PDA

View Full Version : Larry Johnson or Steven Jackson?


schmiddog
02-02-2007, 01:35 PM
I'm gonna go with Jackson. He is a better pass catcher, and his physical skills are jaw-dropping. He has the speed to turn the corner, and some decent shake. Not to mention being a great inside runner.

LJ is a great runner and deceptively fast. His numbers are oustanding but I think, at least to a certain extent, his success is a product of the system he is in.

frogstomp
02-02-2007, 01:37 PM
I'll say Jackson, because he isn't coming off a year where he broke the record for single season carries.

Aside from that, they're pretty even-ish. I'd lean to LJ.

4pAc
02-02-2007, 01:39 PM
LJ is going to flame out if Chiefs keep using him like this. right now I'll say LJ but if he keeps getting used like this Jackson has the brighter future.

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
02-02-2007, 01:40 PM
LJ is better IMO. You say it's his system, but his O-Line really isn't that good anymore. His tackles are crap, and they have one respectable weapon not named Larry Johnson, and the starting QB missed over half the year and sucked when he came back. Teams were selling out to try and stop him, but it didn't work.

Poet3334
02-02-2007, 01:42 PM
Stephen Jackson. His skills are astounding. Besides, LJ takes too much of a pounding.

bigmac076
02-02-2007, 01:44 PM
I'll go with Jackson.

eazyb81
02-02-2007, 01:51 PM
Jackson is awesome, but LJ is better right now. I think Jackson has a more diversified array of skills, but LJ is the better runner no matter what system each player is in.

Obviously LJ will break down if he continues at this pace, but I think (hope) that the Chiefs realize this and will limit his touches next season and beyond.

eazyb81
02-02-2007, 01:53 PM
LJ is better IMO. You say it's his system, but his O-Line really isn't that good anymore. His tackles are crap, and they have one respectable weapon not named Larry Johnson, and the starting QB missed over half the year and sucked when he came back. Teams were selling out to try and stop him, but it didn't work.

Exactly - the whole scheme/system argument against him is bunk at this point. KC's offensive line is a shell of its former self, and the Chiefs offense under Herm Edwards is nothing like the Vermeil/Saunders era offense.

Defenses routinely put 8 in the box against us this season, and LJ had to fight for every yard.

The Unseen
02-02-2007, 01:55 PM
LJ, but I can see it swinging SJ's way in the future.

Splat
02-02-2007, 01:55 PM
You can't really say LJ is a product of the system since we don't run the same system that Priest was in and our line is not even as close to being as good. I would say Jackson is better in the passing game for sure but LJ is alot better in the passing game then people think. I believe when it comes to just running the rock LJ is better he can make you miss or just run you over it really depends on what you ask of your RB on how you want.

NIN1984
02-02-2007, 02:04 PM
real hard not to pick LJ but I think in the long run Jackson will be better

slightlyaraiderfan
02-02-2007, 02:04 PM
I'll say LJ, facing him twice a year is not the greatest of times.

Splat
02-02-2007, 02:06 PM
I'm sure Jackson will win the poll people just don't like LJ out of KC heck even some Chiefs fans don't like him he gives people a bad vibe.

princefielder28
02-02-2007, 02:16 PM
I'm gonna go with Jackson. He is a better pass catcher, and his physical skills are jaw-dropping. He has the speed to turn the corner, and some decent shake. Not to mention being a great inside runner.

LJ is a great runner and deceptively fast. His numbers are oustanding but I think, at least to a certain extent, his success is a product of the system he is in.

He is still very young too so he will only get better

TitleTown088
02-02-2007, 02:43 PM
I'll say jackson just to piss splat off...

02-02-2007, 02:51 PM
Any running back can run behind Denvers OL, same thing with the Cheifs. Remember when that Blaylock dude filled in when Holmes was injured and ran for almost 250 yards?

I dont know who I would take though, everyone tried to stop LJ and couldnt. Not to many teams could line the entire D after jackson because they had Holt, and a QB etc...

eazyb81
02-02-2007, 03:21 PM
Any running back can run behind Denvers OL, same thing with the Cheifs. Remember when that Blaylock dude filled in when Holmes was injured and ran for almost 250 yards?


Huh? That was two seasons ago. Since then we have lost Willie Roaf, Will Shields is well past his prime, and the offensive scheme has totally changed.

KC's offense in 2006 was a 180 from their offense in 2004 - if you watched any Chiefs games this past season you would have known that.

Vikes99ej
02-02-2007, 03:27 PM
I'll take Jackson, because he catches more balls and he's only 23.

Freddy G
02-02-2007, 03:31 PM
Larry Johnson. He is the better pure runner, and while i like Jackson, i feel LJ brings "it" more. Plus, i feel LJ is tad more explosive.

Running backs being able to catch and make plays in the passising game is overrated. You have TEs and WRs, use them. As long as the RB can pass pro, and catch a screen pass, i am satisfied....and LJ can do that.

MichaelJordanEberle (sabf)
02-02-2007, 03:41 PM
Another thing, earlier this year, Rams fans were complaining that Jackson ran "like a 240 lb scatback". Has that changed at all?

comahan
02-02-2007, 03:43 PM
Well, I think Johnson is the better runner, but I prefer Jackson. That is in no way saying that LJ isnt a great back, I just like Jackson.

LarryJohnson27
02-02-2007, 03:43 PM
I'm not going to argue with those who say SJax, because they're both ridiculous specimens, and I'd be happy with either one of them, but to say LJ is a product of the system is totally BS. He didn't have Roaf or Trich this year, along with Green being out. Will Shields and Casey Weigman are really on the decline. We had two OG's playing the OT spots along with a guy who's the size of a TE with a bad back, and a TE playing the FB position (he did okay though). Even Brian Waters got injured in the middle of the season. Yet LJ was still the 2nd best back int he NFL this season (would have been first, but LT just happened to have a CRAZY season).

Jango
02-02-2007, 03:56 PM
I'm going to go for Jackson because I believe that not only is he the better all round player, he also seems a better person in my view, someone more committed to the team then LJ, who seems to cause a rift of some sort on the Chiefs.

Now, living in England, my limited knowledge and exposure to such individual stories are much lower then you guys, so if Jackson is as much of a distraction as LJ then just ignore my post.

EdReedUnstoppable
02-02-2007, 03:58 PM
Ill take Jackson over Johnson, Jackson is a dual threat RB, and I think he'll be better for longer.

LarryJohnson27
02-02-2007, 04:50 PM
I'm going to go for Jackson because I believe that not only is he the better all round player, he also seems a better person in my view, someone more committed to the team then LJ, who seems to cause a rift of some sort on the Chiefs.

Now, living in England, my limited knowledge and exposure to such individual stories are much lower then you guys, so if Jackson is as much of a distraction as LJ then just ignore my post.


LJ's not commited to the team? He might not have been his first 2 years before getting the starting job (rightfully so, the way DV treated him), but since his number was called when Priest went down LJ has been a team player. He carried the ball over 400 times this year. If you ask me it takes a commited person to do that for the team. He always says he want to bring Shields, Trent and the old guys a SB, and when asked about a new contract this week LJ said he isn't worried about it, and his goal is to "win the SB not be the riches man alive". That's not a "ME" type player.

SuperMcGee
02-02-2007, 04:50 PM
I love watching Johnson run over people, but I have to give my nod to Jackson

njx9
02-02-2007, 04:53 PM
assuming we're ignoring the carries johnson had last year (i can't see how that won't affect him next season) i'd take LJ. if we're taking that into consideration, jackson definitely nudges a bit closer.

i do find it funny that people were calling for a 2500 yard season for LJ at the beginning of the year and suddenly would rather have jackson (who they hadn't really noticed all season).

LarryJohnson27
02-02-2007, 05:03 PM
assuming we're ignoring the carries johnson had last year (i can't see how that won't affect him next season) i'd take LJ. if we're taking that into consideration, jackson definitely nudges a bit closer.

i do find it funny that people were calling for a 2500 yard season for LJ at the beginning of the year and suddenly would rather have jackson (who they hadn't really noticed all season).

It's quite simple LJ finished the year with a bad Colts games (OLine's fault), and SJax was probablly had the best stats of all RB's the last 3 or 4 games. Therefore, SJax has the momentum, and it will carry on throught the offseason. Now say LJ runs wild on the Colts and the Chiefs move to the next round these poll results would deffinatley look different.

ninerfan
02-02-2007, 05:28 PM
LJ for me pls

ks_perfection
02-02-2007, 07:17 PM
LJ is the better back, but Stephen Jackson will have the better year.

Chucky
02-02-2007, 07:30 PM
im gonna go with LJ, cuz he did it with a crappy passing game

AZ9er
02-02-2007, 09:18 PM
My two favorite players. So i cannot chose ONE.

Dam8610
02-02-2007, 11:30 PM
I'd take Jackson right now, because I think LJ is going to start breaking down after being extremely overworked by the Chiefs this year.

Gribble
02-02-2007, 11:35 PM
LJ is really misused in KC. Herm Edwards finished off Curtis Martin and it's pretty bad that LJ may fall to the same fate.

RaiderNation
02-03-2007, 12:37 AM
picked steven jackson because hes younger and can catch better. there pratically the same except those 2