefs won’t want to eat that contract if they don’t feel they have to and Herm Edwards will see the spread offense leave before he’ll want to see a running back he thinks is capable of playing loser ball (Herm’s preferred offense) leave.
We could score 30 points a game the rest of this year running the spread and I’m betting Herm will still try to go back to smashmouth next season (using a rationale similar to “They were able to score 30 points using that new-fangled Arena ball offense, I figured that meant they were good enough to score points using my gritty defensive style of ball-control offense.”).
UCrawford - November 20, 2008
And I Don't See LJ's Pass-Blocking Changing
Last game I watched him do a couple of no-effort oles…if he’s not busting his ass on the grunt work after a four game suspension then he’s not going to bust his ass for the last six games of a crappy season.
UCrawford - November 20, 2008
Good call
Even when LJ was putting up gaudy rushing numbers I was against giving him such a huge salary increase. He isn’t the best blocker or receiver. I’d say most people understate how good he actually is at these things, but the spread offense will magnify them as blocking and receiving from the backfield will become more prominent. If Kolby can stay healthy and Chaarles continues to improve, we part ways with LJ. People will say, “but we need a big, bruising back for short yardage downs”, and I will answer Marcus Allen and Priest Holmes were fantastic at short yardage and neither was exactly big and punishing.
Chiefs4Life - November 20, 2008
And Maurice Jones-Drew
Very solid short-yardage runner…tiny guy. Plus we don’t need to be paying a short-yardage back the money we’re paying Johnson.
That said, I still don’t see us dumping Johnson next year. That cap hit’s going to be a killer and we’ve already tossed one bad contract that’s (Napoleon Harris) going to give us a substantial hit next year…not to mention we’ll take another if Tony Gonzalez forces a trade. All that cap room we’ve got will disappear pretty quickly if we dump every bad contract this offseason. I could definitely see LJ gone after next year, though…I suspect that there’s going to be some serious housecleaning once Carl Peterson leaves. Unless they promote Bill Kuharich and Denny Thum to run things in which case the Chiefs will probably continue to suck while Clark Hunt decides to play with his new toy (Newcastle United). I’m getting the impression that Hunt cares much more for English football than the American version.
UCrawford - November 20, 2008
What would he be worth?
I don’t disagree with any of your arguments, but have to wonder what LJ would be worth after another year of low production. His value as trade-bait right now is pretty dismal (maybe a 4th rounder?), but if he produces nothing again next year, we would get nothing for him. Nobody would want him, his ego, and his salary. We screwed the pooch when we bet the farm on LJ, now he gets to sit back and relax in his Maybauch and his mansion and doesn’t have to worry about producing a darn thing.
Chiefs4Life - November 20, 2008
Based On His Usage, Injury History, Attitude And Failure To Do Secondary Tasks Asked Of Him
I think his value would be extremely minimal in any trade. So minimal that it’s probably not worth the cap hit. And especially not worth the cap hit to waive him. Johnson’s got the first three years of his contract guaranteed. After 2009 (his final guaranteed salary year) his hit drops off a lot. I think he’s gone in 2010, but we’re stuck watching him whine, pout and half-ass all of next year too.
UCrawford - November 20, 2008
Assuming, Of Course
That we have a cap in 2010. That’s no guarantee with labor negotiations the way they are.
UCrawford - November 20, 2008
New Question
I am going to assume we will have a salary cap in 2010 (if not, KC is screwed) for this question: Do you think Chiefs management learned anything from the LJ contract extension? Dis they learn that: A) running backs are easy to replace via the draft, B) huge contract extensions for high-risk attitudes generally aren’t worth it, and/or C) guaranteeing such massive numbers is a perfect way to remove a player’s motivation to train and play aggressively?
Chiefs4Life - November 20, 2008
My thoughts
a) I don’t think quality RB’s are easy to replace. Finding the quality ones is the key although Denver has been good at it (rookies) because of Shannahan. Chiefs learned they can get good ones in this position. Word, Okoye, Allen, Holmes.
b) I think LJ was the exception in this case. Carl has been notorious for not doing these types of deals. He’s pretty much saying “I told you so” from everyone that wanted to sign/pay LJ.
c) Depends on the player IMHO. There are plenty that play to their potential after signing. Mostly due to their pasts growing up which formed their persona.
They need to
THE_TRUTH - November 20, 2008
I’d say the rookies in the league this year are showing that RBs are easily replaced by young, fresh legs. Even our younger backs (Kolby, Chaarles) are performing every bit as well as LJ, and combined don’t make his salary. You could argue that this year’s crop of RBs was exceptional, but I think it’s part of a pattern. If you spend the money to get quality players at other (longer-lasting) positions, RB can be close to last on the list, just ahead of fullback and maybe a “blocking” tight end. RBs have such a short career expectancy that signing a player to a long second or third contract is plain silly, since they will be getting paid more and likely producing less.
Chiefs4Life - November 20, 2008
Unless You're Talking About A Barry Sanders Class Of RB
And even then you don’t want to be paying them a contract that gives them big bucks past the age of 30. You’re right…it’s the most replaceable position on the field usually.
UCrawford - November 20, 2008
Salary Cap
KC is not screwed just because there’s no salary cap. The team is profitable and as baseball has clearly demonstrated even teams on a limited payroll can compete for the playoffs if they have competent management. The only reason the Chiefs are screwed is because we don’t have competent management, and as the last decade has shown us even a salary cap can’t turn us into winners when that happens.
To answer your questions:
1) No…I think Carl Peterson is just as incompetent as ever and given the chance to sign free agents in the future he’ll still make abysmal judgments. He didn’t intentionally hand out big contracts to players who weren’t worth it. He hadn’t out bad contracts because he can’t judge players very well. That’s probably not going to change.
2) Huge contracts for “attitude” players are not necessarily a bad thing…sometimes a player can be a jerk but still help a team. Huge contracts with a lot of guaranteed money for bad attitude players are usually a bad thing because it removes all of the GM’s leverage when that player steps out of line.
3) I don’t buy that a big contract always means that a player won’t work at his game. It depends on the individual. Look at LaDainian Tomlinson, for example…he got a huge contract but he still works just as hard and busts his ass as much as he did before. Same with Larry Fitzgerald. Or Peyton Manning. Or Tony Gonzalez. The guys you have to worry about were the ones who didn’t consider their job much of a priority before they got their deal. If they were unhappy and unmotivated before, they’ll probably be unhappy and unmotivated after. If they were gamers before, they’ll probably be gamers after. It’s not really about the money they get…it’s about whether or not they’re dedicated to their job.
UCrawford - November 20, 2008
Correction
He handed out bad contracts because he can’t judge players very well.
UCrawford - November 20, 2008
OK Tony G
Tony G was a good counter-punch to my argument. Well done. But I still think guys like Tony G, Peyton Manning, and Marcus Allen are the exceptions to the rule, not the standard. I mean, has anybody heard much about Dwight Freeney lately? I think when players get signed to a huge extension their main motivation becomes “don’t get hurt and collect my check”, because as long as they are performing at or slightly above league average it’s hard to justify releasing them. To get top 5 money you need only be one of the top 5 players at your position while the contract is being negotiated.
Chiefs4Life - November 20, 2008
Not Really
Just looking at this year’s free agents, Jake Scott got a big deal and he’s doing well this year. Alan Faneca got a big deal and he’s doing well. Same with Jeff Faine. In your own example, Freeney got a big deal and has struggled but that’s about a foot injury he got the year after he signed (which nobody could have predicted) and not an attitude problem. He didn’t stop working just because he got paid.
We tend to notice the players who get big contracts then loaf because they’re usually the ones who also draw the most attention to themselves. But they’re not really the rule…it is about the individual first.
UCrawford - November 20, 2008
Yes
He’s too exensive to cut and too shitty to trade.
HIV 2 Elway - November 20, 2008
That Should Be Someone's Signature Block
“LJ: Too expensive to cut, too shitty to trade”
I think there’s a market out there for it. :)
UCrawford - November 20, 2008
LJ for Alexander
Trade LJ for Shaun Alexander!! HA! JK! The both suck!!
C-7PumpkinSmasher - November 20, 2008
Excellent write-up, Chris
Didn’t Jamaal Charles play in the spread at UT? He’s much quicker so I’d say he has a definite advantage that makes LJ less valuable to us.
Joel Thorman - November 20, 2008
No, he probably won't be a Chief
He’ll get traded and they’ll eat the money and draft/acquire another RB. The argument will be that they got more acquisitions (bodies) for him. Mark my words, crazier things have happened.
The other point is that it won’t matter after next season anyways…there won’t be a salary cap in 2010 and so the money won’t matter. They’ll probably trade him for a couple of players or a couple of draft picks. We’re 32Mil under the cap this year and considering the 5.4 Mil clause in his contract for “good bahavior” is going to get invoked, it won’t be as big a hit.
THE_TRUTH - November 20, 2008
What do you think we can get for him?
Its not worth taking the cap hit for the 5th or 6th rounder we’ll get for him. Keep him and run him until his legs fall off the next two seasons.
HIV 2 Elway - November 20, 2008
We'll get someone on Defense and and 3-4 rounder
The cap’s their least concern. It’ll basically be 4Mil and not 10 like I had thought as well as many others. One good thing Carl did was put the clause in for staying out of trouble.
They’ll eat the 4 Mil considering they ate the 10 Mil. for Nap. Harris…just makes sense don’t it?
THE_TRUTH - November 20, 2008
Really?
You think a team would give us a starting defensive player and 3rd or 4th rounder for LJ after he hasn’t produced anything for the last few years? I hope you’re right, but I don’t see it happening. What team would want to trade a starter and a potential starter from the draft to eat LJ’s salary without being sure they can get 1600 yards from him? I mean Seattle cut Alexander and nobody wanted to pick him up until they went into emergency mode, I think the interest level will be the same for LJ.
Chiefs4Life - November 20, 2008
It was just a guesstimate
I think there are some teams that might….Raiders for one. I think Carl will get “whatever” he can and if Herm is around I don’t see LJ playing for him. Bad blood there.
THE_TRUTH - November 20, 2008
Hmmm....
I don’t know anything about their contract lengths, but the Raiders already have a plethora of capable backs. Do I think LJ fits the Raider mindset and attitude? Absolutely. Do I think they need him? Absolutely not. He might be a better fit for Cleveland if they think Lewis is on his last legs, but do we really want any of the players Cleveland has (except Quinn)?
Chiefs4Life - November 20, 2008
Cleveland...
would be better off just drafting someone. RB’s a dime a dozen. And there is no sense giving up picks for a below average rusher. I can’t think of a single team that would part way with picks for him Maybe the Argonauts.
HIV 2 Elway - November 20, 2008
Raiders Won't Take Him
They’re going to have financial issues aplenty next season when they sort out the mess from their disastrous free agent/trade binge this last offseason. Last thing they need is Johnson.
UCrawford - November 20, 2008
run him into the ground
Lets keep sending him into the back of our o-line, wathc him get all pissy and start crying until eventually he just quits. I love seeing his tantrum face on the sideline. What a bitch!
C-7PumpkinSmasher - November 20, 2008
I think
the main reason we’re in the spread is because we lack good blocking. Mabye once we build a better line we’ll go back to a traditional style offense. That said, I think LJ will be a Chief next season.
GHOST OF DT - November 20, 2008
I don't see the spread being used forever
I really think that this system will go by the wayside, maybe not next season, but possibly in 2010. People have been toying with this Parcells comment “You are what your record says you are,” and while the current system is getting the Chiefs points on the board, it has not won us any games.
There are several factors that contribute to the W’s not coming, but simply put, the spread has not done anything that smash-mouth football the Chiefs were trying to employ did for us. We’re hanging into games, still losing.
Now how does this affect LJ? I don’t know for sure. He’s getting old, and his stock is dropping substantially with each game he doesn’t produce and every incident he has off the field. Can he hold up and be content not getting the carries through the 2009 season and into the 2010 season? Personally, I doubt it. I would prefer he get traded for whatever he’s worth on the market, take the hit, and look elsewhere.
One thing I’m tired of is this prideful crap of the Chiefs brass on not admitting mistakes. Everything is a gamble in the NFL (ex – Brodie Croyle, Ryan Sims, Junior Siavii) and no team is safe from it. The bottom line thinking has got to stop, or the team will never go anywhere.
IISaiNtII - November 20, 2008
4 week holiday
It was quite obvious last week that LJ sat on his ass for four weeks rather than pounding weights in the gym and staying sharp. He looked slow and useless.
sir eccles - November 20, 2008
The Tolerance Box
Herm commented that when players mess up, they could end up in his tolerance box. I interpret it as continuing to use the player, but look for the first chance to get rim of him. I think LJ is in Herm’s box.
sunny D - November 20, 2008
That's What She Said :)
UCrawford - November 20, 2008
Damn you!
webby37 - November 20, 2008
Hmmmm...As a Bronco fan; I beg to differ in regards to the following statement
In any case, the Chiefs should dump all character issues and build a team loaded with high character guys. The Broncos did that last offseason and it turns my team from a .500 average team to a playoff team. The Chefs need to get their act together before the rest of us in the league start comparing your ownership to the Fader Nation’s ownership! Get with the program!
Oh and we’ll be getting revenge in two weeks. So look out!
Tim Lynch - November 20, 2008
A playoff team by default....
The Donkeys resurrection has little to do with the quality of their team and more to do with the complete ineptness of Norv, Herm, and Al Davis.
HIV 2 Elway - November 20, 2008
Pretty Much
Being a considered a “playoff caliber” team in the AFC West is like being the hottest chick at a leper colony. Not much of an accomplishment.
And keep in mind, Zappa, that your team just signed Tatum Bell (again).
UCrawford - November 20, 2008
They got the highest F in the class...
HIV 2 Elway - November 20, 2008
So why is Brandon Marshall still on the roster? He don’t beat women anymore? We’ll see…
ilamuku - November 20, 2008
Because
They probably figure he can’t be a bad influence on Travis Henry any more. :)
UCrawford - November 20, 2008
What's the latest on him?
Drugs, right?
Joel Thorman - November 20, 2008
Cocaine Trafficking, Last I Heard
Possession with intent to distribute (and supposedly a pretty sizeable chunk).
Being libertarian of course I’m pro-legalization, but I will say that this incident just confirms my belief that Henry’s one scummy dude. Best thing I ever saw written about him was this.
UCrawford - November 20, 2008
Legalize the herb!
Time to end marijuana prohibition! But just like Pato Banton says, ’"I do not sniff the coke, I only smoke SENSIMILLA!"
C-7PumpkinSmasher - November 20, 2008
I'll Agree With That
Although it still doesn’t make Travis Henry any less of a scumbag. :)
UCrawford - November 20, 2008
scumbag for sure
Anyone who messes around with that shit is a scumbag for sure. He probably needs some cash for all those kids, or maybe atleast some birth control.
C-7PumpkinSmasher - November 20, 2008
Pato!
Lawd ah mercy
KansasCityShuffle - November 20, 2008
LJ will be back next season.
I think he did pretty good for not playing for a month. He also caught a 20 yard screen pass that he had to work hard for. I think this Bills game will be a crucial game for him now that he has one game under his belt.
ilamuku - November 20, 2008
Let's be clear
If that is the play I’m thinking of, Charles only got the first down because of two blown tackles, one in the backfield.
If the Saints make one of those two tackles, this part of the post would have changed to
PVChiefsfan - November 20, 2008
Agreed.
ilamuku - November 20, 2008
Normally i just allow the players to do all the talking
But its not fair to close the door on LJ just yet, i mean whose back did we ride for 2 years when trent green went through his downward spiral? Yes Larrys EGO gets the best of him at times, but hell we all know he carried the team for those 2 years. Granted he had one of the best Olines in the league, his stats started to decline when people realized we where hurting at the QB position and started to stack the box on the chiefs.
His injury last year was a freak tackle by AJ Hawk, wasn’t nothing LJ could do about it, but look at the Replay of that play, we all know larry was gonna break off a huge gain if he got free from AJ.
Yes his problems this year with the females is disappointing, but think about it this way…… how many females get charged with assualt for spitting drinks on males? how many females get charged for splashing drinks in guys faces? last i counted “NONE”.
Larry is still is maturing, his pass blocking from what I noticed in sundays game is showing some signs of approvement, Alot of the Chiefs players like Thigpen, Waters and Gonzo are all coming out and defending larry by telling US the fans that they noticed huge changes in the 4 weeks larry was gone with his attitude and being very positive.
Larrys frustrations are all the same as us Fans, HE wants to win and produce, so Lets allow him that chance, we owe him that much
LeaveLJalone419 - November 21, 2008
+1
bgrip12 - November 24, 2008
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Arrowhead Pride to post a comment.