Chris Johnson in the slot

When did Brian Westbrook ever have a power RB to tandem him with?

We have LenDale. We can use them the way the Saints used Bush and Deuce in 2006. Also, you'll recall the Raiders did the same thing in 2002 with Charlie Garner with great success.

We don't HAVE to line him up wide. But we can, and that's why will give defenses fits. It makes us harder to prepare for. When he starts out in the backfield, the ability to split him wide causes problems for defenses.

 

if that is what he is arguing, I would agree... use it sparingly, but make an effort to get him on the field as much as possible. He IS most effective behind the QB.. but don't handcuff that role to him if he can improve the team lined up in the slot or out wide. that's all im saying

 

I expect they'll line up with both of them on the field quite a bit. 2 WRs, 1 TE, 2 RBs. Hell, we could line up with 1 WR, 2 TEs, and 2 RBs and then split Johnson out wide. Or even with Hall and Johnson in the backfield and hand the ball off to Hall.

No, it leaves White as the lone tailback and Johnson as a receiver.

As for when they hand off to Johnson with both in the backfield, it worked for White at USC. And it worked for the Saints with McAllister and Bush together.

It creates a mismatch. Johnson's speed vs a LB in coverage. Also, it forces the D to have to adjust on the fly.

The fact is that Johnson is a playmaker, and defenses have to account for that even if he's just a decoy.

I'm sure he'll be successful there and I'm sure he'll get a number of snaps in that alignment. But variety is the spice of life (and gives DCs heartburn).

 

on another note, it makes me so happy to hear Rolltide mention Chris Johnson and the word "successful" in the same sentence. :ha: Baby steps... baby steps :thumb:

 

Personally, I don't care about "distorted" personnel sets, or traditional personnel sets, or whatever. I want the team's best players on the field as much as possible. (Sad to say, this currently does not include any of the WR's on the roster).

Right now, the team's biggest threats are (in no particular order) CJ, VY, Crumpler, and Lendale, each of whom presents a unique challenge for opponents.

Going with an either/or approach in the backfield would make it much easier for opponents to adjust their personnel packages accordingly, moving players in and out according to which RB is on the field. When LW comes in, they use their base package, heavy on LB's. When CJ comes in, they pull an LB and replace him with an extra safety (the so-called "big nickel" package), or perhaps just a straight nickel defense. Either way, they're able to adjust their personnel to match up favorably against the Titans' offensive personnel.

IMO, the perfect package would be 2TE/1WR, with CJ and LW on the field together. This combination would allow them to run any play in the book without changing personnel. But more importantly, it would create matchup nightmares for opponents.

Consider the situation for the defensive coordinator:

"We need that extra LB to plug the middle for Lendale...but we also need an extra DB to keep up with CJ. Then again, we really need to double Crumpler with a safety and a backer....but if we do that, and Scaife splits wide, then we have only one LB in the box, and Lendale drives it down our throats. And with all this going on, who the hell is supposed to spy Vince Young?"

Like I said....in order to be as effective as possible, you want your best players on the field as much as possible. I think this is something we'll be seeing a lot of this year.

 

Nine that was my point.

They are NOT the best players on the field. Lendale white is NOT a FB and has NEVER played ithat position for us. Are we going to run the ball out of these sets? Is CJ going to lead block for lendale sometimes?

That would be dumb!

Did the chargers put lorenzo neal on the bench and play micheal turner at FB? No because that would have been dumb!

Was lendale white playing FB for travis henry in 06?

We have a very good blocking FB who is not going to play much? We have a solid TE in scaife is he not going to play much? Just so we can spread CJ wide?

I have this image of vince getting killed because he has less protection. That would be a good move.

 

Who in the hell is blocking at the point of attack?

We will NOT run the ball as effectively. This is real life not madden.


The jags did not do that last year with their 2 backs they ran them in and out and kept them fresh.

 

2002 raiders?

Starkiller just compared us to the 2002 raiders?


Completely different offense and completely different QB.


Also i do not recall tyrone wheatley playing FB for garner.

 

I didn't compare us to the Raiders, I compared Johnson to Garner (and Bush). The point is that all three are smaller backs who are good receivers that can be good lined up like a WR.