Ben Tate (2 Viewers)

[Proximo]

I know there is a thread on Foster already, but I think Tate deserves his own thread.Lead back "as of right now" that is.THis is up on rotoworld:

Coach Gary Kubiak announced Monday that Ben Tate will be the Texans' lead back until Arian Foster's hamstring fully heals."He's playing really well," Kubiak said of Tate. "Ben's probably going to carry most of the load right now." Kubiak also praised Tate's pass protection for the second straight week. Foster didn't look fully healthy during the first half of Houston's Week 2 win over Miami, and had to shut it down at intermission. The Texans will lean on Tate against the Saints in Week 3. You'll be hard pressed to name 12 better running back plays in fantasy football.

This matchup versus my hometown team, the Saints, would seemingly be a great fantasy start. However, G Williams plugged Aubrayo Franklin into the nose tackle spot much of this previous game against the Bears. When you take away Matt Forte's 42 yard run and Jay Cutler's 12 yard run, they averaged less than a yard per carry or some ridiculously low number. I believe Franklin was rated as one of the top run stuffers last year per pro football focus.What are your thoughts on Tate's fantasy outlook for week 3 and beyond?

 

[packersfan]

What are your thoughts on Tate's fantasy outlook for week 3 and beyond?

I think he has Top 5 potential this week. For Week 4 and beyond, it all comes down to if Foster can get healthy. I think the worst-case scenario for Tate is he gets around 10 carries a game with a healthy Foster regaining his role as the lead back. I think Tate's been far too good to just head back to the bench while Foster gets 25-30 touches a game. Best-case scenario for Tate is Foster struggles all season to get healthy and Tate is locked in for at least 15 touches per game. I think Tate is no worse than a RB3 the rest of the season barring injury. And he obviously has RB1 upside as long as Foster is out.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

I know there is a thread on Foster already, but I think Tate deserves his own thread.

Lead back "as of right now" that is.

THis is up on rotoworld:

Coach Gary Kubiak announced Monday that Ben Tate will be the Texans' lead back until Arian Foster's hamstring fully heals.

"He's playing really well," Kubiak said of Tate. "Ben's probably going to carry most of the load right now." Kubiak also praised Tate's pass protection for the second straight week. Foster didn't look fully healthy during the first half of Houston's Week 2 win over Miami, and had to shut it down at intermission. The Texans will lean on Tate against the Saints in Week 3. You'll be hard pressed to name 12 better running back plays in fantasy football.

This matchup versus my hometown team, the Saints, would seemingly be a great fantasy start. However, G Williams plugged Aubrayo Franklin into the nose tackle spot much of this previous game against the Bears.

When you take away Matt Forte's 42 yard run and Jay Cutler's 12 yard run, they averaged less than a yard per carry or some ridiculously low number. I believe Franklin was rated as one of the top run stuffers last year per pro football focus.

What are your thoughts on Tate's fantasy outlook for week 3 and beyond?

Longtime Saints season ticket-holder here. I was just talking to someone about this today. Busting up Martz and his well known schemes are one thing, a team like the Texans with one of the best running games in the league are a whole other dog.the 42 yard Forte run: there was a mixup on the line between [i think] Dunbar and Jordan, obviously a fluke but then it seems like a RB has always had a long one vs GW's Saints defenses almost every week he has been DC.

The Saints have a mighty weakness against the run and as we saw with Forte they aren't to good with stopping RB's on the pass either, or they don't try to as to the latter. Whether the Saints are up or down or it's tight I see RB's as a good play against them all year, though of course they could [hopefully] start to improve.

I think the bigger question [and I know there is a thread somewhere I saw before that's really more about this] is whether Tate is really taking over as the lead back. One or two weeks with Foster on the mend and limited or out is one thing, a full year of Tate as the "lead" guy is a much bigger deal.

 

[Prinefan]

Tate for the money! Love him this year and long term.

 

[Jedeye]

How is Tate with catching passes out of the backfield? I know the 1st week, he had none.

 

[Proximo]

I know there is a thread on Foster already, but I think Tate deserves his own thread.

Lead back "as of right now" that is.

THis is up on rotoworld:

Coach Gary Kubiak announced Monday that Ben Tate will be the Texans' lead back until Arian Foster's hamstring fully heals.

"He's playing really well," Kubiak said of Tate. "Ben's probably going to carry most of the load right now." Kubiak also praised Tate's pass protection for the second straight week. Foster didn't look fully healthy during the first half of Houston's Week 2 win over Miami, and had to shut it down at intermission. The Texans will lean on Tate against the Saints in Week 3. You'll be hard pressed to name 12 better running back plays in fantasy football.

This matchup versus my hometown team, the Saints, would seemingly be a great fantasy start. However, G Williams plugged Aubrayo Franklin into the nose tackle spot much of this previous game against the Bears.

When you take away Matt Forte's 42 yard run and Jay Cutler's 12 yard run, they averaged less than a yard per carry or some ridiculously low number. I believe Franklin was rated as one of the top run stuffers last year per pro football focus.

What are your thoughts on Tate's fantasy outlook for week 3 and beyond?

Longtime Saints season ticket-holder here. I was just talking to someone about this today. Busting up Martz and his well known schemes are one thing, a team like the Texans with one of the best running games in the league are a whole other dog.the 42 yard Forte run: there was a mixup on the line between [i think] Dunbar and Jordan, obviously a fluke but then it seems like a RB has always had a long one vs GW's Saints defenses almost every week he has been DC.

The Saints have a mighty weakness against the run and as we saw with Forte they aren't to good with stopping RB's on the pass either, or they don't try to as to the latter. Whether the Saints are up or down or it's tight I see RB's as a good play against them all year, though of course they could [hopefully] start to improve.

I think the bigger question [and I know there is a thread somewhere I saw before that's really more about this] is whether Tate is really taking over as the lead back. One or two weeks with Foster on the mend and limited or out is one thing, a full year of Tate as the "lead" guy is a much bigger deal.

Great points. Although I think there will be an improvement in the run D, it has always been our achilles heel it seems. I do remember us busting up Michael Turner quite a bit in the backfield last year.That said, I'm thinking Tate goes off on us this week.

A bit off topic, but if you aren't already on it, saintsreport.com's Saints Super Forum is the best Saints forum out there.

 

[Christo]

I don't think you can read anything into the Bears' rushing numbers as a comparison. They only ran the ball 12 times.

 

[damageinc]

From reading all the quotes this week , seems its just the opposite of what Kubiak said last week. I get the feeling Tate will get 20+ carries and if Foster is up to it he will get a handfull and slowley get 10-15 until they are 50-50 and then what the heck happens. This is barring a Foster or Tate injury. Foster is dynamic and a great pass catcher. But Tate has shown he is also above average runner. Maybe Tate on 1-2 Downs and Foster 3rd down since hes the better blocker and reciever. Man if Foster gets healthy in the next 2-3 weeks this can be a mess BUT for the next 2-3 weeks Tate is fantasy gold and if you own Foster its just a wait and see.

 

[pack66]

I think I'm going to try and move Foster this week (which will be tough in a league that doesn't trade much). I think he'll have value all season, but Foster will always be there as well and you might start to see a RBBC. I've got decent options at RB anyway, but I need a WR. Hopefully I can pull off a trade.

 

[SaintsInDome2006]

From reading all the quotes this week , seems its just the opposite of what Kubiak said last week. I get the feeling Tate will get 20+ carries and if Foster is up to it he will get a handfull and slowley get 10-15 until they are 50-50 and then what the heck happens. This is barring a Foster or Tate injury. Foster is dynamic and a great pass catcher. But Tate has shown he is also above average runner. Maybe Tate on 1-2 Downs and Foster 3rd down since hes the better blocker and reciever. Man if Foster gets healthy in the next 2-3 weeks this can be a mess BUT for the next 2-3 weeks Tate is fantasy gold and if you own Foster its just a wait and see.

After that, and maybe even just 2 weeks from now, it could end up a real FF headache; it could mean owning either one while reading Kubiak quotes like tea leaves as to who will start, who will get the carries.

 

[ImTheScientist]

Tate for the money! Love him this year and long term.

 

[howo5]

I Think buying Tate is the move here. Foster owners will not give up hope and sell their top 4 pick for cheap and Tate owners haven't been starting him in their lineup probably. I think a Beanie Wells or James Starks is enough to get one half of the Houston RBBC, with the upside of Foster being on the shelf from another tear.

 

[Dizzy]

Big news for the FBG contest... I'm sure a lot of guys added Tate under the cap and now they've got a potential top-10 RB for dirt cheap.

 

[cvnpoka]

so if you have foster, would you trade him for tate? vice versa?

 

[Sweet Love]

so if you have foster, would you trade him for tate? vice versa?

I wouldn't do that...I would try to get Tate or move Foster. In the end, you want both or none on your team.

 

[cvnpoka]

no, i was just asking who you would prefer, if you can only have one.

 

[ImTheScientist]

no, i was just asking who you would prefer, if you can only have one.

Tate all the way.

 

[cvnpoka]

im inclined to agree

 

[Neil Beaufort Zod]

Let me add another factor in Tate's favor: Houston doesn't want to break the bank for Foster. The more Tate succeeds and Foster looks like a "product of the system," the less bargaining power he has.

That's not to say Foster isn't talented or is actually just a product of the system. But when his numbers take a big dip this year-- maybe exacerbated by giving Tate plenty of reps-- it will work in the Texans' favor when it's time to address contracts.

Giving Tate a lot of work benefits them by keeping Foster healthy (and fresh for a potential playoff run) and by saving them money in the offseason.

 

[Da Guru]

Tate is too good to keep on the bench. Looks like it could be a RBBC when Foster returns and keep both of them fresh.

Now I am wondering if it is Foster or the system just like in Denver?

 

[Banger]

Tate is too good to keep on the bench. Looks like it could be a RBBC when Foster returns and keep both of them fresh.Now I am wondering if it is Foster or the system just like in Denver?

Foster is certainly a product...prior to him Slaton was a stud and now he can't even get on the field. Don't get me wrong, he's a very good player for the system and he's talented but I don't see him as a top RB talent.

 

[pack66]

Ugh, I meant Tate...sorry long night.

 

[Tanner9919]

Foster owners = Baghdad Bob.

they see Tate, they watch Tate,but they refuse to admit that he has 'arrived'.

unless Foster sits and doesn't practice for a few weeks, this injury will linger all season long..he didn't look crisp last week, so he's definitely still bothered by that hammy..

unfortunately for Foster owners, Tate is here to stay, at least this season - maybe next year there is a RB competition between the two, but for now, Tate is the man...

 

[Proximo]

I found another nugget from a Kubiak interview on the Saints game:

On if he's worried about running back Ben Tate going up against the Saints' defense: "Yeah, but he's improving. In the game yesterday, he had a couple of protection issues that he's got to get better at, but yet there were many that he was excellent at, so I tell Ben, I make the comment to him all the time, I got to get the film to look the same throughout the whole game and then he's on his way, so to speak. He has made improvement in pass protection and yes, we do trust him back there. The only way you're going to get better at that is to be on the field in crunch time, blitz time, those types of things. As of right now, he's going to be out there a great deal."

 

[AmosMoses]

Foster. We hardly knew ya.

 

[cvnpoka]

Tate is too good to keep on the bench. Looks like it could be a RBBC when Foster returns and keep both of them fresh.Now I am wondering if it is Foster or the system just like in Denver?

rbbc is wishful thinking for foster owners.

 

[Shutout]

Foster. We hardly knew ya.

Laughable.there is so much bias from the Foster and Tate owners in these threads that its basically killed the point to have a thread. The foster owners have production and history on their side and the tate owners have the FOTM and shiny new toy on theirs.I can honestly see it going lots of ways because real teams don't care about our fantasy player productivity, but in tryng to be completely unbiased, what I see is a good team that has under achieved and has a golden opportunity. A head coach that absolutely will be fired if this isnt the year they break through. A RB who led the league last year, can block, can catch, and does not fumble. A new RB that is still improving in a few of the areas.So, at the end of the day, it wouldn't surprise me one bit if Tate outproduces Foster until right before Halloween and then, when the division is on the line and things take a turn, a very fresh foster comes in and drives it home. then, after the season, we will truly see how much the Texans like Foster as he will either sign for big money and come back or he will be carrying the ball in Denver or Seattle or somewehre.

 

[packersfan]

So for those in leagues where Tate is still available how much are you spending on him this week if your league uses blind bidding? I'm curious to see where he goes based on this week's news.

 

[drater]

Foster. We hardly knew ya.

Laughable.there is so much bias from the Foster and Tate owners in these threads that its basically killed the point to have a thread. The foster owners have production and history on their side and the tate owners have the FOTM and shiny new toy on theirs.I can honestly see it going lots of ways because real teams don't care about our fantasy player productivity, but in tryng to be completely unbiased, what I see is a good team that has under achieved and has a golden opportunity. A head coach that absolutely will be fired if this isnt the year they break through. A RB who led the league last year, can block, can catch, and does not fumble. A new RB that is still improving in a few of the areas.So, at the end of the day, it wouldn't surprise me one bit if Tate outproduces Foster until right before Halloween and then, when the division is on the line and things take a turn, a very fresh foster comes in and drives it home. then, after the season, we will truly see how much the Texans like Foster as he will either sign for big money and come back or he will be carrying the ball in Denver or Seattle or somewehre.

As an owner of both, I wish they'd just shut Foster down for 3-4 weeks and let it heal completely.

 

[Abraham]

there is so much bias from the Foster and Tate owners in these threads that its basically killed the point to have a thread. The foster owners have production and history on their side and the tate owners have the FOTM and shiny new toy on theirs.

So did the Slaton owners. As a former Vol I like Foster a lot, but this is a situation where Houston has one of the better rush lines, one of the better systems, and a good deep passing game to keep the defense back. Foster may be the most talented rusher they have. But history has shown that even mediocre backs can be really good for the Texans. As such, Foster's single year of great production is no more significant then Slaton's. And Tate could easily reel off four or five straight nice games in a row as well. This isn't a situation where the skill set of one guy is clearly better then the skill set of another. The Texans biggest problem running the ball in recent years was fumbles. But along the way they've gotten big games from Steve Slaton, Ryan Moats, Ben Tate, and Arian Foster. They've gotten pretty good games out of Chris Brown and Derrick Ward. In other words, we still have a long way to go before we can determine that it is Foster - and not a wide combination of things - that makes the Texans rushing game special. And if its the latter as much as the former then it is POSSIBLE that Foster will be held out a while, that Tate will perform well, and that the whole situation will be a mess for a while.

 

[Otis]

I just gave up a bunch for Tate in dynasty (Stevie Johnson, though I get a 2nd round pick next year too). I like him that much. I carried him through much of last year and finally needed the roster space for others and cut him offseason. I'm regretting it now for sure.

I believe Foster is all system, as was Slaton. Tate was drafted to take the job and had a bad break (literally) last season. If he doesn't, who is to say he doesn't put up the same numbers Foster did? I think he's a more talented back, and if you believe in dynasty that the cream always rises to the top, if I have to pick one guy in this situation, it's Tate. I only wish I could have made a deal for him happen weeks ago, because his value is way up right now.

In any event,

 

[shadyridr]

So for those in leagues where Tate is still available how much are you spending on him this week if your league uses blind bidding? I'm curious to see where he goes based on this week's news.

Id probably spend it all on him regardless if I owned Foster or not

 

[shadyridr]

there is so much bias from the Foster and Tate owners in these threads that its basically killed the point to have a thread. The foster owners have production and history on their side and the tate owners have the FOTM and shiny new toy on theirs.

So did the Slaton owners. As a former Vol I like Foster a lot, but this is a situation where Houston has one of the better rush lines, one of the better systems, and a good deep passing game to keep the defense back. Foster may be the most talented rusher they have. But history has shown that even mediocre backs can be really good for the Texans. As such, Foster's single year of great production is no more significant then Slaton's. And Tate could easily reel off four or five straight nice games in a row as well. This isn't a situation where the skill set of one guy is clearly better then the skill set of another. The Texans biggest problem running the ball in recent years was fumbles. But along the way they've gotten big games from Steve Slaton, Ryan Moats, Ben Tate, and Arian Foster. They've gotten pretty good games out of Chris Brown and Derrick Ward. In other words, we still have a long way to go before we can determine that it is Foster - and not a wide combination of things - that makes the Texans rushing game special. And if its the latter as much as the former then it is POSSIBLE that Foster will be held out a while, that Tate will perform well, and that the whole situation will be a mess for a while.

Dont forget Ron Dayne

 

[L5UT1ger]

I have neither. Here is my useless take:

If I am Houston, I WANT a RBBC with these two. I use Tate until Foster is fully healed and then its RBBC. Houston would prefer each getting 10-15 carries vs. one getting 25 and other 5.

There is no downside to RBBC if Houston's goal is to win football games and pay less money to both. If Foster is better when Houston needs to pass, they play him if they are behind. If its close or Houston is winning, they split the carries. Is there any feasible argument to be made where Houston would not want to work them like this?

 

[Shutout]

I just gave up a bunch for Tate in dynasty (Stevie Johnson, though I get a 2nd round pick next year too). I like him that much. I carried him through much of last year and finally needed the roster space for others and cut him offseason. I'm regretting it now for sure.I believe Foster is all system, as was Slaton. Tate was drafted to take the job and had a bad break (literally) last season. If he doesn't, who is to say he doesn't put up the same numbers Foster did? I think he's a more talented back, and if you believe in dynasty that the cream always rises to the top, if I have to pick one guy in this situation, it's Tate. I only wish I could have made a deal for him happen weeks ago, because his value is way up right now.In any event,

Just out of curiosity, what exactly is it you have seen in two games from Tate that makes you think he is the superior talent, as opposed to what you saw Foster do last year? Is he faster? Does he block better? Does he fumble less? Does he pass protect better? Honestly, I have seen Tate do well but there is nothing in him that makes me say "wow! he clearly is the better talent". So, in my opinion, we really can't say it is the system, not the player without clearly lumping tate in there with the others. There really is no difference. In all honesty, if not for Ward's ankle injury, it would likely not even be this much opportunity for Tate because the team has clearly said that Ward is the better pass protector.Also, Tate was not drafted to take this job. The texans actually traded down with the Vikings and then "settled" on Tate when the Viking drafted the player they really wanted (Toby Gerhart). For that in itself, it makes me think that the Texans were never enarmoured with any particular player. Otherwise I would think they would not have traded and made sure they got the guy they wanted. Not trying to pick nits here, I just think its a little runaway assumption that people are overstating Tate's "talent" compared to Foster based simply on the fact that he is healthy and foster isn't (and they have forgotten how impressive Foster was last year). In all honesty, if Foster had not injured his Hammy, its likely the world would not know of tate's "superior talent" and that, in of itself, suggests, that its not that obvious to the coaches that work with him everyday; much less all of us casual fantasy onlookers.

 

[footballnerd]

Kubiak is Shanahan, there is no RB loyalty.

 

[Young 8]

The foster owners have production and history on their side

For "History" you mean 1 season, right ?

 

[GroveDiesel]

I just gave up a bunch for Tate in dynasty (Stevie Johnson, though I get a 2nd round pick next year too). I like him that much. I carried him through much of last year and finally needed the roster space for others and cut him offseason. I'm regretting it now for sure.I believe Foster is all system, as was Slaton. Tate was drafted to take the job and had a bad break (literally) last season. If he doesn't, who is to say he doesn't put up the same numbers Foster did? I think he's a more talented back, and if you believe in dynasty that the cream always rises to the top, if I have to pick one guy in this situation, it's Tate. I only wish I could have made a deal for him happen weeks ago, because his value is way up right now.In any event,

Just out of curiosity, what exactly is it you have seen in two games from Tate that makes you think he is the superior talent, as opposed to what you saw Foster do last year? Is he faster? Does he block better? Does he fumble less? Does he pass protect better? Honestly, I have seen Tate do well but there is nothing in him that makes me say "wow! he clearly is the better talent". So, in my opinion, we really can't say it is the system, not the player without clearly lumping tate in there with the others. There really is no difference. In all honesty, if not for Ward's ankle injury, it would likely not even be this much opportunity for Tate because the team has clearly said that Ward is the better pass protector.Also, Tate was not drafted to take this job. The texans actually traded down with the Vikings and then "settled" on Tate when the Viking drafted the player they really wanted (Toby Gerhart). For that in itself, it makes me think that the Texans were never enarmoured with any particular player. Otherwise I would think they would not have traded and made sure they got the guy they wanted. Not trying to pick nits here, I just think its a little runaway assumption that people are overstating Tate's "talent" compared to Foster based simply on the fact that he is healthy and foster isn't (and they have forgotten how impressive Foster was last year). In all honesty, if Foster had not injured his Hammy, its likely the world would not know of tate's "superior talent" and that, in of itself, suggests, that its not that obvious to the coaches that work with him everyday; much less all of us casual fantasy onlookers.

Um, Tate was going to be the starter last year until he broke his ankle. So if not for HIS injury, we'd never know about Foster's "superior talent" and that, in and of itself, suggests that it's not that obvious to the coaches that work with him everyday; much less all of us casual fantasy onlookers.

 

[humpback]

I just gave up a bunch for Tate in dynasty (Stevie Johnson, though I get a 2nd round pick next year too). I like him that much. I carried him through much of last year and finally needed the roster space for others and cut him offseason. I'm regretting it now for sure.I believe Foster is all system, as was Slaton. Tate was drafted to take the job and had a bad break (literally) last season. If he doesn't, who is to say he doesn't put up the same numbers Foster did? I think he's a more talented back, and if you believe in dynasty that the cream always rises to the top, if I have to pick one guy in this situation, it's Tate. I only wish I could have made a deal for him happen weeks ago, because his value is way up right now.In any event,

Just out of curiosity, what exactly is it you have seen in two games from Tate that makes you think he is the superior talent, as opposed to what you saw Foster do last year? Is he faster? Does he block better? Does he fumble less? Does he pass protect better? Honestly, I have seen Tate do well but there is nothing in him that makes me say "wow! he clearly is the better talent". So, in my opinion, we really can't say it is the system, not the player without clearly lumping tate in there with the others. There really is no difference. In all honesty, if not for Ward's ankle injury, it would likely not even be this much opportunity for Tate because the team has clearly said that Ward is the better pass protector.Also, Tate was not drafted to take this job. The texans actually traded down with the Vikings and then "settled" on Tate when the Viking drafted the player they really wanted (Toby Gerhart). For that in itself, it makes me think that the Texans were never enarmoured with any particular player. Otherwise I would think they would not have traded and made sure they got the guy they wanted. Not trying to pick nits here, I just think its a little runaway assumption that people are overstating Tate's "talent" compared to Foster based simply on the fact that he is healthy and foster isn't (and they have forgotten how impressive Foster was last year). In all honesty, if Foster had not injured his Hammy, its likely the world would not know of tate's "superior talent" and that, in of itself, suggests, that its not that obvious to the coaches that work with him everyday; much less all of us casual fantasy onlookers.

Um, Tate was going to be the starter last year until he broke his ankle. So if not for HIS injury, we'd never know about Foster's "superior talent" and that, in and of itself, suggests that it's not that obvious to the coaches that work with him everyday; much less all of us casual fantasy onlookers.

Not sure how anyone can be so sure of what would have happened. The most likely scenario is that it would have been a competition, and we have no idea how that would have turned out.

 

[Shutout]

I just gave up a bunch for Tate in dynasty (Stevie Johnson, though I get a 2nd round pick next year too). I like him that much. I carried him through much of last year and finally needed the roster space for others and cut him offseason. I'm regretting it now for sure.I believe Foster is all system, as was Slaton. Tate was drafted to take the job and had a bad break (literally) last season. If he doesn't, who is to say he doesn't put up the same numbers Foster did? I think he's a more talented back, and if you believe in dynasty that the cream always rises to the top, if I have to pick one guy in this situation, it's Tate. I only wish I could have made a deal for him happen weeks ago, because his value is way up right now.In any event,

Just out of curiosity, what exactly is it you have seen in two games from Tate that makes you think he is the superior talent, as opposed to what you saw Foster do last year? Is he faster? Does he block better? Does he fumble less? Does he pass protect better? Honestly, I have seen Tate do well but there is nothing in him that makes me say "wow! he clearly is the better talent". So, in my opinion, we really can't say it is the system, not the player without clearly lumping tate in there with the others. There really is no difference. In all honesty, if not for Ward's ankle injury, it would likely not even be this much opportunity for Tate because the team has clearly said that Ward is the better pass protector.Also, Tate was not drafted to take this job. The texans actually traded down with the Vikings and then "settled" on Tate when the Viking drafted the player they really wanted (Toby Gerhart). For that in itself, it makes me think that the Texans were never enarmoured with any particular player. Otherwise I would think they would not have traded and made sure they got the guy they wanted. Not trying to pick nits here, I just think its a little runaway assumption that people are overstating Tate's "talent" compared to Foster based simply on the fact that he is healthy and foster isn't (and they have forgotten how impressive Foster was last year). In all honesty, if Foster had not injured his Hammy, its likely the world would not know of tate's "superior talent" and that, in of itself, suggests, that its not that obvious to the coaches that work with him everyday; much less all of us casual fantasy onlookers.

Um, Tate was going to be the starter last year until he broke his ankle. So if not for HIS injury, we'd never know about Foster's "superior talent" and that, in and of itself, suggests that it's not that obvious to the coaches that work with him everyday; much less all of us casual fantasy onlookers.

that is incorrect. Go back and look at the history (rotowold, etc) and you will see that it was NEVER said that Tate was going to be the back. Foster was listed #1 from the beginning. A lot of people ASSUMED that it was just a matter of time before tate got the job but that never happened. In training camp and in pre-season games, it was always Foster #1.

 

[Shutout]

The foster owners have production and history on their side

For "History" you mean 1 season, right ?

As opposed to two games for Tate, yes.And there is absolutely nothing wrong with seeing a full and complete season of 300+ carries and classifying that as proven. Any guy that can go through a whole season in the NFL at RB and be better at it than everyone else in the league, that counts for me.

And let's be honest: If that had been Ryan Matthews who came into the league and accomplished what Foster did last year, NOBODY would be questioning "proven" or not. Peterson did less in his first year and no one ever questioned whether he proved anything in year one. Its simply a matter of name recognition and hype.

 

[Chaka]

Tate is too good to keep on the bench. Looks like it could be a RBBC when Foster returns and keep both of them fresh.Now I am wondering if it is Foster or the system just like in Denver?

Kubiak was Denver's OC for a decade so the argument for it being the system is pretty strong.

 

[Sir Chadwick]

Looks like I'll be rolling with Tate for a while until Foster is 100%. Then I have to decide whether to put both guys in or re-evaluate.

 

[Abraham]

And there is absolutely nothing wrong with seeing a full and complete season of 300+ carries and classifying that as proven. Any guy that can go through a whole season in the NFL at RB and be better at it than everyone else in the league, that counts for me.

Of course there is nothing wrong with it. But other factors have to be weighed such as the fact that other backs have had similar success in the system (Moats, Dayne, Slaton, now Tate) and that the player in question (Foster) wasn't exactly a highly regarded prospect entering the league. Just something to consider.

And let's be honest: If that had been Ryan Matthews who came into the league and accomplished what Foster did last year, NOBODY would be questioning "proven" or not. Peterson did less in his first year and no one ever questioned whether he proved anything in year one. Its simply a matter of name recognition and hype.

Hype often equals draft position and pedigree. Matthews and Peterson were regarded as first round talents. They are also PAID like first round talents so the team has a lot riding on them being successful. Arian Foster is earning 525k this year but will be a UFA at year's end. Tate is making 405k this season with two more years on the deal ~$500k. From a financial standpoint, breaking the bank to sign Foster isn't a great idea if Tate is able to deliver similar results.

 

[AmosMoses]

The foster owners have production and history on their side

For "History" you mean 1 season, right ?

It's still history to me, dammit!

 

[humpback]

Of course there is nothing wrong with it. But other factors have to be weighed such as the fact that other backs have had similar success in the system (Moats, Dayne, Slaton, now Tate) and that the player in question (Foster) wasn't exactly a highly regarded prospect entering the league. Just something to consider.

I think people forget just how good Foster was last year- it doesn't mean he's the most talented RB in the NFL or anything, but none of those guys had near the same level of success that Foster did last year.

 

[az_prof]

Tate for the money! Love him this year and long term.

Agree with this. Tate's stock is rising fast.

 

[Ray_T]

Kubiak is Shanahan, there is no RB loyalty.

I agree. he learned under Shanahan. I'd expect he would do a lot of things in a similar way. While I like tate and had expected him to eventually become the starter, this is a case where you dont make any huge investment in a houston RB. We learned this with a couple RB's in Houston already.

 

[JamesTheScot]

I just gave up a bunch for Tate in dynasty (Stevie Johnson, though I get a 2nd round pick next year too). I like him that much. I carried him through much of last year and finally needed the roster space for others and cut him offseason. I'm regretting it now for sure.I believe Foster is all system, as was Slaton. Tate was drafted to take the job and had a bad break (literally) last season. If he doesn't, who is to say he doesn't put up the same numbers Foster did? I think he's a more talented back, and if you believe in dynasty that the cream always rises to the top, if I have to pick one guy in this situation, it's Tate. I only wish I could have made a deal for him happen weeks ago, because his value is way up right now.In any event,

Just out of curiosity, what exactly is it you have seen in two games from Tate that makes you think he is the superior talent, as opposed to what you saw Foster do last year? Is he faster? Does he block better? Does he fumble less? Does he pass protect better? Honestly, I have seen Tate do well but there is nothing in him that makes me say "wow! he clearly is the better talent". So, in my opinion, we really can't say it is the system, not the player without clearly lumping tate in there with the others. There really is no difference. In all honesty, if not for Ward's ankle injury, it would likely not even be this much opportunity for Tate because the team has clearly said that Ward is the better pass protector.Also, Tate was not drafted to take this job. The texans actually traded down with the Vikings and then "settled" on Tate when the Viking drafted the player they really wanted (Toby Gerhart). For that in itself, it makes me think that the Texans were never enarmoured with any particular player. Otherwise I would think they would not have traded and made sure they got the guy they wanted. Not trying to pick nits here, I just think its a little runaway assumption that people are overstating Tate's "talent" compared to Foster based simply on the fact that he is healthy and foster isn't (and they have forgotten how impressive Foster was last year). In all honesty, if Foster had not injured his Hammy, its likely the world would not know of tate's "superior talent" and that, in of itself, suggests, that its not that obvious to the coaches that work with him everyday; much less all of us casual fantasy onlookers.

Good posting. It's not like Tate lived up to expectations in college, so given his college career and his lost rookie year, I'm not sure where I can see that he's a true talent but Foster is just a POTS. I suspect that both guys are pretty interchangeable in terms of talent.Had Tate not shown so well, it would be Foster's job as soon as he is able to come back. But with Tate showing well, Houston has the luxury of bringing Foster along slowly to avoid re-injury of the hamstring. I think after what happened to Foster this week, they do snce Foster is back, assuming Tate continues to produce, it becomes a D.Wiiliams+J.Stewart situation. Each guy could be a bell cow by himself but they stymie each other as long as both are healthy.

 

[JamesTheScot]

I just gave up a bunch for Tate in dynasty (Stevie Johnson, though I get a 2nd round pick next year too). I like him that much. I carried him through much of last year and finally needed the roster space for others and cut him offseason. I'm regretting it now for sure.I believe Foster is all system, as was Slaton. Tate was drafted to take the job and had a bad break (literally) last season. If he doesn't, who is to say he doesn't put up the same numbers Foster did? I think he's a more talented back, and if you believe in dynasty that the cream always rises to the top, if I have to pick one guy in this situation, it's Tate. I only wish I could have made a deal for him happen weeks ago, because his value is way up right now.In any event,

Just out of curiosity, what exactly is it you have seen in two games from Tate that makes you think he is the superior talent, as opposed to what you saw Foster do last year? Is he faster? Does he block better? Does he fumble less? Does he pass protect better? Honestly, I have seen Tate do well but there is nothing in him that makes me say "wow! he clearly is the better talent". So, in my opinion, we really can't say it is the system, not the player without clearly lumping tate in there with the others. There really is no difference. In all honesty, if not for Ward's ankle injury, it would likely not even be this much opportunity for Tate because the team has clearly said that Ward is the better pass protector.Also, Tate was not drafted to take this job. The texans actually traded down with the Vikings and then "settled" on Tate when the Viking drafted the player they really wanted (Toby Gerhart). For that in itself, it makes me think that the Texans were never enarmoured with any particular player. Otherwise I would think they would not have traded and made sure they got the guy they wanted. Not trying to pick nits here, I just think its a little runaway assumption that people are overstating Tate's "talent" compared to Foster based simply on the fact that he is healthy and foster isn't (and they have forgotten how impressive Foster was last year). In all honesty, if Foster had not injured his Hammy, its likely the world would not know of tate's "superior talent" and that, in of itself, suggests, that its not that obvious to the coaches that work with him everyday; much less all of us casual fantasy onlookers.

Um, Tate was going to be the starter last year until he broke his ankle. So if not for HIS injury, we'd never know about Foster's "superior talent" and that, in and of itself, suggests that it's not that obvious to the coaches that work with him everyday; much less all of us casual fantasy onlookers.

that is incorrect. Go back and look at the history (rotowold, etc) and you will see that it was NEVER said that Tate was going to be the back. Foster was listed #1 from the beginning. A lot of people ASSUMED that it was just a matter of time before tate got the job but that never happened. In training camp and in pre-season games, it was always Foster #1.

That's what I remember as well. Foster was the starter in name primarily because he was the incumbent who had finished decently in 2009. But many predicted that Tate would win the job or at least make it a RBBC. Some of that was pedigree driven for sure. When Tate got injured, the Foster hype increased, in my opinion, because he was no longer at risk for touches.