So everyone has been pumped about Jamaal Charles breaking out against the Saints, me included. The line has received their kudos, Charles has received his, even Moeacki has gotten some praise for his blocking. However, will someone please tell me why Nate Eachus isn't getting his?

The experiment of not using a fullback (after cutting both Shane Bannon and Pat Dimarco in preseason) wasn't working the way Romeo had expected. Many teams have dropped the fullback position from their gameplan and roster, however, as the Chiefs showed us it doesn't work in a run heavy offense where you can expect to run the ball anywhere from 20 to 45 times a game (Ask the Steelers, Ravens, and 49ers if you don't believe me)

The lead blocker vacancy allowed the Falcons and Buffalo defenses to cover many gaps without any consequence, leading to Charles and Hillis being touched sooner than they should have. Now with the insertion of Eachus at fullback, the Chiefs have gotten a much needed lead blocker (and did a damn good job might I add) that can also catch the ball out of the backfield if needed.

While he is a bit smaller than your typical fullback (Cowboys fullback Lawrence Vickers stands at 6'0 and weighs in at 250 lbs while Eachus stands at 5'10 and weighs in a 212 lbs) he made just about every block he needed to make. While he didn't blow anyone up, he got them out of the way or kept them occupied while Charles did his thing.

Eachus is a hardnosed back who understands the game and blocking schemes, which is all you can ask of a fullback. So if you didn't notice him against the Saints, keep an eye out for him slamming into opposing linebackers while Charles runs for consistent gains of 9 and 10 yards (or 91 yards) the rest of the season.