What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Matt Forte - to be more relevant again (1 Viewer)

whitem0nkey

Footballguy
based on the new changes in Chicago, Matt forte should be more like how he was before.The bears will be using the west coast offence, Matt Forte is an ideal west coast RB. He will see more opportunities. more short quick passes.

 
based on the new changes in Chicago, Matt forte should be more like how he was before.The bears will be using the west coast offence, Matt Forte is an ideal west coast RB. He will see more opportunities. more short quick passes.
CFL is a passing league (seeing as how it is 3 down football) which could lead to Forte catching a ton of passes if Trestman uses some of his CFL experience.
 
based on the new changes in Chicago, Matt forte should be more like how he was before.The bears will be using the west coast offence, Matt Forte is an ideal west coast RB. He will see more opportunities. more short quick passes.
CFL is a passing league (seeing as how it is 3 down football) which could lead to Forte catching a ton of passes if Trestman uses some of his CFL experience.
now its still early and things may change, but i just hear west cost offence right now, and if that is true, then his numbers could be similar they were in the past, slightly lower due to more options then before.
 
based on the new changes in Chicago, Matt forte should be more like how he was before.The bears will be using the west coast offence, Matt Forte is an ideal west coast RB. He will see more opportunities. more short quick passes.
CFL is a passing league (seeing as how it is 3 down football) which could lead to Forte catching a ton of passes if Trestman uses some of his CFL experience.
Not sure it'll be all that different, TBH. If you look at how Trestman used his RBs with the Alouettes, it's pretty similar to how Forte is used now. His lead backs usually had about 200 rushes and 60 catches a season, which I think is fairly similar to Forte's numbers when you adjust for 3 vs. 4 downs. I watched a few Alouettes games, and while I remember their RBs as definitely involved in the passing game (at least when compared than Toronto), it didn't strike me as that pass-heavy.
 
http://espn.go.com/blog/nflnation/post/_/id/77319/receiving-opportunities-for-forte-bush

Receiving opportunities for Forte, Bush
Excerpt:

Meanwhile, Chicago Bears tailback Matt Forte will be playing in a scheme that got Charlie Garner 91 receptions for the Oakland Raiders in 2002. Bears coach Marc Trestman, of course, was the Raiders' offensive coordinator at the time.

Forte had at least 50 receptions in his first four seasons before dipping to 44 last season. He has proved to be an adept route runner in addition to excelling on screen plays and short passes into the flat.

"I would expect [to be used more in the new offense]," Forte told reporters last month. "Coach Trestman, I think he said he watched a lot of film on me and has seen me run different routes. So we'll get back to catching the ball out of the backfield like we did the prior years."

So we have two offenses that have supported 88-plus receptions by a running back in previous incarnations. Could Bush or Forte approach that number? Why not?
 
Looking like money in the bank (PPR). Now the question is who do we like better this year? Forte or Reggie Bush?
I would expect forte to be a more effective/productive runner, although bush i think will catch more passes. Its close, but id go forte.
 
I see Martellus Bennett taking away some targets in the short passing game, and I have a hard time seeing the Bears O-line improving much. It's year been year after year of unfulfilled expectations with new personnel on the line. Might the new system favor him? Sure. But Forte's also a year older and I don't foresee a major improvement over last year's numbers.

 
I see Martellus Bennett taking away some targets in the short passing game, and I have a hard time seeing the Bears O-line improving much. It's year been year after year of unfulfilled expectations with new personnel on the line. Might the new system favor him? Sure. But Forte's also a year older and I don't foresee a major improvement over last year's numbers.
This is inaccurate. How much new have they obtained the past few years? Gabe Carimi and 7th round picks. Chicago just signed 3 OL(one pro bowler, one 3 year starter) and drafted another 1st round pick. What else would you have liked them to do in order to see an improvement?

 
I see Martellus Bennett taking away some targets in the short passing game, and I have a hard time seeing the Bears O-line improving much. It's year been year after year of unfulfilled expectations with new personnel on the line. Might the new system favor him? Sure. But Forte's also a year older and I don't foresee a major improvement over last year's numbers.
This is inaccurate. How much new have they obtained the past few years? Gabe Carimi and 7th round picks. Chicago just signed 3 OL(one pro bowler, one 3 year starter) and drafted another 1st round pick. What else would you have liked them to do in order to see an improvement?
Also, they hired Aaron Kromer as their Offensive Coordinator/Line Coach.

 
I see Martellus Bennett taking away some targets in the short passing game, and I have a hard time seeing the Bears O-line improving much. It's year been year after year of unfulfilled expectations with new personnel on the line. Might the new system favor him? Sure. But Forte's also a year older and I don't foresee a major improvement over last year's numbers.
This is inaccurate. How much new have they obtained the past few years? Gabe Carimi and 7th round picks. Chicago just signed 3 OL(one pro bowler, one 3 year starter) and drafted another 1st round pick. What else would you have liked them to do in order to see an improvement?
My issue is not that the Bears aren't trying; it's that despite their efforts, they have a history of unsuccess. I'm thinking as far back as drafting Chris WIlliams in the 1st round in 2008 and signing Orlando Pace in 2009 for the Bears' attempts to upgrade a shoddy line, and none of it has produced any substantial upgrade in 5 years. And though this has less to do with Forte, the biggest question is pass blocking for Cutler, and I'm in agreement with PFF regarding the hard data on Bushrod's pass blocking (http://bit.ly/W9RWNs). The Bears *could* have a much better line; I'm just not banking on it by projecting a major uptick in Forte's production for my fantasy draft this year.

 
based on the new changes in Chicago, Matt forte should be more like how he was before.The bears will be using the west coast offence, Matt Forte is an ideal west coast RB. He will see more opportunities. more short quick passes.
Trestman is the most important element here.

People may go in evaluating Chicago based on the old ways of doing things, there could be a lot of surprises this year.

 
I see Martellus Bennett taking away some targets in the short passing game, and I have a hard time seeing the Bears O-line improving much. It's year been year after year of unfulfilled expectations with new personnel on the line. Might the new system favor him? Sure. But Forte's also a year older and I don't foresee a major improvement over last year's numbers.
This is inaccurate. How much new have they obtained the past few years? Gabe Carimi and 7th round picks. Chicago just signed 3 OL(one pro bowler, one 3 year starter) and drafted another 1st round pick. What else would you have liked them to do in order to see an improvement?
My issue is not that the Bears aren't trying; it's that despite their efforts, they have a history of unsuccess. I'm thinking as far back as drafting Chris WIlliams in the 1st round in 2008 and signing Orlando Pace in 2009 for the Bears' attempts to upgrade a shoddy line, and none of it has produced any substantial upgrade in 5 years. And though this has less to do with Forte, the biggest question is pass blocking for Cutler, and I'm in agreement with PFF regarding the hard data on Bushrod's pass blocking (http://bit.ly/W9RWNs). The Bears *could* have a much better line; I'm just not banking on it by projecting a major uptick in Forte's production for my fantasy draft this year.
It was already mentioned, the regime has changed. Those decisions you are questioning are the result of Lovie Smith being the coach and Jerry Angelo being the GM. (also don't forget that those two were responsible for making Mike Martz the OC and promoting Mike Tice as well)

 
Fantasy hint: Matt Forte's touchdowns

By Kevin Seifert | ESPN.com

This Fantasy Roundtable debate between the Atlanta Falcons' Steven Jackson and the Chicago Bears' Matt Forte isn't totally fair. Jackson is expected to be the Falcons' unquestioned workhorse this season, while Forte figures to share at least some duties -- particularly on the goal line -- with veteran backup Michael Bush.

As we've discussed many times, Forte has displayed many strengths in his career, among them: open-field running, receiver-like catching skills, able pass-blocking. But for whatever reason, he has been one of the NFL's worst goal-to-go runners over the past five years.

According to ESPN Stats & Information, he has converted only 12 of 98 such carries for touchdowns since joining the Bears in 2008. Bush filled that role last season, scoring five touchdowns in 11 carries.

But the discussion also reminds us to drop all previously-held assumptions about the Bears. With a new coaching staff in place for the first time in a decade, the Bears are much harder to predict. Forte might not have had much success at the goal line, but that doesn't mean new coach Marc Trestman won't want to see for himself -- or that he might not have some new ideas for getting it done.

Plus, as we discussed in May, Trestman was once the coordinator of an offense that got its starting tailback 91 receptions in a season. (Charlie Garner, Oakland Raiders, 2002). Who knows where that could take Forte from a fantasy value. That season, Garner accounted for 11 touchdowns, including four by reception. There are plenty of ways to peel the (fantasy) apple.
 
Fantasy hint: Matt Forte's touchdowns

By Kevin Seifert | ESPN.com

This Fantasy Roundtable debate between the Atlanta Falcons' Steven Jackson and the Chicago Bears' Matt Forte isn't totally fair. Jackson is expected to be the Falcons' unquestioned workhorse this season, while Forte figures to share at least some duties -- particularly on the goal line -- with veteran backup Michael Bush.

As we've discussed many times, Forte has displayed many strengths in his career, among them: open-field running, receiver-like catching skills, able pass-blocking. But for whatever reason, he has been one of the NFL's worst goal-to-go runners over the past five years.

According to ESPN Stats & Information, he has converted only 12 of 98 such carries for touchdowns since joining the Bears in 2008. Bush filled that role last season, scoring five touchdowns in 11 carries.

But the discussion also reminds us to drop all previously-held assumptions about the Bears. With a new coaching staff in place for the first time in a decade, the Bears are much harder to predict. Forte might not have had much success at the goal line, but that doesn't mean new coach Marc Trestman won't want to see for himself -- or that he might not have some new ideas for getting it done.

Plus, as we discussed in May, Trestman was once the coordinator of an offense that got its starting tailback 91 receptions in a season. (Charlie Garner, Oakland Raiders, 2002). Who knows where that could take Forte from a fantasy value. That season, Garner accounted for 11 touchdowns, including four by reception. There are plenty of ways to peel the (fantasy) apple.
About that Charlie Garner role, I'd suggest taking a look at the Argos' stats last year; Trestman made extensive use of two "slotbacks" in terms of receptions. These guys are smaller than most NFL primary RB's, including Forte, but also don't quite fit the WR mold. I realize CFL football might not exactly translate but I do believe we've seen how Trestmen has operated south of the border before and it looks promising for the RBs I'd say.

As an aside I'd add that the Bears drafted or signed Michael Ford from LSU. This is an extremely talented RB who like other Tiger RBs before got crowded in game plans that often included as many as 3-5 very talented RBs who could do all kinds of damage. Ford was excellent on the outside, he has tons of speed and I would not discount his being one of those popular midseason FA/WW pickups.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Matt Forte expects to feature in Chicago Bears' offenseBy Chris Wesseling

Around the League Writer

Running back Matt Forte attributes his career-lows of 44 receptions and 340 receiving yards to coordinator Mike Tice's overreliance on Brandon Marshall in the Chicago Bears' one-dimensional offense last season.

That won't happen again under new coach Marc Trestman this year.

"I would expect (to be used more)," Forte said, via Comcast SportsNet Chicago. "Coach Trestman, I think he said he watched a lot of film on me and has seen me run different routes. So we'll get back to catching the ball out of the backfield like we did the prior years."

Darren Sproles and Ray Rice are the only two NFL running backs with more receiving yards than Matt Forte over the past five seasons. It's clear that Trestman plans to take advantage of a back who averaged 56 receptions for 496 receiving yards while catching eight touchdown passes in the pre-Tice years.

Trestman has raved about Forte's playmaking ability after pouring over game tape.

"I just got done looking at all his catches from 2010. He was on the line scrimmage, he was running out of the backfield (and) he is great in space," Trestman explained in March. "He has a skill set that goes full spectrum of what you want out of a running back. He can run inside. He can run outside. He can catch the ball extremely well. I saw him as a very good route runner for a wide receiver. I saw him in slants in 2010. I saw him run rail routes, sideline routes."

Trestman has earned a well-deserved reputation as a quarterback whisperer, but it's Forte who stands to benefit the most in the Bears' offense. In Trestman's 10 NFL seasons as offensive coordinator or quarterbacks coach, his lead back averaged 65 receptions per year.

We're officially issuing the fantasy alert for Forte in 2013.

Follow Chris Wesseling on Twitter @ChrisWesseling.
 
Road to Bourbonnais: More Forte in 2013

By Michael C. Wright | ESPNChicago.com

The Chicago Bears brought in another weapon on offense for quarterback Jay Cutler in tight end Martellus Bennett, and there’s got to be at least some desire on the team’s part to see a repeat performance of Brandon Marshall's 2012 record-breaking season.

That’s why it would seem difficult for the Bears to find a way to incorporate more Matt Forte into the offense in 2013, but that’s the plan under Marc Trestman. More than likely, the team will be able to pull it off.

"I would expect (to be used more in 2013). Coach Trestman, I think he said he watched a lot of film on me and has seen me run different routes," Forte said back in May. "So we'll get back to catching the ball out of the backfield like we did the prior years."

The addition of Marshall prior to the 2012 season certainly caused a dip in production for Forte. Forte gained 1,434 yards from scrimmage in 2012 (1,094 rushing and 340 receiving), and while those numbers indicate a productive season, the running back rushed for 100 yards or more in just three games.

Forte finished second in receptions (44), but caught 74 fewer passes than Marshall (119). Forte's 44 catches in 2012 represented a career low. In the four previous years, he averaged nearly 56 catches.

"I think last year was basically the only time that happened. Before that, I actually was running the ball and catching the ball out of the backfield, had multiple catches," Forte said. "Last year was the only (a reduction) in catches. Brandon had a lot of catches, and everybody else really didn't have a whole lot. We were kind of one-dimensional last year I would say. (There’s) gonna be an emphasis for us this year to spread the ball around so that it works, it's balanced.”

To achieve that balance, the offense needs to run through Forte. Once opposing defenses gear up to stop him, that’s when Cutler can work the magic with Marshall, Bennett and the rest of the receiving corps.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I see Martellus Bennett taking away some targets in the short passing game, and I have a hard time seeing the Bears O-line improving much. It's year been year after year of unfulfilled expectations with new personnel on the line. Might the new system favor him? Sure. But Forte's also a year older and I don't foresee a major improvement over last year's numbers.
This is inaccurate. How much new have they obtained the past few years? Gabe Carimi and 7th round picks. Chicago just signed 3 OL(one pro bowler, one 3 year starter) and drafted another 1st round pick. What else would you have liked them to do in order to see an improvement?
My issue is not that the Bears aren't trying; it's that despite their efforts, they have a history of unsuccess. I'm thinking as far back as drafting Chris WIlliams in the 1st round in 2008 and signing Orlando Pace in 2009 for the Bears' attempts to upgrade a shoddy line, and none of it has produced any substantial upgrade in 5 years. And though this has less to do with Forte, the biggest question is pass blocking for Cutler, and I'm in agreement with PFF regarding the hard data on Bushrod's pass blocking (http://bit.ly/W9RWNs). The Bears *could* have a much better line; I'm just not banking on it by projecting a major uptick in Forte's production for my fantasy draft this year.
Questioning an organizations current decisions based on past decisions isn't a good choice. Will the TB Bucs DBs suck this year, even though they brought in Revis, because historically they haven't been good lately? See how silly this can get?

Whether you like him or not, Bushrod is an upgrade at LT. His 2012 wasn't as good as his 2011, but even his 2012 is an upgrade. It allows Webb to compete at RT. They signed Eben Britton to compete at RT(former 2nd round pick who hasn't lived up to the hype and had injury issues). Signed Matt Slousan(SP?) to compete at a Guard position(started last 3 years with the Jets). Drafted Kyle Long(round 1) and Jordan Mills(round 4 or 5). Traded away their worst OL of 2012(Carimi).

To recap, they got rid of their worst OL and brought in 5 new guys. But that won't work out because of Chris Williams/Orlando Pace/Carimi and Chicago's past OL?

 
Rotoworld:

Matt Forte once again reiterated that he expects to be heavily involved in the passing game.
"In this offense," Forte said, "the running back runs a lot of routes and is able to catch the ball a lot. I'm able to catch the ball; I’m willing to catch it. I expect a lot out of myself." In coach Marc Trestman's previous offenses, his lead back averaged 65 receptions per season. Forte should eclipse his previous career-high of 63 catches from 2008 with ease this season.


Source: Chicago Sun-Times
 
Everybody brings up Garner's 91 reception season, but Trestman's offense also produced an 87 catch season for Derek Loville, 73 for Michael Pittman, and 69 for Larry Centers.

He will be a PPR stud

 
Rotoworld:

According to the Chicago Sun Times, the Bears' "underutilization" of Matt Forte was "one of the factors" behind GM Phil Emery's firing of Lovie Smith.
Forte set career lows in the passing game in 2012. Emery hired the right man to correct this flaw in pass-happy coach Marc Trestman. Trestman coached the Raiders' 2001-2002 offenses, when Charlie Garner racked up 72 and 91 receptions, respectively. Trestman's quick-hitting pass game will undoubtedly play to versatile Forte's strengths, especially as a receiver. He's squarely in the hunt as a late first-round to early second-round fantasy pick.

Source: Chicago Sun-Times
 
If I played PPR of course it would be tougher to figure out where I would slot Forte amongst the top RBs, but since I dont play PPR, Im surprised how clearly I would prefer to take all 10 RBs whose ADP is ahead of his, and Id take SJax and Ridley over him as well. Needless to say, Im guessing Forte wont be on too many of my rosters this year.

 
his value will HAVE to be in PPR because RBs under Trestman's last 4 years never had more than 200 carries in a season while he called the plays. Of course, in 1998 a rb had 274 rushing attempts and LCenters had 69 receptions.

His upside is severely limited if he does not get the rushing attempts--he becomes Sproles, which is not all bad.

Looking at the above how high can you predict his carries?

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't see any way a healthy Forte gets less than 235 carries. That's what I would set his floor.

 
his value will HAVE to be in PPR because RBs under Trestman's last 4 years never had more than 200 carries in a season while he called the plays. Of course, in 1998 a rb had 274 rushing attempts and LCenters had 69 receptions.

His upside is severely limited if he does not get the rushing attempts--he becomes Sproles, which is not all bad.

Looking at the above how high can you predict his carries?
Although I don't expect more than 250, I don't think carries will be a problem:

(Rotoworld)According to the Chicago Sun Times, the Bears' "underutilization" of Matt Forte was "one of the factors" behind GM Phil Emery's firing of Lovie Smith.

Analysis: Forte set career lows in the passing game in 2012. Emery hired the right man to correct this flaw in pass-happy coach Marc Trestman. Trestman coached the Raiders' 2001-2002 offenses, when Charlie Garner racked up 72 and 91 receptions, respectively. Trestman's quick-hitting pass game will undoubtedly play to versatile Forte's strengths, especially as a receiver. He's squarely in the hunt as a late first-round to early second-round fantasy pick.
 
his value will HAVE to be in PPR because RBs under Trestman's last 4 years never had more than 200 carries in a season while he called the plays. Of course, in 1998 a rb had 274 rushing attempts and LCenters had 69 receptions.

His upside is severely limited if he does not get the rushing attempts--he becomes Sproles, which is not all bad.

Looking at the above how high can you predict his carries?
Although I don't expect more than 250, I don't think carries will be a problem.
Carries will be a problem if you base it on past performance under the new head coach. He seemed to use a split most of the time with 1998 being the only year where 1 rb did all the running and the FB did all the catching. Honestly, I cannot predict more than 200 carries based on past data. I can, however, just randomly come up with a higher number. Of course, none of those rbs were a "complete" back like Forte so it will be interesting.

My random number--I think a safe number is probably 230 carries especially if he is going to get a ton of receiving targets.

At 4.2 career yards/carry I think he will be around 1000 yards rushing this year, with his fantasy relevance coming from his catching.

Even if you think he gets 250 carries, that is only 1050 yds rushing the whole year.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
his value will HAVE to be in PPR because RBs under Trestman's last 4 years never had more than 200 carries in a season while he called the plays. Of course, in 1998 a rb had 274 rushing attempts and LCenters had 69 receptions.

His upside is severely limited if he does not get the rushing attempts--he becomes Sproles, which is not all bad.

Looking at the above how high can you predict his carries?
Although I don't expect more than 250, I don't think carries will be a problem.
Carries will be a problem if you base it on past performance under the new head coach. He seemed to use a split most of the time with 1998 being the only year where 1 rb did all the running and the FB did all the catching. Honestly, I cannot predict more than 200 carries based on past data. I can, however, just randomly come up with a higher number. Of course, none of those rbs were a "complete" back like Forte so it will be interesting.

My random number--I think a safe number is probably 230 carries especially if he is going to get a ton of receiving targets.

At 4.2 career yards/carry I think he will be around 1000 yards rushing this year, with his fantasy relevance coming from his catching.

Even if you think he gets 250 carries, that is only 1050 yds rushing the whole year.
I'm not concerned about him hitting 1000 rushing yards if he gets 60+ catches and a few more TD's.

 
You would crazy IMO to draft forte over a top 5 wide receiver. He is currently going in the early 2nd and that is way too risky for a guy like forte for me.

 
his value will HAVE to be in PPR because RBs under Trestman's last 4 years never had more than 200 carries in a season while he called the plays. Of course, in 1998 a rb had 274 rushing attempts and LCenters had 69 receptions.

His upside is severely limited if he does not get the rushing attempts--he becomes Sproles, which is not all bad.

Looking at the above how high can you predict his carries?
Although I don't expect more than 250, I don't think carries will be a problem.
Carries will be a problem if you base it on past performance under the new head coach. He seemed to use a split most of the time with 1998 being the only year where 1 rb did all the running and the FB did all the catching. Honestly, I cannot predict more than 200 carries based on past data. I can, however, just randomly come up with a higher number. Of course, none of those rbs were a "complete" back like Forte so it will be interesting.

My random number--I think a safe number is probably 230 carries especially if he is going to get a ton of receiving targets.

At 4.2 career yards/carry I think he will be around 1000 yards rushing this year, with his fantasy relevance coming from his catching.

Even if you think he gets 250 carries, that is only 1050 yds rushing the whole year.
I'm not concerned about him hitting 1000 rushing yards if he gets 60+ catches and a few more TD's.
which is why I said his value will HAVE to come in ppr and receptions, because his rushing stats will be "average."

 
his value will HAVE to be in PPR because RBs under Trestman's last 4 years never had more than 200 carries in a season while he called the plays. Of course, in 1998 a rb had 274 rushing attempts and LCenters had 69 receptions.

His upside is severely limited if he does not get the rushing attempts--he becomes Sproles, which is not all bad.

Looking at the above how high can you predict his carries?
Although I don't expect more than 250, I don't think carries will be a problem.
Carries will be a problem if you base it on past performance under the new head coach. He seemed to use a split most of the time with 1998 being the only year where 1 rb did all the running and the FB did all the catching. Honestly, I cannot predict more than 200 carries based on past data. I can, however, just randomly come up with a higher number. Of course, none of those rbs were a "complete" back like Forte so it will be interesting.

My random number--I think a safe number is probably 230 carries especially if he is going to get a ton of receiving targets.

At 4.2 career yards/carry I think he will be around 1000 yards rushing this year, with his fantasy relevance coming from his catching.

Even if you think he gets 250 carries, that is only 1050 yds rushing the whole year.
I'm not concerned about him hitting 1000 rushing yards if he gets 60+ catches and a few more TD's.
which is why I said his value will HAVE to come in ppr and receptions, because his rushing stats will be "average."
You said his upside was severely limited but he could be top 5 with only 1000 rushing yards. The biggest thing standing in the way of that are TD's, which realistically top out at 10 combined rushing/receiving, and of course his health.

 
his value will HAVE to be in PPR because RBs under Trestman's last 4 years never had more than 200 carries in a season while he called the plays. Of course, in 1998 a rb had 274 rushing attempts and LCenters had 69 receptions.

His upside is severely limited if he does not get the rushing attempts--he becomes Sproles, which is not all bad.

Looking at the above how high can you predict his carries?
Although I don't expect more than 250, I don't think carries will be a problem.
Carries will be a problem if you base it on past performance under the new head coach. He seemed to use a split most of the time with 1998 being the only year where 1 rb did all the running and the FB did all the catching. Honestly, I cannot predict more than 200 carries based on past data. I can, however, just randomly come up with a higher number. Of course, none of those rbs were a "complete" back like Forte so it will be interesting.

My random number--I think a safe number is probably 230 carries especially if he is going to get a ton of receiving targets.

At 4.2 career yards/carry I think he will be around 1000 yards rushing this year, with his fantasy relevance coming from his catching.

Even if you think he gets 250 carries, that is only 1050 yds rushing the whole year.
I'm not concerned about him hitting 1000 rushing yards if he gets 60+ catches and a few more TD's.
which is why I said his value will HAVE to come in ppr and receptions, because his rushing stats will be "average."
You said his upside was severely limited but he could be top 5 with only 1000 rushing yards. The biggest thing standing in the way of that are TD's, which realistically top out at 10 combined rushing/receiving, and of course his health.
Yeah, severely limited was probably not the best choice of words. I like Forte.

 
You would crazy IMO to draft forte over a top 5 wide receiver. He is currently going in the early 2nd and that is way too risky for a guy like forte for me.
Only WR I'd take before him is The One.

You'd prefer someone more stable after him like one of these RB's in order, that go after WR5:

Gore

Murray

Miller

McFadden

Wilson

Sproles

Bell

Ball

Ivory

Mathews

Those guys are more stable to you? I'd rather have Forte and then be grabbing one of the following WR:

Fitz

Cobb

White

Andre

Cruz

VJax

Jordy

Colston

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Forte looks lighter and quicker. Think he was a little too bulky the previous two seasons.

 
Rotoworld:

Matt Forte handled all three red-zone carries with the Bears' first-team offense in Thursday night's preseason game.
The Bears put Forte in the I formation on his touchdown run, and he executed from three yards out. Michael Bush worked strictly with the Josh McCown offense. Forte was stripped of goal-line duties under Lovie Smith, but he's earning them back under rookie coach Marc Trestman. It's a nice plus for Forte's fantasy outlook. He's shaping up as a value pick at his early-second round ADP.
 
I'd love to have Forte as my RB2. Picking on the turn in a PPR, I'll prob go Forte then CJ2K.
I'm buying on Forte as well... and excuse this if it's splitting hair, but wouldn't the above make him your RB1?

A lot more comfortable with him as a RB2 than a RB1.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I'd love to have Forte as my RB2. Picking on the turn in a PPR, I'll prob go Forte then CJ2K.
I'm buying on Forte as well... and excuse this if it's splitting hair, but wouldn't the above make him your RB1?

A lot more comfortable with him as a RB2 than a RB1.
You're correct in the Forte would be my RB1 based on how I draft him. But I feel that by mid-season, CJ2K will end up as the RB1. Forte right behind him. (i'm drinking the CJ2K kool aid)

 
I've always been a Forte fan because after he disappointed people in 2009 I've been able to pick him up for far less than his actual worth year after year. It's funny how many people still have this very negative opinion of him based on that season. It's largely a perception issue. He's not a top five RB and likely never will be, but he's still a fantastic stat producer. A low end RB1 and one of the best RB2s you could hope for.

As for this upcoming season? I think his carries remain about the same, 220-250, but his receptions move up by about 20 to say, 65 total. I'm guessing we'll see about 1,700 combined yards and 6-8 TDs.

 
If last night's goal line work is any indication, I think your 6-8 TD number could be a bit low. I see him hitting double digit TDs this year, barely.

 
As for this upcoming season? I think his carries remain about the same, 220-250, but his receptions move up by about 20 to say, 65 total. I'm guessing we'll see about 1,700 combined yards and 6-8 TDs.
I think that sounds about right, but I'd drop the yardage and bump the TDs. Maybe ~1500 combined yards and 10-12 TDs.

 
If I'm in PPR and in spots 1.10-1.12, I'm looking to pair Forte up with another stud RB.
MJD or CJ2K. Bush will be solid in PPR also.
Yeah, you're looking at Forte, CJ2K, Ridley, SJax, MJD and Bush. I'm not a huge fan of Ridley here if we're talking PPR but Forte paired up with any of the other afromentioned dudes seems pretty solid.
Agreed. I'm actually drafting from the 10-12 spots in my PPR and non-PPR this year. I'm going to go Forte/CJ2K in PPR. And I like Ridley a lot in non-PPR.

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top