Holmes4six! 969 Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 This maybe thinking out of the box, or plain stupid, but what does everything think of the idea using Charles more as a receiver than RB? We could line him up in the slot or even out wide on some formations. He has the speed to take the top off a defense and the quickness for the slot. I'm not saying to take away his RB duties completely, but with Ware and West there, can we limit the pounding he takes and use his speed in areas that could open up the offense. I was also thinking of him returning kicks. He needs to be on the field...and trying to thinks of ways that don't keep other playmakers off the field. Maybe down right stupid, but maybe not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KCSLC2008 606 Posted January 21, 2016 Share Posted January 21, 2016 I'm ok with Charles catching the ball, but I would prefer him to either go out like a receiver or run the ball traditionally than catch the ball behind the line of scrimmage like he has been doing. But then, if we send him out after lining up as a receiver, wouldn't a WR be better to do that instead? Right? Charles' hands are fine, but they haven't really been deeper than a screen (not that Smith throws really deep often). So it tells me, there would only really be an advantage for when the defense thinks Charles is going to run or block or catch it short but then he goes for a deeper pass instead. We've tried screens that work, but that's not so "let's use him as a receiver" as much as "let's use him as a catching runningback." We've tried the behind the line of scrimmage passes that would theoretically use his speed and elusiveness to get yards, but that was our damn problem in the 1-5 start (5 of the games with Charles). It was soo 2013 to keep doing that as if the defense was going to be unprepared. They weren't. They were ready. They were expecting it. It was our stupid, "let's get in the flow of the offense before varying" crap. I'm sorry, that's just how I feel about it and I think people thought Smith was checking down. THAT WAS THE DAMN PLAY. Stupid shit play at that done way too often. It was the quick strike avoid the bad line play that would just ensure a three and out instead of keep Smith upright (he was hit anyway many times for 1-2 yards gain - on f'ing third down). Anyone notice that once Smith got to audible most of the short passes were going forward, as in beyond the line of scrimmage? I mean, I noticed it once the losing streak ended, but that was the first game Smith had audibling power, Pedersen started helping out more at that time with playcalls. But we were also desperate to win, so Reid could have changed, too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kcchief4lif 910 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 This maybe thinking out of the box, or plain stupid, but what does everything think of the idea using Charles more as a receiver than RB? We could line him up in the slot or even out wide on some formations. He has the speed to take the top off a defense and the quickness for the slot. I'm not saying to take away his RB duties completely, but with Ware and West there, can we limit the pounding he takes and use his speed in areas that could open up the offense. I was also thinking of him returning kicks. He needs to be on the field...and trying to thinks of ways that don't keep other playmakers off the field. Maybe down right stupid, but maybe not. May not be a Full time "WR" per say but personally I think that is the route they should go with him. That is of course baring a full recovery. Pending how the draft goes I would also like to see them get him back on punt/kick returns... But, that is my unconventional way of thinking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kcchief4lif 910 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 opps quoted myself... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilkie 1,518 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 Charles is too short to be an effective receiver. Assuming after second ACL tear he still has that great speed. I want to see him back at RB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eraser 722 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 Jamaal Charles is 5'11", which is a bit undersized for a receiver, but not that much. He is a pass catching running back, and for that reason he will not be converted to a receiver. Charcandrick West looks to be a more prototypical receiver than Charles. (both are 5'11"). Size is not the issue. West displays some of the nuances of a wide receiver. West is probably better suited to handle the whole play book. Neither player is going to be confused with a Rhodes scholar, but Jamaal has a learning disability, and West does not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
azchief21 5,278 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 Jamaal Charles is one of the top backs in the league and one of the best in the history of the Chiefs. When he's healthy you put him at RB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SEMO 6,811 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 Charles is too short to be an effective receiver. Assuming after second ACL tear he still has that great speed. I want to see him back at RB. What?! There are lots of effective receivers Jamaal's height or shorter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kcchief4lif 910 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 What?! There are lots of effective receivers Jamaal's height or shorter. Exeactly. My thing is. Where do you think Charles is at his best?? My opinion is, the open field... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jetlord 10,209 Posted January 22, 2016 Share Posted January 22, 2016 Charles is too short to be an effective receiver. Assuming after second ACL tear he still has that great speed. I want to see him back at RB. What about Welker or Edelman? Lots of YAC from shorter receivers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhataLerror 370 Posted January 23, 2016 Share Posted January 23, 2016 Did someone try to argue that Charles is a polished route runner? He's not. Therefore he's better behind the quarterback. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chiefmania 22 Posted January 24, 2016 Share Posted January 24, 2016 Can't imagine there is any thought at making him a WR, but I could see them have him catch the ball more and running a little less. He has good hands, is great in the open field, and is tough enough to make catches in traffic. I've seen a lot of comments about the screens, and bubble screens to Charles and Kelsey and Maclin, etc. Does no one else notice that every other team out there does that also? It is part of the NFL. Get the right defense rushing up the field, and the RB screen is one of the most explosive plays in football. Get the right defense, and the WR/TE bubble screen is one of the most explosive plays in football. Are they going to work everytime? Of course not. But when they do, they are fun to watch. Back to the JC question. I would like to see them line him up wide and to the jet sweep with him. Have West/Ware in the backfield, Maclin and Wilson/Conley wide, Kelse split out at TE, Charles as the slot doing the sweep. That would sure give defenses a lot to have to think about. Conley deep, Kelsey down the seam, Maclin on a route, Charles on the sweep, Ware off guard, and you still have Smith with the ability to run the ball. Just another possibility in this offense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.