I appreciate the concept that if someone is better than JJ, they should play the position. A lot of coaches use that philosophy...
But arguing against having good hands doesn't make sense to me. Nearly every fumble by a kick returner is going to cost you points. Here are the stats for punt returners with a higher average than JJ:
Drummond is number 1, but has no stats on NFL.com, so I don't know if he's fumbled. Besides, his stats don't count, since he got a 99 yard touchdown against us.
Rossum is number 2 in punt returns, but fumbled twice last year.
Northcut (3) and fumbles twice a year (for the last 4 years).
Micheal Lewis (4), fumbled 3 times in the last two years (6 times in '02).
Welker (5) fumbled 4 times.
Sams (6) fumbled 5 times.
Smith (7) fumbled 4 times.
Hall (8) only fumbled 1 time, but averages 2 fumbles a year.
Lewis (9) only fumbled 1 time,
McQuarters (10) fumbled 5 times
Frazier (11) 2 times
Clements (12) 3 times
Parker (13) 5 times
Moses (t 14) 1 time
Battle (t 14) 2 times
Burleson (t 14) once
Most of these guys don't return kickoffs and punts, which increases your chance of a fumble.
So what I'm saying is, don't knock the 'holding onto the ball' logic. Dropping it costs games. If you have an average that's above half the returners in the NFL, and have fewer fumbles than all of them (nobody had 0), that's a good thing.
I'm surprised JJ hasn't fumbled more, just because everyone else does. And whoever we replace JJ with will probably fumble more.
That's my logic. He's stayed healthy, he's got good hands, he's averaging 8.6 per return on punts. He improved from 2003 to 2004 on punts. Definitely needs improvement on kickoffs, but you'll notice Houston didn't sub somebody else for him. So yeah, play the best guy you've got. But if that ends up being JJ, let it rest.