Jamaal Charles may not be a lock to stay in K.C.

We all know how great of a running back Kansas City Chiefs running back Jamaal Charles has been. When the Chiefs were bounced from the playoffs by New England Patriots, all I could think about is how scary the team will be when he gets back from his torn ACL in Week 5.

Getting one of their best players back is sure to give them a boost in 2016, right?

According to Hall of Fame running back Marshall Faulk, not so fast.

He told the Kansas City Star, “I can’t even see what reason they would continue to pay (him) if they have a way of getting up from under that contract and dispersing money elsewhere to fill some of the gaps that they have. And that’s just real talk—that’s the business of the game.

“I love Jamaal, and I think he could find another home. I think there’s a lot left in him. But looking at what went on when he went down in Kansas City, are his days possibly numbered there?”

I don’t know if I agree with all that but it’s pretty easy to see his point when you look at how the season played out. The Chiefs were 1-4 with Charles in the lineup and after he went out, including the playoffs, they went 11-2 including a 10-game winning streak. And behind the running of Charcandrick West and Spencer Ware, the Chiefs rushed 128 yards per game.

Those numbers caused Faulk to ask the Kansas City Star, “The conversation is, ‘Why does Kansas City keep Jamaal Charles when you saw Spencer Ware and Charcandrick West? For what reason?'”

The Chiefs could save about $5.3 million with no dead money if they cut Charles. And they have a few pending free agents like safety Eric Berry and outside linebacker Tamba Hali and to sign. There haven’t been any reports that such a release may happen and as a said before, I don’t necessarily agree.

But Faulk has a point and this is the NFL with the devalued running back position.