Arian Foster (1 Viewer)

[Insein]

WHERE ARE THE NAYSAYERS NOW?Arian Foster continues to produce and leads my leagues in RB scoring. He's averaging 5.5 yds per carry and 105 yds per game and he leads the NFL in rushing and yards from scrimmage. He's tied with Antonio Gates for the most Rush/Rec TDs with seven. I think it's safe to say Cowboy fan was dead wrong.

I'm worried about Kubiak and the Ward thing.

 

[Lobary]

Ward carried the ball three times. Trust me, there is nothing to see here. He's doing well as the back up RB but he is not in Foster's class. Foster has better speed and vision and Kubiak knows it.

All credit to Ward for a nifty TD run, but he's not going to eat into Foster's touches.

 

[Concept Coop]

WHERE ARE THE NAYSAYERS NOW?Arian Foster continues to produce and leads my leagues in RB scoring. He's averaging 5.5 yds per carry and 105 yds per game and he leads the NFL in rushing and yards from scrimmage. He's tied with Antonio Gates for the most Rush/Rec TDs with seven. I think it's safe to say Cowboy fan was dead wrong.

How can I be wrong, when I said Foster was re-draft gold? Meaning, he will have a great year.

 

[Concept Coop]

He is just in a special situation. Redraft gold; dynasty fool's gold.

What part of his situation do you expect will change over the next 3 years?

My post in another thread, re: Foster vs. MJD in dynasty leagues:Lastly, a few examples, off the top of my head in which Foster's dynasty value is cut in half, in 12 months or less:

1. Tate is better. Foster is tearing it up, in large part due to his situation. Tate will have the same access to that situation. If he is a better player, which is not a stretch to think he could be, he could be the guy. It doesn't even have to be Tate. It could be another back brought in originally to spell Foster. Foster missed a couple games, the new guys fills in just as well, BOOM, RBBC.

2. Foster wants a big payday. The Texans know that there are a lot of RBs that can do what Foster has done, or close to it, at the very least, given the situation and limited sample size. What leverage does Foster have? Not much, if Houston thinks they can find the production elsewhere. He could be traded or could hold out.

3. Teams adjust to the Houston offensive attack. If teams have to pick their poison, they are going to start thinking about bringing an extra man into the block regularly, at some point. Foster is not on film much, but that changes a bit every week.

4. Something happens to AJ, or Schaub. Without the threat of one of the best WR/QB combos, teams will be much more inclined to concentrate on Foster. Injuries to the line as well. (I wrote this before the OAK game, so it doesn't sound valid now. But it was the Raiders)

5. He is a fluke. This is a less likely scenario, every week that Foster puts up 100 yards on 20 carries. But it is not out of the realm of possibility.

6. Fumbles.

7. He simply can't carry the load: Injuries, slowing down, or simply running out of gas. It takes a lot to be a full time RB in the NFL, for 16 weeks. Not many (even) NFL caliber specimens can do it, year after year. Foster has not proven that he can. His running style also reminds me of guys like Larry Johnson. His upright style could introduce a brick wall at age 27-28.

None of those are likely and each of those arguments can be suggested about any RB in the league. There isn't any evidence to suggest that any of those things will happen. Using your arguments, every RB in a dynasty is fool's gold.

That is very far from the truth. 1. Not every runningback has an injured back up, whose draft position was as high as Tate's.

2. Not every runningback is making $400,000. Not every runningback plays for the Texans, who seem to be able to get results no matter who is playing that position for them.

3. Teams have adjusted to the likes of MJD, AP, FG, SJ and they still get numbers. We will see if that ever happens in Houston.

7. Again, other runninbacks have shown that they can stay healthy after carrying the load for season after season. Granted, he can't, based on the fact that he hasn't carried a load for an entire season, but it is a bit of a risk.

 

[Concept Coop]

No need to go back and read it. Derrick Ward, who looked like an average COLLEGE runningback in Tampa, was able to do what Foster has been doing all year. Foster is not slow, quite the opposite for his size, actually - good burst too. But he lacks wiggle, is not great at breaking tackles, has average vision and balance, and runs upright. He is a good NFL running back. But there are a lot of good RBs in the NFL. He is not a special talent. He is just in a special situation. Redraft gold; dynasty fool's gold.

Hi CC,I was trying to figure out why everyone was piling on you and then I saw this. You are taking 1.5 quarters of work against the Oakland Raiders who have allowed big yardage totals to several backs this season and saying he is every bit as good as Arian Foster, that's just not fair. He had a season and 2 off seasons and Tampa Bay and stunk the place up. he had a few carries in the last game and you are using that to put down Arian Foster, that seems very short sighted IMO. Tony Richardson ran for 4 Touchdowns in a game in Kansas City once, did that make Richardson as good as Priest Holmes? I agree that KC had a trmendous run punishing OL but you still need backs with vision to find holes. Why is LT succeeding in New York but Greene is struggling? I would say LT has great vision. When I watched DeAngelo last Sunday he was making cuts and running in directions where defenders were not, he has good vision. You don't break off 75 yard TD runs like FOster did last week and not have vision. I'm not ready to put Foster in as an elite back but in Dyansty right now he commands a huge ransom so while he might be fool's gold in your opinion he is worth every ounce at the moment. Just some different ways to look at it and I'm not piling on you or putting you down. Everyone is entitled to their opinion of the guy. I do agree he is in a great situation but Andre Johnson was out last week, the passing game was avg and he still blew the doors off the Oakland Coliseum. -MOP

I don't recall ever saying that Ward was as good as Foster. I don't think that. I know Foster is better. My point is that history shows us that just about anyone can look good playing RB for the Texans. Ward is producing. Slaton Produced. Ahman Green Produced.... you get my point.Obviously, the more that Foster does this, the more those opposed the dynasty hype around him, including myself, have to re-look at things. If you read current posts, I have come off of my "sell high" statements and would now hold Foster, unless I got elite talent back. But I still don't think Foster is an elite talent. It think Felix Jones is a better RB and would be putting up Foster numbers in Texas. But the fact remains that Felix Jones does not play RB for the Houston Texans.

 

[tdhartis]

No need to go back and read it. Derrick Ward, who looked like an average COLLEGE runningback in Tampa, was able to do what Foster has been doing all year. Foster is not slow, quite the opposite for his size, actually - good burst too. But he lacks wiggle, is not great at breaking tackles, has average vision and balance, and runs upright. He is a good NFL running back. But there are a lot of good RBs in the NFL. He is not a special talent. He is just in a special situation. Redraft gold; dynasty fool's gold.

Hi CC,I was trying to figure out why everyone was piling on you and then I saw this. You are taking 1.5 quarters of work against the Oakland Raiders who have allowed big yardage totals to several backs this season and saying he is every bit as good as Arian Foster, that's just not fair. He had a season and 2 off seasons and Tampa Bay and stunk the place up. he had a few carries in the last game and you are using that to put down Arian Foster, that seems very short sighted IMO.

Tony Richardson ran for 4 Touchdowns in a game in Kansas City once, did that make Richardson as good as Priest Holmes? I agree that KC had a trmendous run punishing OL but you still need backs with vision to find holes. Why is LT succeeding in New York but Greene is struggling? I would say LT has great vision. When I watched DeAngelo last Sunday he was making cuts and running in directions where defenders were not, he has good vision. You don't break off 75 yard TD runs like FOster did last week and not have vision.

I'm not ready to put Foster in as an elite back but in Dyansty right now he commands a huge ransom so while he might be fool's gold in your opinion he is worth every ounce at the moment. Just some different ways to look at it and I'm not piling on you or putting you down. Everyone is entitled to their opinion of the guy. I do agree he is in a great situation but Andre Johnson was out last week, the passing game was avg and he still blew the doors off the Oakland Coliseum.

-MOP

I don't recall ever saying that Ward was as good as Foster. I don't think that. I know Foster is better. My point is that history shows us that just about anyone can look good playing RB for the Texans. Ward is producing. Slaton Produced. Ahman Green Produced.... you get my point.Obviously, the more that Foster does this, the more those opposed the dynasty hype around him, including myself, have to re-look at things. If you read current posts, I have come off of my "sell high" statements and would now hold Foster, unless I got elite talent back. But I still don't think Foster is an elite talent. It think Felix Jones is a better RB and would be putting up Foster numbers in Texas. But the fact remains that Felix Jones does not play RB for the Houston Texans.

Yeah, OK. Too bad there is no way to prove that. And last I checked, Dallas was "in Texas".

 

[jdoggydogg]

The entire Texan time got manhandled today. Foster had no chance..

This.

Foster isnt a highly skilled runner. If the Texans offense isnt clicking, he is not going to do well. He isnt the the kind of RB who can set the pace for the offense. With that said, he is a top 10 redraft RB as long as he is starting for this Texans offense, and will put up some more big games this season.

Dude, you just gotta give this up.

 

[jdoggydogg]

How many Foster owners are locking up Derrick Ward as a handcuff? Seems like the evidence shows that Ward can be successful in this offense if Foster goes down.

 

[Mario Kart]

I really wish I had picked Foster instead of Wells. My team would be much, much better. I believed in one league and failed to recognize in another. Sorry, Arian.

 

[Concept Coop]

Yeah, OK. Too bad there is no way to prove that. And last I checked, Dallas was "in Texas".

I am sorry that you didn't realize that I meant Houston or Texans. Bless your heart. If you need help, PM me. And I said there is no way to prove it. Don't know why you're rolling your eyes, seeing as how all you did was agree with me. Arian Foster's Monster season, after playing the Colts (who made R. Torrain look amazing), and Raiders: 5.5 YPCFelix Jones career: 6YPC.

 

[tdhartis]

No I just think its funny that you go about making all of this banter about Foster not being good and trying to prove how Felix Jones is somehow better. Just because I said it is too bad that you can't prove it doesn't mean that I agree with you. I do not believe Felix is a better RB, or that he would do better in Fosters position. Yes, Jones has averaged 6.0 YPC in his career, but it's not as if Foster's terrible while averaging 5.3 in his very short career and 5.5 on the season. However, this year Jones is averaging a yard less per carry, albeit on fewer touches.

Also, Torrain is by no means a world beater but is a talented back, who most likely would have had a great senior season at ASU and be taken in the second or third round if it were not for the injury that took him out halfway through the season. Shanahan, considered to be one of the best evaluators of RB talent could see this, as do many other besides you. Besides that, Foster ran well on both Dallas, Oakland, and KC. It wasn't just Indy.

And I knew perfectly well what you meant by "in Texas."

 

[Concept Coop]

No I just think its funny that you go about making all of this banter about Foster not being good and trying to prove how Felix Jones is somehow better. Just because I said it is too bad that you can't prove it doesn't mean that I agree with you. I do not believe Felix is a better RB, or that he would do better in Fosters position. Yes, Jones has averaged 6.0 YPC in his career, but it's not as if Foster's terrible while averaging 5.3 in his very short career and 5.5 on the season. However, this year Jones is averaging a yard less per carry, albeit on fewer touches. Also, Torrain is by no means a world beater but is a talented back, who most likely would have had a great senior season at ASU and be taken in the second or third round if it were not for the injury that took him out halfway through the season. Shanahan, considered to be one of the best evaluators of RB talent could see this, as do many other besides you. Besides that, Foster ran well on both Dallas, Oakland, and KC. It wasn't just Indy. And I knew perfectly well what you meant by "in Texas."

Fewer touches is not the issue. The issue is that Foster's numbers are skewed by two major games. He has played four games that weren't against the Colts or Raiders and he has averaged over 4YPC once, when the Texans were blown out against the Cowboys. And Torrain is not a talented NFL back. He looks lost and looks like he is running in mud, when he cuts. He is a big strong guy and when the holes are there, he can get yards (If he picks the correct hole). Shanahan is considered to be able to plug anyone into his system and get results. I don't know that he would be considered one of the best evaluators. For every TD there is a Mo Clarrett and Tatum Bell. I am happy to hear that you knew perfectly well what I meant. I am also happy that you pretended not to, in an attempt to be funny, so that we could have this conversation. Good times.

 

[tietzjd]

tdhartis and Coop you two are so cute!

Yes Houston has better recored but they did lose to Dallas. If I had to choose team make playoffs it would be Houston.....

But I like to see the boys win a lot of games, them betting up on east would be good for my Vikings. Who beat the boys again.

 

[jdoggydogg]

Fewer touches is not the issue. The issue is that Foster's numbers are skewed by two major games. He has played four games that weren't against the Colts or Raiders and he has averaged over 4YPC once, when the Texans were blown out against the Cowboys.

Just terrible logic.

 

[Concept Coop]

Fewer touches is not the issue. The issue is that Foster's numbers are skewed by two major games. He has played four games that weren't against the Colts or Raiders and he has averaged over 4YPC once, when the Texans were blown out against the Cowboys.

Just terrible logic.

Please expand. Becuase when I said "Ward looked just as good" I was blasted because "it was only the Raiders!" But when I apply the "only the Raiders" logic to Foster, it is terrible. The Raiders suck against the run. The Colts suck against the run. Please help me understand why those aren't logical points to be taken into account, when Felix's average just dropped because he had to go up against the Williams Wall in Minny?

 

[jdoggydogg]

Fewer touches is not the issue. The issue is that Foster's numbers are skewed by two major games. He has played four games that weren't against the Colts or Raiders and he has averaged over 4YPC once, when the Texans were blown out against the Cowboys.

Just terrible logic.

Please expand. Becuase when I said "Ward looked just as good" I was blasted because "it was only the Raiders!" But when I apply the "only the Raiders" logic to Foster, it is terrible. The Raiders suck against the run. The Colts suck against the run. Please help me understand why those aren't logical points to be taken into account, when Felix's average just dropped because he had to go up against the Williams Wall in Minny?

In general, I dismiss arguments that set aside individual standout performances. Every single fantasy stud not named Antonio Gates has one or two gems that inflate his overall numbers.

 

[Tango]

Fewer touches is not the issue. The issue is that Foster's numbers are skewed by two major games. He has played four games that weren't against the Colts or Raiders and he has averaged over 4YPC once, when the Texans were blown out against the Cowboys.

Just terrible logic.

Please expand. Becuase when I said "Ward looked just as good" I was blasted because "it was only the Raiders!" But when I apply the "only the Raiders" logic to Foster, it is terrible. The Raiders suck against the run. The Colts suck against the run. Please help me understand why those aren't logical points to be taken into account, when Felix's average just dropped because he had to go up against the Williams Wall in Minny?

He's done well in all but one game. Situations:

In comebacks, he has the hands to be involved in the passing game.

With the lead, they pound it with him.

He is among the small handful that plays on 1st, 2nd, 3rd and GL situations.

Opponent:

Just hasnt mattered. He's done well in all but one game. So 5 of 6.

Threat of Ward/Slaton:

This will exist until he reaches a certain exalted level that usually takes a while; how long did it take for MJD, Gore to shed their competition? Or for lesser backs like Benson, BJGE, and many others who are still in that process. This is not a weakness of Foster, it simply comes with the territory in the NFL in 2010; the fact that it is up against Slaton and Ward is net-net helpful. GK needs to have depth at Rb that has a bit of experience. Foster tweaked his knee last week for pete's sake. So he is still in that process as expected; but further along then perhaps anyone might have guessed. Being in the race for the rushing title will help with this.

 

[Concept Coop]

Fewer touches is not the issue. The issue is that Foster's numbers are skewed by two major games. He has played four games that weren't against the Colts or Raiders and he has averaged over 4YPC once, when the Texans were blown out against the Cowboys.

Just terrible logic.

Please expand. Becuase when I said "Ward looked just as good" I was blasted because "it was only the Raiders!" But when I apply the "only the Raiders" logic to Foster, it is terrible. The Raiders suck against the run. The Colts suck against the run. Please help me understand why those aren't logical points to be taken into account, when Felix's average just dropped because he had to go up against the Williams Wall in Minny?

In general, I dismiss arguments that set aside individual standout performances. Every single fantasy stud not named Antonio Gates has one or two gems that inflate his overall numbers.

Why dismiss? It is not the end all, be all, but it should be taken into consideration when projecting future value. Especially when a sample size is as small as Foster's. If we are talking about 6 games, one or two gems can translate into major inflation. But if you dismiss it, I would love to sell you Matt Forte in a dynasty league, right about now.

 

[tdhartis]

So your in the camp of "if it wasn't for that 40 yard run" I'm taking it? OK, cool. Also, didn't want to go off on this topic too much but for one, Maurice Clarett was a gamble in the first place and Denver knew that. As for Bell, he went over 1,000 yards in 2006, and was 80 yards short of 1,000 the year before when he was in a RBBC. Then there is also Olandis Gary (injured), Mike Anderson (never got another shot), CP, and Reuben Droughns (went on to be first Browns player to get 1,000 yard rushing since 1985). As much as some of their success was due to the system, I think it is foolish to think Shanahan doesn't have an eye for RBs or that Torain is not the least bit talented. Also, hope your enjoying your blow out over the Texans. Bet that sweet taste is turning a bit sour right about now.

 

[BuckeyeArt]

He is just in a special situation. Redraft gold; dynasty fool's gold.

What part of his situation do you expect will change over the next 3 years?

My post in another thread, re: Foster vs. MJD in dynasty leagues:Lastly, a few examples, off the top of my head in which Foster's dynasty value is cut in half, in 12 months or less:

1. Tate is better. Foster is tearing it up, in large part due to his situation. Tate will have the same access to that situation. If he is a better player, which is not a stretch to think he could be, he could be the guy. It doesn't even have to be Tate. It could be another back brought in originally to spell Foster. Foster missed a couple games, the new guys fills in just as well, BOOM, RBBC.

2. Foster wants a big payday. The Texans know that there are a lot of RBs that can do what Foster has done, or close to it, at the very least, given the situation and limited sample size. What leverage does Foster have? Not much, if Houston thinks they can find the production elsewhere. He could be traded or could hold out.

3. Teams adjust to the Houston offensive attack. If teams have to pick their poison, they are going to start thinking about bringing an extra man into the block regularly, at some point. Foster is not on film much, but that changes a bit every week.

4. Something happens to AJ, or Schaub. Without the threat of one of the best WR/QB combos, teams will be much more inclined to concentrate on Foster. Injuries to the line as well. (I wrote this before the OAK game, so it doesn't sound valid now. But it was the Raiders)

5. He is a fluke. This is a less likely scenario, every week that Foster puts up 100 yards on 20 carries. But it is not out of the realm of possibility.

6. Fumbles.

7. He simply can't carry the load: Injuries, slowing down, or simply running out of gas. It takes a lot to be a full time RB in the NFL, for 16 weeks. Not many (even) NFL caliber specimens can do it, year after year. Foster has not proven that he can. His running style also reminds me of guys like Larry Johnson. His upright style could introduce a brick wall at age 27-28.

None of those are likely and each of those arguments can be suggested about any RB in the league. There isn't any evidence to suggest that any of those things will happen. Using your arguments, every RB in a dynasty is fool's gold.

That is very far from the truth. 1. Not every runningback has an injured back up, whose draft position was as high as Tate's.

2. Not every runningback is making $400,000. Not every runningback plays for the Texans, who seem to be able to get results no matter who is playing that position for them.

3. Teams have adjusted to the likes of MJD, AP, FG, SJ and they still get numbers. We will see if that ever happens in Houston.

7. Again, other runninbacks have shown that they can stay healthy after carrying the load for season after season. Granted, he can't, based on the fact that he hasn't carried a load for an entire season, but it is a bit of a risk.

1. I don't know why you'd think an injured rookie backup is more of a threat to Foster than a non-injured backup. If anything, the injury is a positive for Foster. Tate will essentially be a rookie next year AND recovering from a serious injury. Every starting RB is constantly facing competition from a backup. Many are high draft picks. I'm not going to look up every team but here are the 4 you mentioned (Tate's position was 2/26):

MJD - Greg Jones ---2/23

AP - Gerhart --- 2/19

Gore - Coffee --- 3/1

SJax - Leonard -- 2/20

Every starting RB is constantly facing competition. Foster is no different.

2. Every successful starting RB will ask for more money at some point. Again, Foster is no different, other than it may be easier to satisfy him.

3. Again, no reason to downgrade Foster more than any other starting RB. This is just a "what if".

4. Injuries are a risk to every starting RB in the league. Foster is no different.

You haven't shown me any reason to believe his situation is likely to change over the next 2-3 years. Good reasons for questioning the dynasty situation might be "AP's QB is retiring next year" or "MJD's and Gore's QB situation next year is an unknown" or "SJax is getting old". Those don't necessarily apply to everyone else.

 

[tdhartis]

Fewer touches is not the issue. The issue is that Foster's numbers are skewed by two major games. He has played four games that weren't against the Colts or Raiders and he has averaged over 4YPC once, when the Texans were blown out against the Cowboys.

Just terrible logic.

Please expand. Becuase when I said "Ward looked just as good" I was blasted because "it was only the Raiders!" But when I apply the "only the Raiders" logic to Foster, it is terrible. The Raiders suck against the run. The Colts suck against the run. Please help me understand why those aren't logical points to be taken into account, when Felix's average just dropped because he had to go up against the Williams Wall in Minny?

In general, I dismiss arguments that set aside individual standout performances. Every single fantasy stud not named Antonio Gates has one or two gems that inflate his overall numbers.

Why dismiss? It is not the end all, be all, but it should be taken into consideration when projecting future value. Especially when a sample size is as small as Foster's. If we are talking about 6 games, one or two gems can translate into major inflation. But if you dismiss it, I would love to sell you Matt Forte in a dynasty league, right about now.

Wait, before you were talking up Felix because of his 6.0 YPC. How do I not know that number is inflated because of the small sample size. After all, using that logic, Felix Jones only has 28 more carries over his entire career than Foster does.As for Jones going against the "Williams Wall" in MIN, it seems as if LT and Greene did just fine. Isn't Felix more talented then them?

 

[Concept Coop]

Fewer touches is not the issue. The issue is that Foster's numbers are skewed by two major games. He has played four games that weren't against the Colts or Raiders and he has averaged over 4YPC once, when the Texans were blown out against the Cowboys.

Just terrible logic.

Please expand. Becuase when I said "Ward looked just as good" I was blasted because "it was only the Raiders!" But when I apply the "only the Raiders" logic to Foster, it is terrible. The Raiders suck against the run. The Colts suck against the run. Please help me understand why those aren't logical points to be taken into account, when Felix's average just dropped because he had to go up against the Williams Wall in Minny?

He's done well in all but one game. Situations:

In comebacks, he has the hands to be involved in the passing game.

With the lead, they pound it with him.

He is among the small handful that plays on 1st, 2nd, 3rd and GL situations.

Opponent:

Just hasnt mattered. He's done well in all but one game. So 5 of 6.

Threat of Ward/Slaton:

This will exist until he reaches a certain exalted level that usually takes a while; how long did it take for MJD, Gore to shed their competition? Or for lesser backs like Benson, BJGE, and many others who are still in that process. This is not a weakness of Foster, it simply comes with the territory in the NFL in 2010; the fact that it is up against Slaton and Ward is net-net helpful. GK needs to have depth at Rb that has a bit of experience. Foster tweaked his knee last week for pete's sake. So he is still in that process as expected; but further along then perhaps anyone might have guessed. Being in the race for the rushing title will help with this.

I will agree with everything you said here. Which is why I love Foster for re-draft, this year. As you pointed out, there is a level of risk when a back has not proven to be elite, ala MJD and Gore. This might not mean much this year, but over the next 5 years, it very well could.

 

[Concept Coop]

So your in the camp of "if it wasn't for that 40 yard run" I'm taking it? OK, cool. Also, didn't want to go off on this topic too much but for one, Maurice Clarett was a gamble in the first place and Denver knew that. As for Bell, he went over 1,000 yards in 2006, and was 80 yards short of 1,000 the year before when he was in a RBBC. Then there is also Olandis Gary (injured), Mike Anderson (never got another shot), CP, and Reuben Droughns (went on to be first Browns player to get 1,000 yard rushing since 1985). As much as some of their success was due to the system, I think it is foolish to think Shanahan doesn't have an eye for RBs or that Torain is not the least bit talented. Also, hope your enjoying your blow out over the Texans. Bet that sweet taste is turning a bit sour right about now.

You are making my point for me. How talented are these guys? They didn't do much outside of Denver. I do still enjoy it, actually. I have to put up with crap from 20+ NFL fanbases right now. Luckily for me, the Texan fans are not on that list.

 

[Concept Coop]

1. I don't know why you'd think an injured rookie backup is more of a threat to Foster than a non-injured backup. If anything, the injury is a positive for Foster. Tate will essentially be a rookie next year AND recovering from a serious injury. Every starting RB is constantly facing competition from a backup. Many are high draft picks. I'm not going to look up every team but here are the 4 you mentioned (Tate's position was 2/26):MJD - Greg Jones ---2/23AP - Gerhart --- 2/19Gore - Coffee --- 3/1SJax - Leonard -- 2/20Every starting RB is constantly facing competition. Foster is no different.2. Every successful starting RB will ask for more money at some point. Again, Foster is no different, other than it may be easier to satisfy him. 3. Again, no reason to downgrade Foster more than any other starting RB. This is just a "what if".4. Injuries are a risk to every starting RB in the league. Foster is no different. You haven't shown me any reason to believe his situation is likely to change over the next 2-3 years. Good reasons for questioning the dynasty situation might be "AP's QB is retiring next year" or "MJD's and Gore's QB situation next year is an unknown" or "SJax is getting old". Those don't necessarily apply to everyone else.

Before I go any further, I want to make sure I understand you. You think Jones, Gerhart, Coffe, and Leonard are competition to 4 of the best backs in the NFL? Huh. Okay. Two of them are FBs. Coffee and Gerhart were brought in to spell carries, not compete. There are very few RBs in NFL history that could compete with AP, let alone any one particular draft. 1. It has been a positive. But I think the Texans drafted Tate as their RB of the future. He has had a MAJOR setback, but it is not out of the realm of posibility that he could be that. Foster is not an elite talent, and neither is Tate. If their talent levels are close, there could be a RBBC. You really think AP,SJ,FG, and MJD are going to end up in a RBBC before they are forced to because of age? No. Why? Because they are all elite talents. Arian Foster is not. 2. Foster is different. Again, he has a small sample size, and history shows that anyone can produce in Minny. There is potential that Foster thinks he is top 5, and Houston thinks he is top 20. In that case, Houston is not going to pay him top 5. 3. A "what if" is a negative when you are investing a top 7 dynasty draftpick in a player. The more proven, the safer, the more valuable a player is. 4. He is no different, except that guys like MJD, CJ, and AP have shown that they can stay healthy. Foster hasn't had that chance. Again, the more proven, the safer, the more valuable... AP put up elite numbers with Jackson. Gore and MJD have always put up numbers with shaky QB play. SJax hasn't slowed yet. But of course his age is a concern. AGAIN: The more proven, the safer, the more valuable... And please tell me exaclty how high would take Foster. Because if you think this will continue, he is your #1 pick in a dynasty league, no? At least top 3?

 

[tdhartis]

No I'm not actually, Olandis Gary and Mike Anderson never had another opportunity to prove they could be 1,000 yard rushers again which does not mean it wouldn't have happened given the opportunity/lack of injury. Reuben Droughs is a huge case against you because he went to one of the worst teams, with the worst lines, that hadn't had a single 1,000 yards rusher for 20+ years and put up 1,000 yards NOT in Shanahan's system. Agree to disagree, but I like many other think Shanahan has a eye for hidden talent. And if you ever saw Torain in college, it wasn't so hidden. Just shrouded by injury.

And even as a Texans fan I still feel as if I can give crap to Cowboys fans. Year after year the Boys are heralded as the next SB champions and playoff lock. It's always, "the most talented team in the NFL and there is no way they don't produce". But seemingly almost every year in recent memory Dallas falls short of expectations. Sure, you may have beat the Texans this year. But we will see who comes out on top at the end of the season when the Texans make it to the playoffs and the Cowboys fall short. Then the same hype repeats itself next year when Jerry finds himself a new HC.

 

[Concept Coop]

No I'm not actually, Olandis Gary and Mike Anderson never had another opportunity to prove they could be 1,000 yard rushers again which does not mean it wouldn't have happened given the opportunity/lack of injury. Reuben Droughs is a huge case against you because he went to one of the worst teams, with the worst lines, that hadn't had a single 1,000 yards rusher for 20+ years and put up 1,000 yards NOT in Shanahan's system. Agree to disagree, but I like many other think Shanahan has a eye for hidden talent. And if you ever saw Torain in college, it wasn't so hidden. Just shrouded by injury. And even as a Texans fan I still feel as if I can give crap to Cowboys fans. Year after year the Boys are heralded as the next SB champions and playoff lock. It's always, "the most talented team in the NFL and there is no way they don't produce". But seemingly almost every year in recent memory Dallas falls short of expectations. Sure, you may have beat the Texans this year. But we will see who comes out on top at the end of the season when the Texans make it to the playoffs and the Cowboys fall short. Then the same hype repeats itself next year when Jerry finds himself a new HC.

I honestly don't know if I saw Torain in college. I am sure I did, as I have always watched tons of college football. But I don't remember him.But I have seen him in the pros and he is not talented, compared to other starting RBs. He lacks vision, makes poor cuts, and takes a while to get a head of steam. You can give crap to Cowboys fans if you would like. It just makes you look silly. The two teams played each other, and the better team destroyed the inferior Texans. And (BIG) IF you make the playoffs, congrats on the first time ever. Enjoy it. It is awesome.

 

[plyka]

Fewer touches is not the issue. The issue is that Foster's numbers are skewed by two major games. He has played four games that weren't against the Colts or Raiders and he has averaged over 4YPC once, when the Texans were blown out against the Cowboys.

Just terrible logic.

Please expand. Becuase when I said "Ward looked just as good" I was blasted because "it was only the Raiders!" But when I apply the "only the Raiders" logic to Foster, it is terrible. The Raiders suck against the run. The Colts suck against the run. Please help me understand why those aren't logical points to be taken into account, when Felix's average just dropped because he had to go up against the Williams Wall in Minny?

I'm not the guy who wrote "just terrible logic" but i don't really have to be to know what he meant. You see, "YPC" or otherwise known as yards per carry is an AVERAGE. In mathematics, and average is a calculation where you take all of the numbers in a set, add it together and then divide by the total number inside the set (the mean). The purpose of this tool is to approximate the typical value of the subject. Now, certain actions completely invalidate an average. One of them is not taking into consideration the entire set. However, you can discount some of numbers in a set, if they are at random, and still come to a close approximation. What you can never ever ever do and still have a legitimate number is selectively pick certain numbers inside the set to discount. This not only makes the "calculation" invalid, it does something worse ---since you are picking which numbers to discount, it doesn't just give you an inaccurate average, it gives you an intentionally misleading result! That is, the person chooses which numbers not to count inside the average, and if a person can choose which numbers to discount, then he can make whatever "average" he wants.In this specific case, what you're doing is saying: "look at Foster's average. If you take out all of his big runs, and not count his huge games, then his "average" is bad." It is so idiotic that i can't believe you're actually looking for an explanation on why your reasoning is not sound, lol. I can pick any player in the entire NFL and make his "average" look bad if i have the ability to choose a certain number of downs to avoid. If i take Peyton Manning and not count 20% of his biggest plays and just count the rest, then he is going to have the worst average in the entire NFL of all QBs, lol.

Of course then it wouldn't be an average at all, it would be a made up number. I could just pick a number, make it up in my head and consider that his average and it would have the same legitimacy as your number for Foster which discounts his biggest games in your "average."

 

[tdhartis]

First time ever makes it seem like a long time, while in reality the team has only been around since 2002. I don't feel as if I look silly at 4-2 when the Cowboys and the self-proclaimed "better team" are at 1-4. But wait, we have a common opponent in the Redskins, and the Texans beat them but yet the Skins beat the Cowboys. But your right, the Boys did beat us straight up. I think Cowboys fans perrenial over-inflation of their teams prospects is way more silly than a Texans fan giving the Cowboys fan in question a little bit of trash talk for not being nearly as good as they hyped themselves to be. We are causing this thread to go incredibly off topic, so this will be my last post not concerning AF.

 

[Concept Coop]

For those thinking it is crazy for us that are not ready to crown Arian, to suggest this trend might not continue:

Mike Anderson 2000 Denver Broncos 1,487 yards; 5.0 YPC; 15 TDs

Clinton Portis 2002 1,508 yards; 5.5 YPC; 15 TDs

Rueben Droughns 2004: 1,240 yards; 4.5 YPC; 6 TDs

Domanik Davis 2004: 1,188 yards; 3.9 YPG; 13 TDs

Sure, Arian has looked great and it COULD continue for years. But it is not a slam dunk. Foster could be a Portis or he could be an Anderson. I don't know what is so crazy about what I am saying.

 

[Concept Coop]

Fewer touches is not the issue. The issue is that Foster's numbers are skewed by two major games. He has played four games that weren't against the Colts or Raiders and he has averaged over 4YPC once, when the Texans were blown out against the Cowboys.

Just terrible logic.

Please expand. Becuase when I said "Ward looked just as good" I was blasted because "it was only the Raiders!" But when I apply the "only the Raiders" logic to Foster, it is terrible. The Raiders suck against the run. The Colts suck against the run. Please help me understand why those aren't logical points to be taken into account, when Felix's average just dropped because he had to go up against the Williams Wall in Minny?

I'm not the guy who wrote "just terrible logic" but i don't really have to be to know what he meant. You see, "YPC" or otherwise known as yards per carry is an AVERAGE. In mathematics, and average is a calculation where you take all of the numbers in a set, add it together and then divide by the total number inside the set (the mean). The purpose of this tool is to approximate the typical value of the subject. Now, certain actions completely invalidate an average. One of them is not taking into consideration the entire set. However, you can discount some of numbers in a set, if they are at random, and still come to a close approximation. What you can never ever ever do and still have a legitimate number is selectively pick certain numbers inside the set to discount. This not only makes the "calculation" invalid, it does something worse ---since you are picking which numbers to discount, it doesn't just give you an inaccurate average, it gives you an intentionally misleading result! That is, the person chooses which numbers not to count inside the average, and if a person can choose which numbers to discount, then he can make whatever "average" he wants.In this specific case, what you're doing is saying: "look at Foster's average. If you take out all of his big runs, and not count his huge games, then his "average" is bad." It is so idiotic that i can't believe you're actually looking for an explanation on why your reasoning is not sound, lol. I can pick any player in the entire NFL and make his "average" look bad if i have the ability to choose a certain number of downs to avoid. If i take Peyton Manning and not count 20% of his biggest plays and just count the rest, then he is going to have the worst average in the entire NFL of all QBs, lol.

Of course then it wouldn't be an average at all, it would be a made up number. I could just pick a number, make it up in my head and consider that his average and it would have the same legitimacy as your number for Foster which discounts his biggest games in your "average."

When did I discount his big games? I am not saying don't count them, I am saying take them for what they are, when comparing them to Felix Jones, who has not had the benefit of playing the Colts or Raiders this season. Don't put words in my mouth and then "lol" at them. That is not fair or logical.

"Saying that Foster's numbers are inflated due to two big games is like saying, 'take away all of Tom Brady's touchdowns and he's not very good' lol!"

 

[Concept Coop]

First time ever makes it seem like a long time, while in reality the team has only been around since 2002. I don't feel as if I look silly at 4-2 when the Cowboys and the self-proclaimed "better team" are at 1-4. But wait, we have a common opponent in the Redskins, and the Texans beat them but yet the Skins beat the Cowboys. But your right, the Boys did beat us straight up. I think Cowboys fans perrenial over-inflation of their teams prospects is way more silly than a Texans fan giving the Cowboys fan in question a little bit of trash talk for not being nearly as good as they hyped themselves to be. We are causing this thread to go incredibly off topic, so this will be my last post not concerning AF.

Dallas - 27Houston - 13 (after garbage-time TD)

 

[RobMexico]

In general, I dismiss arguments that set aside individual standout performances. Every single fantasy stud not named Antonio Gates has one or two gems that inflate his overall numbers.

In one league I own Foster/CJ, I've had two weeks of poor performance by CJ and only one by Foster. It happens.

 

[BuckeyeArt]

Before I go any further, I want to make sure I understand you. You think Jones, Gerhart, Coffe, and Leonard are competition to 4 of the best backs in the NFL? Huh. Okay. Two of them are FBs. Coffee and Gerhart were brought in to spell carries, not compete. There are very few RBs in NFL history that could compete with AP, let alone any one particular draft.

Where did I say that? I was only responding to your assertion that a 'backup with a high draft position' was a unique situation.

1. It has been a positive. But I think the Texans drafted Tate as their RB of the future. He has had a MAJOR setback, but it is not out of the realm of posibility that he could be that. Foster is not an elite talent, and neither is Tate. If their talent levels are close, there could be a RBBC.

Once again, this can be said about any other RB in the league. 'Out of the realm of possibility' seems miles away from 'expect will change', which happened to be the original question by Hoosier16.

2. Foster is different. Again, he has a small sample size, and history shows that anyone can produce in Minny. There is potential that Foster thinks he is top 5, and Houston thinks he is top 20. In that case, Houston is not going to pay him top 5.

Again, no different than any other RB, unless you have info that Foster is already demanding a new contract.

3. A "what if" is a negative when you are investing a top 7 dynasty draftpick in a player. The more proven, the safer, the more valuable a player is.

4. He is no different, except that guys like MJD, CJ, and AP have shown that they can stay healthy. Foster hasn't had that chance. Again, the more proven, the safer, the more valuable...

How did we get to discussing a top 7 dynasty pick from "dyansty fool's gold"? Again, this was about what part of his situation you expected to change over the next 2-3 years.He is just as likely to get a major injury as any other RB. He hasn't shown any tendency towards sitting out with minor injuries. Why would you expect that to change? There are many, many things that have a possibility of happening. What are the things you expect to happen.

And please tell me exaclty how high would take Foster. Because if you think this will continue, he is your #1 pick in a dynasty league, no? At least top 3?

We really don't have to worry about draft position until next year, unless you have a startup draft commencing right now. If you're asking where I'd rank him, I guess it's somewhere in the top 12. I really haven't given it much thought, but I know it's far from the tier of "fool's gold". Do I think his situation will change? No, I have no reason to expect it will. That doesn't mean he'd be my #1 pick next year. I'm certainly not going to try to make up reasons why it might change.

 

[Ghost Rider]

First time ever makes it seem like a long time, while in reality the team has only been around since 2002. I don't feel as if I look silly at 4-2 when the Cowboys and the self-proclaimed "better team" are at 1-4. But wait, we have a common opponent in the Redskins, and the Texans beat them but yet the Skins beat the Cowboys. But your right, the Boys did beat us straight up. I think Cowboys fans perrenial over-inflation of their teams prospects is way more silly than a Texans fan giving the Cowboys fan in question a little bit of trash talk for not being nearly as good as they hyped themselves to be. We are causing this thread to go incredibly off topic, so this will be my last post not concerning AF.

Dallas - 27Houston - 13 (after garbage-time TD)

So, one team beating another means the winning team is better, even if the loser in that one game has a much better record? Really?

 

[Concept Coop]

First time ever makes it seem like a long time, while in reality the team has only been around since 2002. I don't feel as if I look silly at 4-2 when the Cowboys and the self-proclaimed "better team" are at 1-4. But wait, we have a common opponent in the Redskins, and the Texans beat them but yet the Skins beat the Cowboys. But your right, the Boys did beat us straight up. I think Cowboys fans perrenial over-inflation of their teams prospects is way more silly than a Texans fan giving the Cowboys fan in question a little bit of trash talk for not being nearly as good as they hyped themselves to be. We are causing this thread to go incredibly off topic, so this will be my last post not concerning AF.

Dallas - 27Houston - 13 (after garbage-time TD)

So, one team beating another means the winning team is better, even if the loser in that one game has a much better record? Really?

Are you really trying to introduce logic into fan banter that you are not a part of? Really?

 

[Concept Coop]

We really don't have to worry about draft position until next year, unless you have a startup draft commencing right now. If you're asking where I'd rank him, I guess it's somewhere in the top 12. I really haven't given it much thought, but I know it's far from the tier of "fool's gold". Do I think his situation will change? No, I have no reason to expect it will. That doesn't mean he'd be my #1 pick next year. I'm certainly not going to try to make up reasons why it might change.

1. No. That is not possible for any RB in the NFL. It will not happen to AD, CJ, FG, SJ and a couple others, because they are elite talents. Because I don't think Foster is elite, I think there is a chance he is forced into a RBBC. I am not saying it WILL happen, but I think it could. 2. No. It is different. If AP or CJ demand top 5 money, they will get it, because they are top 5 talents. Because I don't think Foster is elite, and Houston can get good production from anyone, I think it is a risk. I don't think it WILL happen, but I think it could. 3/4. Wrong. If a player has shown the ability to stay healthy, after carrying the load, year after year, it is logical to assume that they are less likely to give into smaller, nagging injuries than someone has not proven their durability.Lastly, I never said I expect these things to happen. If you are trying to cut down my argument, at least acknowledge what my argument is. My argument is that Foster has a lot more question marks than other FF players, namely the elite ones. My argument is not that any of these things WILL happen, just that there is more potential of them happening. This is how we got to the top 7 comment. Arians Foster is the number 1 scoring RB in FF. He is only 24 years old. If you don't see that changing, how could he not be your top RB? My top 7 comments was to get you to display that you DO have some reservations and are not sure this will continue. Because if you are, he would not be top 12, he would be top 1-3.

 

[BuckeyeArt]

We really don't have to worry about draft position until next year, unless you have a startup draft commencing right now. If you're asking where I'd rank him, I guess it's somewhere in the top 12. I really haven't given it much thought, but I know it's far from the tier of "fool's gold". Do I think his situation will change? No, I have no reason to expect it will. That doesn't mean he'd be my #1 pick next year. I'm certainly not going to try to make up reasons why it might change.

1. No. That is not possible for any RB in the NFL. It will not happen to AD, CJ, FG, SJ and a couple others, because they are elite talents. Because I don't think Foster is elite, I think there is a chance he is forced into a RBBC. I am not saying it WILL happen, but I think it could. 2. No. It is different. If AP or CJ demand top 5 money, they will get it, because they are top 5 talents. Because I don't think Foster is elite, and Houston can get good production from anyone, I think it is a risk. I don't think it WILL happen, but I think it could. 3/4. Wrong. If a player has shown the ability to stay healthy, after carrying the load, year after year, it is logical to assume that they are less likely to give into smaller, nagging injuries than someone has not proven their durability.Lastly, I never said I expect these things to happen. If you are trying to cut down my argument, at least acknowledge what my argument is. My argument is that Foster has a lot more question marks than other FF players, namely the elite ones. My argument is not that any of these things WILL happen, just that there is more potential of them happening. This is how we got to the top 7 comment. Arians Foster is the number 1 scoring RB in FF. He is only 24 years old. If you don't see that changing, how could he not be your top RB? My top 7 comments was to get you to display that you DO have some reservations and are not sure this will continue. Because if you are, he would not be top 12, he would be top 1-3.

OK, maybe I'm confused about what fool's gold is. Where is your fool's gold tier? Where do you rank him?

 

[Concept Coop]

We really don't have to worry about draft position until next year, unless you have a startup draft commencing right now. If you're asking where I'd rank him, I guess it's somewhere in the top 12. I really haven't given it much thought, but I know it's far from the tier of "fool's gold". Do I think his situation will change? No, I have no reason to expect it will. That doesn't mean he'd be my #1 pick next year. I'm certainly not going to try to make up reasons why it might change.

1. No. That is not possible for any RB in the NFL. It will not happen to AD, CJ, FG, SJ and a couple others, because they are elite talents. Because I don't think Foster is elite, I think there is a chance he is forced into a RBBC. I am not saying it WILL happen, but I think it could. 2. No. It is different. If AP or CJ demand top 5 money, they will get it, because they are top 5 talents. Because I don't think Foster is elite, and Houston can get good production from anyone, I think it is a risk. I don't think it WILL happen, but I think it could. 3/4. Wrong. If a player has shown the ability to stay healthy, after carrying the load, year after year, it is logical to assume that they are less likely to give into smaller, nagging injuries than someone has not proven their durability.Lastly, I never said I expect these things to happen. If you are trying to cut down my argument, at least acknowledge what my argument is. My argument is that Foster has a lot more question marks than other FF players, namely the elite ones. My argument is not that any of these things WILL happen, just that there is more potential of them happening. This is how we got to the top 7 comment. Arians Foster is the number 1 scoring RB in FF. He is only 24 years old. If you don't see that changing, how could he not be your top RB? My top 7 comments was to get you to display that you DO have some reservations and are not sure this will continue. Because if you are, he would not be top 12, he would be top 1-3.

OK, maybe I'm confused about what fool's gold is. Where is your fool's gold tier? Where do you rank him?

Fools gold = not as talented as his numbers, or current situation suggests. Fool's gold = putting situation over talent, in dynasty leagues, where more often than not, talent wins out. Situations change, talent remains.

 

[BuckeyeArt]

We really don't have to worry about draft position until next year, unless you have a startup draft commencing right now. If you're asking where I'd rank him, I guess it's somewhere in the top 12. I really haven't given it much thought, but I know it's far from the tier of "fool's gold". Do I think his situation will change? No, I have no reason to expect it will. That doesn't mean he'd be my #1 pick next year. I'm certainly not going to try to make up reasons why it might change.

1. No. That is not possible for any RB in the NFL. It will not happen to AD, CJ, FG, SJ and a couple others, because they are elite talents. Because I don't think Foster is elite, I think there is a chance he is forced into a RBBC. I am not saying it WILL happen, but I think it could. 2. No. It is different. If AP or CJ demand top 5 money, they will get it, because they are top 5 talents. Because I don't think Foster is elite, and Houston can get good production from anyone, I think it is a risk. I don't think it WILL happen, but I think it could. 3/4. Wrong. If a player has shown the ability to stay healthy, after carrying the load, year after year, it is logical to assume that they are less likely to give into smaller, nagging injuries than someone has not proven their durability.Lastly, I never said I expect these things to happen. If you are trying to cut down my argument, at least acknowledge what my argument is. My argument is that Foster has a lot more question marks than other FF players, namely the elite ones. My argument is not that any of these things WILL happen, just that there is more potential of them happening. This is how we got to the top 7 comment. Arians Foster is the number 1 scoring RB in FF. He is only 24 years old. If you don't see that changing, how could he not be your top RB? My top 7 comments was to get you to display that you DO have some reservations and are not sure this will continue. Because if you are, he would not be top 12, he would be top 1-3.

OK, maybe I'm confused about what fool's gold is. Where is your fool's gold tier? Where do you rank him?

Fools gold = not as talented as his numbers, or current situation suggests. Fool's gold = putting situation over talent, in dynasty leagues, where more often than not, talent wins out. Situations change, talent remains.

So, where do you rank him?

 

[Concept Coop]

We really don't have to worry about draft position until next year, unless you have a startup draft commencing right now. If you're asking where I'd rank him, I guess it's somewhere in the top 12. I really haven't given it much thought, but I know it's far from the tier of "fool's gold". Do I think his situation will change? No, I have no reason to expect it will. That doesn't mean he'd be my #1 pick next year. I'm certainly not going to try to make up reasons why it might change.

1. No. That is not possible for any RB in the NFL. It will not happen to AD, CJ, FG, SJ and a couple others, because they are elite talents. Because I don't think Foster is elite, I think there is a chance he is forced into a RBBC. I am not saying it WILL happen, but I think it could. 2. No. It is different. If AP or CJ demand top 5 money, they will get it, because they are top 5 talents. Because I don't think Foster is elite, and Houston can get good production from anyone, I think it is a risk. I don't think it WILL happen, but I think it could. 3/4. Wrong. If a player has shown the ability to stay healthy, after carrying the load, year after year, it is logical to assume that they are less likely to give into smaller, nagging injuries than someone has not proven their durability.Lastly, I never said I expect these things to happen. If you are trying to cut down my argument, at least acknowledge what my argument is. My argument is that Foster has a lot more question marks than other FF players, namely the elite ones. My argument is not that any of these things WILL happen, just that there is more potential of them happening. This is how we got to the top 7 comment. Arians Foster is the number 1 scoring RB in FF. He is only 24 years old. If you don't see that changing, how could he not be your top RB? My top 7 comments was to get you to display that you DO have some reservations and are not sure this will continue. Because if you are, he would not be top 12, he would be top 1-3.

OK, maybe I'm confused about what fool's gold is. Where is your fool's gold tier? Where do you rank him?

Fools gold = not as talented as his numbers, or current situation suggests. Fool's gold = putting situation over talent, in dynasty leagues, where more often than not, talent wins out. Situations change, talent remains.

So, where do you rank him?

I haven't done a set of rankings during the season, since I haven't been drafting, obviously. So this answer is not concrete, but I would say somewhere between 9-12 (RB).

 

[Hoss_Cartwright]

Sorry if Honda

Derrick Ward-RB-Texans Oct. 18 - 4:54 pm et

Texans coach Gary Kubiak indicated Monday that Derrick Ward has earned more of a role going forward.

"We need to play him more with Arian to keep (Foster) fresh," said Kubiak. Ward is averaging 8.68 yards per touch on 17 carries and two catches since being signed as a free agent just prior to the opener. We wouldn't bet on him nearing double-digit touches per game, but Ward is worth grabbing as a handcuff to Foster. Steve Slaton is completely off the radar.

Source: Nick Scurfield on Twitter

 

[Amused to Death]

I haven't done a set of rankings during the season, since I haven't been drafting, obviously. So this answer is not concrete, but I would say somewhere between 9-12 (RB).

He's currently the top RB in my dynasty league by a wide margin. I don't care where other rank Foster, offering the 8th ranked RB in my league ain't getting him from me. He's a complete hold at the moment for me. I might regret it later, but considering how cheap I got him he's firmly planted in the RB2 slot of my lineup.

 

[Concept Coop]

I haven't done a set of rankings during the season, since I haven't been drafting, obviously. So this answer is not concrete, but I would say somewhere between 9-12 (RB).

He's currently the top RB in my dynasty league by a wide margin. I don't care where other rank Foster, offering the 8th ranked RB in my league ain't getting him from me. He's a complete hold at the moment for me. I might regret it later, but considering how cheap I got him he's firmly planted in the RB2 slot of my lineup.

I can respect that. I actually listed Foster as a hold, on a "buy, sell, hold" just the other day. If I was a contender, I woud place more value in Foster than if I was rebuilding. If I was top 3 in a league, with Foster as my main guy, I wouldn't trade him for the #8 guy either. But in a start-up draft at the end of the season, I do think there are 8 guys I would take over Foster, at the RB spot. A perfect example being Jamaal Charles. I have Charles ahead of Foster, but would not trade Foster for Charles if I needed Foster's points to remain at the top of a league.

 

[BuckeyeArt]

I haven't done a set of rankings during the season, since I haven't been drafting, obviously. So this answer is not concrete, but I would say somewhere between 9-12 (RB).

Interesting. We're maybe 3-4 slots apart and he's fool's gold to you and a top dynasty RB to me.

 

[BuckeyeArt]

I haven't done a set of rankings during the season, since I haven't been drafting, obviously. So this answer is not concrete, but I would say somewhere between 9-12 (RB).

He's currently the top RB in my dynasty league by a wide margin. I don't care where other rank Foster, offering the 8th ranked RB in my league ain't getting him from me. He's a complete hold at the moment for me. I might regret it later, but considering how cheap I got him he's firmly planted in the RB2 slot of my lineup.

I can respect that. I actually listed Foster as a hold, on a "buy, sell, hold" just the other day. If I was a contender, I woud place more value in Foster than if I was rebuilding. If I was top 3 in a league, with Foster as my main guy, I wouldn't trade him for the #8 guy either. But in a start-up draft at the end of the season, I do think there are 8 guys I would take over Foster, at the RB spot. A perfect example being Jamaal Charles. I have Charles ahead of Foster, but would not trade Foster for Charles if I needed Foster's points to remain at the top of a league.

That's interesting. You'd take Charles, a RB whose coach thinks he is best used in a timeshare, over Foster because he might at some point in the future be possibly used in a timeshare.

 

[Concept Coop]

I haven't done a set of rankings during the season, since I haven't been drafting, obviously. So this answer is not concrete, but I would say somewhere between 9-12 (RB).

He's currently the top RB in my dynasty league by a wide margin. I don't care where other rank Foster, offering the 8th ranked RB in my league ain't getting him from me. He's a complete hold at the moment for me. I might regret it later, but considering how cheap I got him he's firmly planted in the RB2 slot of my lineup.

I can respect that. I actually listed Foster as a hold, on a "buy, sell, hold" just the other day. If I was a contender, I woud place more value in Foster than if I was rebuilding. If I was top 3 in a league, with Foster as my main guy, I wouldn't trade him for the #8 guy either. But in a start-up draft at the end of the season, I do think there are 8 guys I would take over Foster, at the RB spot. A perfect example being Jamaal Charles. I have Charles ahead of Foster, but would not trade Foster for Charles if I needed Foster's points to remain at the top of a league.

That's interesting. You'd take Charles, a RB whose coach thinks he is best used in a timeshare, over Foster because he might at some point in the future be possibly used in a timeshare.

Charles in a time share still equates to RB1 in PPR. Foster in a timeshare does not. I think Charles is a more talented player than Foster. And if we are going to go based off of what a coach thinks, and interpret that ourselves, what does the drafting of Tate say about Foster? I would take Stewart over Foster too.

And instead of using the term "interesting", why not just be blunt and say what you really want to.

I would be "interested" to see who the 6-7 RBs you have ahead of Foster, and why. Because after the first two, you would need to resort to the same reasons you previously lambasted me for using. Foster is the #1 RB in FF, and he is only 24. If you expect that to continue, the only guys you could possibly list over Foster are AP and CJ.

 

[BuckeyeArt]

Charles in a time share still equates to RB1 in PPR. Foster in a timeshare does not. I think Charles is a more talented player than Foster. And if we are going to go based off of what a coach thinks, and interpret that ourselves, what does the drafting of Tate say about Foster?

More like a RB2 right now. We don't know anything about Foster in a timeshare. Tate was drafted in April. Kubiak has been raving about Foster since about minicamp.

And instead of using the term "interesting", why not just be blunt and say what you really want to.

It was interesting and I thought I did.

I would be "interested" to see who the 6-7 RBs you have ahead of Foster, and why. Because after the first two, you would need to resort to the same reasons you previously lambasted me for using. Foster is the #1 RB in FF, and he is only 24. If you expect that to continue, the only guys you could possibly list over Foster are AP and CJ.

Off the top of my head, I'd take AP, CJ, and Rice over Foster. Probably Stewart. I'd put MJD and Mendenhall about even. That puts him about 5-7, or in the middle of the top 12.

 

[Concept Coop]

Charles in a time share still equates to RB1 in PPR. Foster in a timeshare does not. I think Charles is a more talented player than Foster. And if we are going to go based off of what a coach thinks, and interpret that ourselves, what does the drafting of Tate say about Foster?

More like a RB2 right now. We don't know anything about Foster in a timeshare. Tate was drafted in April. Kubiak has been raving about Foster since about minicamp.

And instead of using the term "interesting", why not just be blunt and say what you really want to.

It was interesting and I thought I did.

I would be "interested" to see who the 6-7 RBs you have ahead of Foster, and why. Because after the first two, you would need to resort to the same reasons you previously lambasted me for using. Foster is the #1 RB in FF, and he is only 24. If you expect that to continue, the only guys you could possibly list over Foster are AP and CJ.

Off the top of my head, I'd take AP, CJ, and Rice over Foster. Probably Stewart. I'd put MJD and Mendenhall about even. That puts him about 5-7, or in the middle of the top 12.

My point is this. He is the #1 FF back right now and you don't see that changing. Why would you take Rice and Stewart ahead of him? Why would MJD and Mendehall be equal? He is scoring more than they are and is around the same age.

 

[ponchsox]

Does Foster come close to his week one performance against the Colts?

 

[Herm23]

Charles in a time share still equates to RB1 in PPR. Foster in a timeshare does not. I think Charles is a more talented player than Foster. And if we are going to go based off of what a coach thinks, and interpret that ourselves, what does the drafting of Tate say about Foster?

More like a RB2 right now. We don't know anything about Foster in a timeshare. Tate was drafted in April. Kubiak has been raving about Foster since about minicamp.

And instead of using the term "interesting", why not just be blunt and say what you really want to.

It was interesting and I thought I did.

I would be "interested" to see who the 6-7 RBs you have ahead of Foster, and why. Because after the first two, you would need to resort to the same reasons you previously lambasted me for using. Foster is the #1 RB in FF, and he is only 24. If you expect that to continue, the only guys you could possibly list over Foster are AP and CJ.

Off the top of my head, I'd take AP, CJ, and Rice over Foster. Probably Stewart. I'd put MJD and Mendenhall about even. That puts him about 5-7, or in the middle of the top 12.

My point is this. He is the #1 FF back right now and you don't see that changing. Why would you take Rice and Stewart ahead of him? Why would MJD and Mendehall be equal? He is scoring more than they are and is around the same age.

This post has degenerated into sillyness, as evidenced by the bolded above.Is it really that hard to understand that he may view Foster as talented, but not as talented as other players that are not producing as well at the moment? That doesn't mean he needs to believe his situation is shaky, that Ben Tate will challenge his touches, that he is at extreme risk of losing all value, or that he will fall off the face of the earth in the near future. Thinking that foster is being helped by his situation and thinking he is a talented player are absolutely NOT mutually exclusive hypotheses, despite your apparent attempts to say otherwise.

Edit: I would also like to add that my exact feelings on Foster are up in the air. I believe he is a talented player, but think he is producing above his talent level at the moment. I feel safe in saying he is a top 10 RB. Outside of that, I am not sure. Much of my skepticism resides in a lot of the arguments Concept Coop has brought up (his original premise was solid, but I don't agree with some of the comments he has since made in trying to defend it)- his track record isn't long enough for me to feel comfortable yet.

I don't think he will face any competition for the job next year, but I don't yet feel comfortable saying I KNOW he won't face competition, I don't think the offense is the sole reason for his production, but I don't yet feel comfortable saying I KNOW it isn't the sole reason, etc... There are very few players in the league I would feel comfortable placing in the "I KNOW" catagory -vs- the "I THINK" catagory and Foster has not yet joined that "I KNOW" group. If he is still producing next year, has no reasonable threat of competition, etc... then I will feel more comfortable inching him closer to that "I KNOW" group. However, like almost any player at any position, track record is crucial in determing that comfort level with me (especially when there is a lack of draft pedigree) and I'm not totally sure even another year of high level production will be enough to place him in the "I KNOW" group. Part of the diffiuculty of this hobby is evaluating the non-transcendent talents and figuring out who is purely a product of his situation and who is capable of producing even if the situation becomes less ideal. I am leaning towards Foster being the latter rather than the former, but need to see an awful lot more before I feel comfortable.