Carries Breakdown Foster vs. Slaton after Tate Injury (1 Viewer)

[Tango]

And you have all this faith in Foster who plays on a team that used a 2nd round pick on a RB. The team has a lot more faith in Foster now because they have to, but up until Tate getting injured, Foster was not guaranteed to be the man by any means. But so glad you have so much faith in the guy when he has done a lot less to earn it than Slaton has. Foster's 2009 is no where near Slaton's 2008. But I have to say it again, if anything happened prior to 11 months ago it might as well not have happened...

This is where you start losing me. I (and many, many others) predicted that the Texans would use a first rounder for a RB before Slaton's injury last year. After watching each and every GK presser last year that was painfully obvious. Then *compound* that with Slaton's injury (not knowing what they would have with him) & Moats leaving and they could have been so thin that even the Titans (with CJ) would have used a high draft pick on a running back. In this sense you seem to be the one writing off Slaton's injury as a appendectomy. It was very serious and the Texans' RB depth was non-existent if he didnt recover..no matter the talent level (or lack thereof) of Foster.No one was painting Foster as a superstar last week. He ranked in the low 30's for me at RB in a non-PPR. The reason for even that high of a ranking is that it seemed he would get the first crack at this job; that's it. And that has value. It's a play-the-percentages move. It's akin to an extra inning game in baseball that's sudden death instead of a game where the home team gets last ups. Foster, talented or not; was going to get a chance, however unlikely, to earn the full-time spot or at least goalline duties. That had significant value in of itself in the Texans' offense.

Now that the competition has cleared out a little and his expected touches increase and the variance around that mean shrinks a little, his value rises. His quality/touch is completely up in the air we all agree; but the signs are positive in that regard...although admittedly premature.

 

[DansRams]

This is some 1st Class Quality Posting here people....Listen up, this man knows things!

Nice job Fanatic.... :(

LOL...How about this...I'll draft Foster and you guys draft Slaton...that will show me

 

[njherdfan]

I understand why people are skeptical over Foster and his limited track record, but objectively, could things have shaped up any better for him this off-season?

1. He has, by all accounts, been the best back in camp, and he's gotten praise numerous times from coaches and other players.

2. The running back who is the most similar to him is out for an extended period of time.

3. He plays with a coach with a well-known hatred of backs who fumble, and Slaton fumbled yet again last night.

It's certainly possible that Foster will be a flash-in-the-pan type player, but from everything I've seen, he's big and fast, and he runs decisively. I think he's in a great situation and there is definitely cause for optimism there.

 

[DansRams]

I understand why people are skeptical over Foster and his limited track record, but objectively, could things have shaped up any better for him this off-season?1. He has, by all accounts, been the best back in camp, and he's gotten praise numerous times from coaches and other players.2. The running back who is the most similar to him is out for an extended period of time.3. He plays with a coach with a well-known hatred of backs who fumble, and Slaton fumbled yet again last night.It's certainly possible that Foster will be a flash-in-the-pan type player, but from everything I've seen, he's big and fast, and he runs decisively. I think he's in a great situation and there is definitely cause for optimism there.

Agree

The Houston Chronicle reports that Ben Tate will be placed on injured reserve after undergoing ankle surgery on Tuesday.Coach Gary Kubiak characterized Tate's injury as "very significant," and Chronicle beat reporter John McClain is confident that Tate's season is over before it began. Arian Foster should continue his scream up fantasy draft boards. Chris Henry and Jeremiah Johnson are candidates for third string. The club could also take a look at free agents like Ladell Betts and Tatum Bell.

Just in case there was any question.

 

[NajehHejan]

Everyone is slamming Slaton for fumling, and rightfully so.

It seems everyone is forgetting about Foster's fumbling problems.

He fumbled early in week 15 last year and was yanked by Kubiak and never saw the field again that game. He killed many a fantasy owner's playoffs hopes that day. Kubiak had said repeatedly that Foster was going to get his shot, but he was pulled after one early fumble and never saw the field again. I couldn't find the old thread, but repeated Tennessee homers had confirmed that Foster had the unfortunate propensity of coughing up the ball at inopportune times. Has Foster remedied his fumbling problems? Will Kubiak never pul Foster again for fumbling?

I'm no Slaton apologist nor am I trying to bach Foster, but it wasn't that long ago that Foster was geting the hook for fumbling. Beware of this, everyone.

 

[Tango]

Let's not forget about Chris Henry. Although no one expects him to compete for a starting role, he may be a factor in the offense now. I expect GK to mention him at his 330 CDT presser.

Quoting myself above...here is what GK had to say:(on RB Chris Henry's performance) "He looked good on special teams. Offensively, he's inconsistent with some assignment stuff and things that we're trying to get him settled down on, but he's very aggressive. He showed up for (special teams coordinator) Joe (Marciano) and he will get more time at the (running) back position as we move forward now with (RB Ben) Tate being out. So we'll see, but he did some good things. He showed up."

I doubt he makes a dent unless the guys in front of him falter. It sounds like he would have been fighting for a roster spot if Tate wasnt injured.

Moreover, he talked abut adding someone new:

(on whether he would keep four running backs on the 53-man roster) "Yeah, that's always an option. Obviously you've got three active all the time and you usually keep four. If not, one of them may be on your practice squad. But gosh, they're all so young, so that's a big possibility that we do. There's also a possibility if we're going to lose (RB) Ben (Tate) for a period of time that we could be looking, too. We've got a long way to go. There's a lot of training camp left, preseason games left just to get to opening day and we're sitting here staring at four young backs right now, so it's kind of scary."

 

[pantherclub]

Foster maybe a top 10 back this year but if you are drafting him in the 3rd or 4rth based on 2 games last year at the every end of the season then good luck to you. I think as it stands now he should be in the late 6ish and on round.

 

[Redmen62]

As for the 3.3 YPC, it's a bad stat. One that must be improved upon if he's ever going to be more than a 3rd down back. That being said, do you think that the injury might have made him a little cautious or ineffective? This is where you rip me for blaming the injury again. Silly me, equating a nerve damage in a players neck for impacting his ability to play effectively. I mean, if you can't see lack of feeling in his hands as having an impact on him holding onto the ball, I'd be dreaming if you could comprehend this simple correlation.

I'm not saying the guy is going to become Tiki Barber and I'm not saying he's going to become Dominick Davis. He had a really good year his rookie season. He had a very bad soph season. He had an injury that was so bad that he had to have two vertebrae in his neck fused together to resolve it. In your eyes, that's probably akin to an appendectomy, but in mine that's pretty serious.

Putting aside the condescension for a moment, I think it's interesting that one of the key points of a pro-Steve Slaton argument is that he had a very serious neck injury. If the injury was bad enough to cause his terrible play last year, wouldn't you then be worried about Slaton's ability to be healthy enough to be a primary RB in the NFL?

 

[sgtrobo]

I find this humorousArian Foster is a nobody who had a few good games while Houston's true starter had been sidelined with a nerve injury.by midseason, Arian Foster will be back to being a nobody and folks will be pissed that they dumped on Slaton so easily.

Just like Ryan Grant and Brandon Jackson... oh wait

because Brandon Jackson finished the season with 1659 yards from scrimmage and 10 TDs...oh wait

 

[Grahamburn]

It's pretty easy to spot the Foster owners/Slaton owners in here.

Foster clearly has the inside track on this job.

If we're going to blame Slaton's fumbling on the injury, and he's supposedly healthy now, it doesn't bode well for him that he fumbled again and was fairly ineffective running the ball Saturday night while Foster played well. I doubt Gary Kubiak cares why Slaton continues to fumble.

:Fosterowner:

 

[WVU Alum]

As for the 3.3 YPC, it's a bad stat. One that must be improved upon if he's ever going to be more than a 3rd down back. That being said, do you think that the injury might have made him a little cautious or ineffective? This is where you rip me for blaming the injury again. Silly me, equating a nerve damage in a players neck for impacting his ability to play effectively. I mean, if you can't see lack of feeling in his hands as having an impact on him holding onto the ball, I'd be dreaming if you could comprehend this simple correlation.

I'm not saying the guy is going to become Tiki Barber and I'm not saying he's going to become Dominick Davis. He had a really good year his rookie season. He had a very bad soph season. He had an injury that was so bad that he had to have two vertebrae in his neck fused together to resolve it. In your eyes, that's probably akin to an appendectomy, but in mine that's pretty serious.

Putting aside the condescension for a moment, I think it's interesting that one of the key points of a pro-Steve Slaton argument is that he had a very serious neck injury. If the injury was bad enough to cause his terrible play last year, wouldn't you then be worried about Slaton's ability to be healthy enough to be a primary RB in the NFL?

Chris Johnson seems to be doing OK.

 

[benm3218]

As for the 3.3 YPC, it's a bad stat. One that must be improved upon if he's ever going to be more than a 3rd down back. That being said, do you think that the injury might have made him a little cautious or ineffective? This is where you rip me for blaming the injury again. Silly me, equating a nerve damage in a players neck for impacting his ability to play effectively. I mean, if you can't see lack of feeling in his hands as having an impact on him holding onto the ball, I'd be dreaming if you could comprehend this simple correlation.

I'm not saying the guy is going to become Tiki Barber and I'm not saying he's going to become Dominick Davis. He had a really good year his rookie season. He had a very bad soph season. He had an injury that was so bad that he had to have two vertebrae in his neck fused together to resolve it. In your eyes, that's probably akin to an appendectomy, but in mine that's pretty serious.

Putting aside the condescension for a moment, I think it's interesting that one of the key points of a pro-Steve Slaton argument is that he had a very serious neck injury. If the injury was bad enough to cause his terrible play last year, wouldn't you then be worried about Slaton's ability to be healthy enough to be a primary RB in the NFL?

Chris Johnson seems to be doing OK.

What? When did CJ have neck surgery and fumble a ton? I do not see a connection...

 

[WVU Alum]

As for the 3.3 YPC, it's a bad stat. One that must be improved upon if he's ever going to be more than a 3rd down back. That being said, do you think that the injury might have made him a little cautious or ineffective? This is where you rip me for blaming the injury again. Silly me, equating a nerve damage in a players neck for impacting his ability to play effectively. I mean, if you can't see lack of feeling in his hands as having an impact on him holding onto the ball, I'd be dreaming if you could comprehend this simple correlation.

I'm not saying the guy is going to become Tiki Barber and I'm not saying he's going to become Dominick Davis. He had a really good year his rookie season. He had a very bad soph season. He had an injury that was so bad that he had to have two vertebrae in his neck fused together to resolve it. In your eyes, that's probably akin to an appendectomy, but in mine that's pretty serious.

Putting aside the condescension for a moment, I think it's interesting that one of the key points of a pro-Steve Slaton argument is that he had a very serious neck injury. If the injury was bad enough to cause his terrible play last year, wouldn't you then be worried about Slaton's ability to be healthy enough to be a primary RB in the NFL?

Chris Johnson seems to be doing OK.

What? When did CJ have neck surgery and fumble a ton? I do not see a connection...

CJ had the same surgery in 2005-2006. See the connection now?

 

[benm3218]

As for the 3.3 YPC, it's a bad stat. One that must be improved upon if he's ever going to be more than a 3rd down back. That being said, do you think that the injury might have made him a little cautious or ineffective? This is where you rip me for blaming the injury again. Silly me, equating a nerve damage in a players neck for impacting his ability to play effectively. I mean, if you can't see lack of feeling in his hands as having an impact on him holding onto the ball, I'd be dreaming if you could comprehend this simple correlation.

I'm not saying the guy is going to become Tiki Barber and I'm not saying he's going to become Dominick Davis. He had a really good year his rookie season. He had a very bad soph season. He had an injury that was so bad that he had to have two vertebrae in his neck fused together to resolve it. In your eyes, that's probably akin to an appendectomy, but in mine that's pretty serious.

Putting aside the condescension for a moment, I think it's interesting that one of the key points of a pro-Steve Slaton argument is that he had a very serious neck injury. If the injury was bad enough to cause his terrible play last year, wouldn't you then be worried about Slaton's ability to be healthy enough to be a primary RB in the NFL?

Chris Johnson seems to be doing OK.

What? When did CJ have neck surgery and fumble a ton? I do not see a connection...

CJ had the same surgery in 2005-2006. See the connection now?

Not when you put the words CJ and Slaton in the same sentence.

 

[DansRams]

Putting aside the condescension for a moment, I think it's interesting that one of the key points of a pro-Steve Slaton argument is that he had a very serious neck injury. If the injury was bad enough to cause his terrible play last year, wouldn't you then be worried about Slaton's ability to be healthy enough to be a primary RB in the NFL?

Chris Johnson seems to be doing OK.

What? When did CJ have neck surgery and fumble a ton? I do not see a connection...

CJ had the same surgery in 2005-2006. See the connection now?

Not when you put the words CJ and Slaton in the same sentence.

I thought the J Charles comparison was bad, but CJ takes the cake

 

[sgtrobo]

oh lord. the question was asked regarding Slaton's injury. CJ had a similar injury and surgery and recovered fine.

I don't think anyone is trying to claim that Slaton is as good as CJ, only they had similar backgrounds regarding a similar injury and surgery.

Not that it matters anymore, but for those who have such short memories, Slaton and Johnson had very similar rookie season stats.

268/1282/9, 4.8, 1659/10

vs.

251/1228/9, 4.9, 1488/10

 

[GregR_2]

I don't want to dig up the link unless needed, but last when Kubiak was talking about Slaton's role as the lead back that in a perfect game the "lead" back would get 15-18 carries, the 2nd guy 10-12. My guess is that still holds.

How accurate are comments like this by Kubiak? Is he giving real insight or just giving reporters a bone?

Kinda think he is no diffrent thatn most coaches and while not an intentional lie, there are always things like game situations, available talentetc, which he can fall back on when things play out differently. My guess is that look at 2008 (when Slaton played well) and see if his actions and words follow.

I think Kubiak was being accurate as to what his preference is if he has 2 RBs he feels confident with. Look in the last half of 2008 and you'll see that was the kind of split he had between Slaton and Ahman Green. Until Green went out with an injury and then there were a few games where Slaton got almost all the carries until week 17 when Moats worked in there and got the RB2 portion.Then 2009 starts and Brown was the 2nd RB and Brown was getting 30-40% of the carries.His statement is very in line with my memories of how he actually uses the backs.

 

[WVU Alum]

Not when you put the words CJ and Slaton in the same sentence.

I thought the J Charles comparison was bad, but CJ takes the cake

This has got to be schtick, right? You two can not both be this dense. I'm trying to figure out how a debate over the injury, turns into a camparison of talent? Where did I state they were equal in talent? Or even imply such a thing? I do give points for effort. You nearly convinced me that Slaton can't be productive after his injury due to the fact that his name is not Chris Johnson.

 

[mistersmith]

Everyone is slamming Slaton for fumling, and rightfully so.

It seems everyone is forgetting about Foster's fumbling problems.

He fumbled early in week 15 last year and was yanked by Kubiak and never saw the field again that game. He killed many a fantasy owner's playoffs hopes that day. Kubiak had said repeatedly that Foster was going to get his shot, but he was pulled after one early fumble and never saw the field again. I couldn't find the old thread, but repeated Tennessee homers had confirmed that Foster had the unfortunate propensity of coughing up the ball at inopportune times. Has Foster remedied his fumbling problems? Will Kubiak never pul Foster again for fumbling?

I'm no Slaton apologist nor am I trying to bach Foster, but it wasn't that long ago that Foster was geting the hook for fumbling. Beware of this, everyone.

Had both Slaton and Foster last year. Kubiak was good with his word when it came to which RB started, but it was usually different than who finished. Both of them killed me with their fumbling issues. Not only did I get negative points for a fumble, but I wouldn't get any more points thanks to Kubiak's quick hook.

Slaton killed me during the regular season since he kept starting - and then he would fumble in the 1st half and get yanked.

Then Foster kills me in the playoffs week 15 since he got yanked after fumbling 8 plays in.

It was pretty infuriating and it's not something I want to deal with again this year.

I'm sure one of them will do well, but not sure if they're worth it at their current ADP (which is rising pretty quickly.)

 

[Clifford]

This. Nicely put. The Tate injury really sucks for drafting the Houston backfield because if you were following camp you knew it was Foster and Slaton anyway competing. Now people are going to know the job is Foster's and his adp will shoot up to the fifth. Pretty high for what is still an unknown commodity for the most part, with at least threatening competition IF Slaton can really perform in the next two games. If Slaton doesn't average over 4.0 ypc for the first three preseason games, I think we can safely say it's AF's show in Houston for the year

(until he fumbles).

 

[Banger]

oh lord. the question was asked regarding Slaton's injury. CJ had a similar injury and surgery and recovered fine.I don't think anyone is trying to claim that Slaton is as good as CJ, only they had similar backgrounds regarding a similar injury and surgery.Not that it matters anymore, but for those who have such short memories, Slaton and Johnson had very similar rookie season stats. 268/1282/9, 4.8, 1659/10vs.251/1228/9, 4.9, 1488/10

that's the problem with just looking at stats.

 

[TheFanatic]

oh lord. the question was asked regarding Slaton's injury. CJ had a similar injury and surgery and recovered fine.I don't think anyone is trying to claim that Slaton is as good as CJ, only they had similar backgrounds regarding a similar injury and surgery.Not that it matters anymore, but for those who have such short memories, Slaton and Johnson had very similar rookie season stats. 268/1282/9, 4.8, 1659/10vs.251/1228/9, 4.9, 1488/10

Don't muddy this thread up with logic and reason. There's no place for that here...

 

[GregR_2]

...

I actually clicked on this thread to point out that the Texans will at some point be bringing in another running back so there's no point in theoretically splitting the carries between Slaton and Foster. This situation will get further muddled soon.

Barring a Brian Westbrook returned to old form, I don't see them bringing in someone else who would change that the best expectation is that Foster and Slaton will get the split in carries being discussed.Even if they do bring in someone who works into the top 2, I still think there ends up being a split along the previously discussed ratio. So I think it makes sense to treat Foster and Slaton that way.

 

[sgtrobo]

oh lord. the question was asked regarding Slaton's injury. CJ had a similar injury and surgery and recovered fine.I don't think anyone is trying to claim that Slaton is as good as CJ, only they had similar backgrounds regarding a similar injury and surgery.Not that it matters anymore, but for those who have such short memories, Slaton and Johnson had very similar rookie season stats. 268/1282/9, 4.8, 1659/10vs.251/1228/9, 4.9, 1488/10

Don't muddy this thread up with logic and reason. There's no place for that here...

my bad. Won't happen againI don't have either of these guys anywhere. I have no vested interest in this fight to be honest because it dosen't affect me directly. I think Arian Foster might be the real deal. I also KNOW that Slaton has performed extremely well when he was healthy and that last season he wasn't healthy. After a decade plus of FF, you learn to ride with these types of things because it happens all the time. dude whups ### one year and sucks the next and people just absolutely crap on him. There was this dude, what was his name....Peyton...something....anyway, he was 4 years into his career and then he has a bolo crap-pile of a season, threw 23 picks, barely even had more TDs than picks, and everyone took a crap on him.Another guy, Ben Roe...bah, can't remember. He was a top guy in fantasy one year, then he gets injured and has a crappy year and everybody forgets about him. So what's the guy do? He turns around and puts up about 4400 yards and 27 TDs compared to 12 picks. Anyway, I'm obviously being facetious, but someone said "if it didn't happen in the last 11 months, then it may as well have never happened"agreed. People in fantasy have VERY short memories. I'm avoiding both because I hate Mike Shanahan backfields, but for those of you willing to gamble, at least be open to what history has taught and don't selectively choose your information while selectively dismissing other information. Take it all in and make a decision. Good luck with that, it's tougher than it sounds because, as I said earlier, we WANT to believe we found the next super-sleeper.

 

[humpback]

oh lord. the question was asked regarding Slaton's injury. CJ had a similar injury and surgery and recovered fine.I don't think anyone is trying to claim that Slaton is as good as CJ, only they had similar backgrounds regarding a similar injury and surgery.Not that it matters anymore, but for those who have such short memories, Slaton and Johnson had very similar rookie season stats. 268/1282/9, 4.8, 1659/10vs.251/1228/9, 4.9, 1488/10

Don't muddy this thread up with logic and reason. There's no place for that here...

my bad. Won't happen againI don't have either of these guys anywhere. I have no vested interest in this fight to be honest because it dosen't affect me directly. I think Arian Foster might be the real deal. I also KNOW that Slaton has performed extremely well when he was healthy and that last season he wasn't healthy. After a decade plus of FF, you learn to ride with these types of things because it happens all the time. dude whups ### one year and sucks the next and people just absolutely crap on him. There was this dude, what was his name....Peyton...something....anyway, he was 4 years into his career and then he has a bolo crap-pile of a season, threw 23 picks, barely even had more TDs than picks, and everyone took a crap on him.Another guy, Ben Roe...bah, can't remember. He was a top guy in fantasy one year, then he gets injured and has a crappy year and everybody forgets about him. So what's the guy do? He turns around and puts up about 4400 yards and 27 TDs compared to 12 picks. Anyway, I'm obviously being facetious, but someone said "if it didn't happen in the last 11 months, then it may as well have never happened"agreed. People in fantasy have VERY short memories. I'm avoiding both because I hate Mike Shanahan backfields, but for those of you willing to gamble, at least be open to what history has taught and don't selectively choose your information while selectively dismissing other information. Take it all in and make a decision. Good luck with that, it's tougher than it sounds because, as I said earlier, we WANT to believe we found the next super-sleeper.

I hear what you're saying, but your examples aren't the best. I can't recall anyone "crapping" on Peyton after that season, which wasn't nearly as bad as you're saying anyway. The reason for that is, he had a much better history- #1 pick, 3 great seasons prior, no injuries, etc. If Slaton had ANY of those things going for him, he'd probably be getting more respect, but he doesn't. He was a late 3rd round pick who's had one good season, one bad season, and a pretty major injury. Likewise, his injury may have been similar to CJ's, but thier paths weren't- CJ's was a much better prospect, his injury happened in college, and he didn't go from really good to really bad and fumbling because of it.The most telling thing to me here is Kubiak- he's talked about limiting Slaton's touches basically since they drafted him, even after they saw first hand what he did his rookie season. If we're all forgetting that year, then so are the coaches. There must be some reason why they aren't giving him the starting job, right? Whatever that reason is must outweigh his rookie year production, at least in their minds.

 

[GregR_2]

I want to respond to the comment about people having short memories, in the context of Slaton.

I get a feeling that a lot of people look back at Slaton's 2008 season and are giving too much credit to his skills as a running back, and not giving enough to how well the offensive line ended up playing that season. Something the O-line didn't repeat in 2009 when they lost both guards early in the year.

Slaton did well getting around the edge and on passes where he had some room to work. But also amongst my lasting memories from 2008 were that Slaton often had big holes on his big gains... that he had a lot of runs that a RB with better speed would have taken to the house when Slaton got caught from behind or by someone taking an angle on him... and that he did poor on the goal line.

To see if those recollections were apt I went back and looked at some posts of mine from the end of 2008 and preseason 2009. Posts like this one from December of 2008:

Slaton is going to end up with Twice as many rushing yards as Bush had in his first two seasons. Just as many touchdowns... Granted less Recieving yards, but the seasons not over and I don't pay my RB to receive.

Slaton has proved more, in less time. Easy choice.

Don't get me wrong, as a Texans fan I love having Slaton and I think he's a pretty good RB.But I also think he gets too much credit and the offensive line is not getting enough credit. They've been opening some great holes for him to run through, and quite a few of his monster runs have come from him being virtually untouched by the time he hits the second level. And that of course is when he's able to do some real damage with his speed.

Not knocking Slaton, but I think he's probably got a better situation to be in as far as the run blocking right now. Earlier in the year and in preseason, when the O-line hadn't gelled and adjusted to Alex Gibb's scheme as well, I didn't think Slaton looked nearly as good. He's improved at the same time the line has.

So I'd say, yes, people sometimes have short memories and might be forgetting what Slaton did in 2008. But I also think in regards to Slaton's 2008 that people tend to give him a little too much credit. That they either didn't see his games or forgot just how much the offensive line contributed to how well he did. Is he a pretty good RB? Yes. Is he one of those talents who will get his even behind a poor line? I don't think he is. I don't think Foster is either... at least so far he hasn't shown any reason to think that. But I don't think it's necessarily a given that Slaton is the better RB of the two, or better than Tate, just because of what he and his O-line accomplished in 2008.

 

[TheFanatic]

I want to respond to the comment about people having short memories, in the context of Slaton.

I get a feeling that a lot of people look back at Slaton's 2008 season and are giving too much credit to his skills as a running back, and not giving enough to how well the offensive line ended up playing that season. Something the O-line didn't repeat in 2009 when they lost both guards early in the year.

Slaton did well getting around the edge and on passes where he had some room to work. But also amongst my lasting memories from 2008 were that Slaton often had big holes on his big gains... that he had a lot of runs that a RB with better speed would have taken to the house when Slaton got caught from behind or by someone taking an angle on him... and that he did poor on the goal line.

To see if those recollections were apt I went back and looked at some posts of mine from the end of 2008 and preseason 2009. Posts like this one from December of 2008:

Slaton is going to end up with Twice as many rushing yards as Bush had in his first two seasons. Just as many touchdowns... Granted less Recieving yards, but the seasons not over and I don't pay my RB to receive.

Slaton has proved more, in less time. Easy choice.

Don't get me wrong, as a Texans fan I love having Slaton and I think he's a pretty good RB.But I also think he gets too much credit and the offensive line is not getting enough credit. They've been opening some great holes for him to run through, and quite a few of his monster runs have come from him being virtually untouched by the time he hits the second level. And that of course is when he's able to do some real damage with his speed.

Not knocking Slaton, but I think he's probably got a better situation to be in as far as the run blocking right now. Earlier in the year and in preseason, when the O-line hadn't gelled and adjusted to Alex Gibb's scheme as well, I didn't think Slaton looked nearly as good. He's improved at the same time the line has.

So I'd say, yes, people sometimes have short memories and might be forgetting what Slaton did in 2008. But I also think in regards to Slaton's 2008 that people tend to give him a little too much credit. That they either didn't see his games or forgot just how much the offensive line contributed to how well he did. Is he a pretty good RB? Yes. Is he one of those talents who will get his even behind a poor line? I don't think he is. I don't think Foster is either... at least so far he hasn't shown any reason to think that. But I don't think it's necessarily a given that Slaton is the better RB of the two, or better than Tate, just because of what he and his O-line accomplished in 2008.

Wouldn't that be an argument in favor of those that think the real Steve Slaton was what we saw in 2008 and not in 2009? The real Steve Slaton had was uninjured and played well behind a good line. The other SS played injured behind a bad O-Line and thus didn't perform. So if he's healthy and the line is improved/healthier over last year, then Slaton's numbers should be more akin to what he did in 2008? That being said, if he can't hold onto the ball then he rides the pine and this discussion is over...

 

[Banger]

I want to respond to the comment about people having short memories, in the context of Slaton.

I get a feeling that a lot of people look back at Slaton's 2008 season and are giving too much credit to his skills as a running back, and not giving enough to how well the offensive line ended up playing that season. Something the O-line didn't repeat in 2009 when they lost both guards early in the year.

Slaton did well getting around the edge and on passes where he had some room to work. But also amongst my lasting memories from 2008 were that Slaton often had big holes on his big gains... that he had a lot of runs that a RB with better speed would have taken to the house when Slaton got caught from behind or by someone taking an angle on him... and that he did poor on the goal line.

To see if those recollections were apt I went back and looked at some posts of mine from the end of 2008 and preseason 2009. Posts like this one from December of 2008:

Slaton is going to end up with Twice as many rushing yards as Bush had in his first two seasons. Just as many touchdowns... Granted less Recieving yards, but the seasons not over and I don't pay my RB to receive.

Slaton has proved more, in less time. Easy choice.

Don't get me wrong, as a Texans fan I love having Slaton and I think he's a pretty good RB.But I also think he gets too much credit and the offensive line is not getting enough credit. They've been opening some great holes for him to run through, and quite a few of his monster runs have come from him being virtually untouched by the time he hits the second level. And that of course is when he's able to do some real damage with his speed.

Not knocking Slaton, but I think he's probably got a better situation to be in as far as the run blocking right now. Earlier in the year and in preseason, when the O-line hadn't gelled and adjusted to Alex Gibb's scheme as well, I didn't think Slaton looked nearly as good. He's improved at the same time the line has.

So I'd say, yes, people sometimes have short memories and might be forgetting what Slaton did in 2008. But I also think in regards to Slaton's 2008 that people tend to give him a little too much credit. That they either didn't see his games or forgot just how much the offensive line contributed to how well he did. Is he a pretty good RB? Yes. Is he one of those talents who will get his even behind a poor line? I don't think he is. I don't think Foster is either... at least so far he hasn't shown any reason to think that. But I don't think it's necessarily a given that Slaton is the better RB of the two, or better than Tate, just because of what he and his O-line accomplished in 2008.

Wouldn't that be an argument in favor of those that think the real Steve Slaton was what we saw in 2008 and not in 2009? The real Steve Slaton had was uninjured and played well behind a good line. The other SS played injured behind a bad O-Line and thus didn't perform. So if he's healthy and the line is improved/healthier over last year, then Slaton's numbers should be more akin to what he did in 2008? That being said, if he can't hold onto the ball then he rides the pine and this discussion is over...

he was also the beneficiary of there being no other back on the roster. When A. Green came back they often went to him even though he was terrible and injured and then last year they were trying to give the ball to any stiff they could, C. Brown, Moats, etc. guys that I don't even know if they are in the NFL this year. I'm not saying Foster is T. Davis but he has been running with the 1st team all off-season and from all accounts has outplayed him considerably in TC.

 

[Shutout]

I have both in different leagues so I'm not wanting to favor one more than the other but it should be pretty clear that we shouldn't be wanting to make the news instead of just reporting it.

Anyone with an open mind and who has been following the Texans the past few years know there are TONS of reasons and issues surrounding the success/failures of the many backs they have used. hey also know that Kubiak has openly stated numerous times that they are looking for a guy that can do all the things they need. As much as we like to say Shanahan was tricky with RBs (and he was for a while), we have to remember...when he had a legit back who was healthy, he rode that horse till it dropped (Davis, Anderson, Portis).

Now they have Foster that has done nothing but show up and get the job done. People need to open their mind and realize that sometimes guys like Ryan Grant, Pierre thomas, Terrell Davis, Samkon Gado (for a while), Domonick Davis, etc DO come out of nowhere and just produce. Forget that the Texans drafted a RB in the 2nd. What else were they to do when they were unsure of Slaton's health status? That was an insurance pick. If it were a "This is our new man" pick, they wouldn't have traded down in the 2nd...they would have traded UP in the 1st.

I think both backs can have their moments this year on this team but it should be as clear as the nose on people's faces that Foster is legit and he has the most important thing going for him...opportunity.

 

[GregR_2]

I want to respond to the comment about people having short memories, in the context of Slaton.

I get a feeling that a lot of people look back at Slaton's 2008 season and are giving too much credit to his skills as a running back, and not giving enough to how well the offensive line ended up playing that season. Something the O-line didn't repeat in 2009 when they lost both guards early in the year.

Slaton did well getting around the edge and on passes where he had some room to work. But also amongst my lasting memories from 2008 were that Slaton often had big holes on his big gains... that he had a lot of runs that a RB with better speed would have taken to the house when Slaton got caught from behind or by someone taking an angle on him... and that he did poor on the goal line.

To see if those recollections were apt I went back and looked at some posts of mine from the end of 2008 and preseason 2009. Posts like this one from December of 2008:

Slaton is going to end up with Twice as many rushing yards as Bush had in his first two seasons. Just as many touchdowns... Granted less Recieving yards, but the seasons not over and I don't pay my RB to receive.

Slaton has proved more, in less time. Easy choice.

Don't get me wrong, as a Texans fan I love having Slaton and I think he's a pretty good RB.But I also think he gets too much credit and the offensive line is not getting enough credit. They've been opening some great holes for him to run through, and quite a few of his monster runs have come from him being virtually untouched by the time he hits the second level. And that of course is when he's able to do some real damage with his speed.

Not knocking Slaton, but I think he's probably got a better situation to be in as far as the run blocking right now. Earlier in the year and in preseason, when the O-line hadn't gelled and adjusted to Alex Gibb's scheme as well, I didn't think Slaton looked nearly as good. He's improved at the same time the line has.

So I'd say, yes, people sometimes have short memories and might be forgetting what Slaton did in 2008. But I also think in regards to Slaton's 2008 that people tend to give him a little too much credit. That they either didn't see his games or forgot just how much the offensive line contributed to how well he did. Is he a pretty good RB? Yes. Is he one of those talents who will get his even behind a poor line? I don't think he is. I don't think Foster is either... at least so far he hasn't shown any reason to think that. But I don't think it's necessarily a given that Slaton is the better RB of the two, or better than Tate, just because of what he and his O-line accomplished in 2008.

Wouldn't that be an argument in favor of those that think the real Steve Slaton was what we saw in 2008 and not in 2009? The real Steve Slaton had was uninjured and played well behind a good line. The other SS played injured behind a bad O-Line and thus didn't perform. So if he's healthy and the line is improved/healthier over last year, then Slaton's numbers should be more akin to what he did in 2008? That being said, if he can't hold onto the ball then he rides the pine and this discussion is over...

I don't think the "real" any RB is when he's playing behind a very good line... it's when he is playing behind an average line. If so, then no, the "real" Slaton is probably a little worse than we saw in 2008, and better than in 2009.

I don't know that I'd expect the Texans O-line to be as good in 2010 at run blocking as they were in 2008. They have some different linemen and don't have Gibbs coaching them. I'd hope for improvement at least to average again, but I don't know that they won't need time to gel before getting there.

 

[GregR_2]

SportsRadio 610 just replayed an interview with Kubiak from earlier today apparently

Missed his comments on Foster.

Said he thought Slaton looked good on his drive until he put it on the ground.

Said that Chris Henry looked good on special teams, didn't do as well carrying the ball, but did well in pass protection.

Said Jeremiah Johnson ran the ball well but he has to prove he can contribute on special teams and in pass protection.

When asked about bringing in a veteran RB, he rambled for awhile and in the end you couldn't draw any conclusions on whether they'll try to get a veteran RB or not.

 

[DansRams]

Not when you put the words CJ and Slaton in the same sentence.

I thought the J Charles comparison was bad, but CJ takes the cake

This has got to be schtick, right? You two can not both be this dense. I'm trying to figure out how a debate over the injury, turns into a camparison of talent? Where did I state they were equal in talent? Or even imply such a thing? I do give points for effort. You nearly convinced me that Slaton can't be productive after his injury due to the fact that his name is not Chris Johnson.

Dude, you use CJ as an example of why Slaton can come back from injury when the debate really only has to do with how Foster will do in the same offence as Slaton. You can't compare Cj post injury to Slaton. I understand the similar injury, but I also understand the major difference in talent. Your Charles/Jones response was used to try to explain the role Slaton could play versus Foster. I'm pretty sure Charles has more ability to take on more than a 3rd down role than Slaton. So in the end, YOUR arguements are weak....therefore the responses.Bottom line....my agruement has been that Foster will be the main RB for Houston this year and very possibly an RB2/high end RB3...Slaton is no more than a handcuff/bye week filler. If you have FACTS to debate this then fine, let's debate, but "Charles situation" and "CJ's injury/recovery" as your facts, that somehow support that Slaton is the guy and we are all overrating Foster is simply not worth a response...additionally please try to refrain from the personal insults...they don't help you look less like an idiot.

 

[Wyld Stallyns]

Something that I'm surprised that I haven't seen mentioned in here yet is that Slaton was somewhere around 195-199lbs when he entered the league. He had a 4.45 time in the 40 and his primary strength was his speed/burst/quickness.

After his great rookie season, he bulked up to about 215lbs before the 2009 season. That's around 15-20lbs MORE than when he was drafted - Which is a lot on a guy who was small to begin with.

Now, I didn't get much of a chance to watch him play in 2008 so I admittedly don't have much of a reference point and will defer to anyone who did watch him in both seasons - BUT, I think I remember reading that he didn't look quite as quick last year as he did in '08. That he'd lost a little bit of his burst and speed.

I just thought this was worth bringing up with all of the talk in here of Slaton's great rookie season and how he shouldn't be written off so quickly because he's still the same player, etc... I mean, he's not 'really' the same player that he was in 2008. Fumbling and neck injuries aside, he bulked up between seasons.

 

[WVU Alum]

Dude, you use CJ as an example of why Slaton can come back from injury when the debate really only has to do with how Foster will do in the same offence as Slaton. You can't compare Cj post injury to Slaton. I understand the similar injury, but I also understand the major difference in talent. Your Charles/Jones response was used to try to explain the role Slaton could play versus Foster. I'm pretty sure Charles has more ability to take on more than a 3rd down role than Slaton. So in the end, YOUR arguements are weak....therefore the responses.

Bottom line....my agruement has been that Foster will be the main RB for Houston this year and very possibly an RB2/high end RB3...Slaton is no more than a handcuff/bye week filler. If you have FACTS to debate this then fine, let's debate, but "Charles situation" and "CJ's injury/recovery" as your facts, that somehow support that Slaton is the guy and we are all overrating Foster is simply not worth a response...additionally please try to refrain from the personal insults...they don't help you look less like an idiot.

Ok, I'm leaning towards dense now. Obviously you have a few reading comprehension issues, so let me break it down a bit for you. Lets remove the "Charles situation" from the debate, as I never mentioned him. Now on to Slaton. I was discussing the ability of a person to return after a similar injury which is easy to see when in context of the portion of the original quoted post that I bolded:

If the injury was bad enough to cause his terrible play last year, wouldn't you then be worried about Slaton's ability to be healthy enough to be a primary RB in the NFL?

Chris Johnson seems to be doing OK.

Now I left it bolded, but italicized the relevant question, which I then answered. Now, let us review the last sentence in your very confused post #'12166683'. Perhaps if you read the entirety of the posts in the thread that you decide to critique, and could actually make an argument (let's even assume your response fits what was posted) someone would take you seriously. If, however, you should state:

If you have FACTS to debate this then fine, let's debate, but "Charles situation" and "CJ's injury/recovery" as your facts, that somehow support that Slaton is the guy and we are all overrating Foster is simply not worth a response

...and then fail to give any facts and instead add opinion, such as, " I'm pretty sure Charles has more ability to take on more than a 3rd down role than Slaton" and "The nerve injury caused fumbles excuse is pretty funny" you lose a little credibility. The only fact you posted was that he did indeed have a nerve injury last year, and that he had 3.3 ypc. That is your basis for the entire tirade... oh, I was forgetting you posting his 2 ypc and a fumble outing in the first preseason game. Yep, that must seal the deal.And in the end, I was commenting on the fact that someone else in the NFL had a similar injury and good recovery. All the rest is adding a hell of a lot of meaning and context into one sentence.

 

[DansRams]

Dude, you use CJ as an example of why Slaton can come back from injury when the debate really only has to do with how Foster will do in the same offence as Slaton. You can't compare Cj post injury to Slaton. I understand the similar injury, but I also understand the major difference in talent. Your Charles/Jones response was used to try to explain the role Slaton could play versus Foster. I'm pretty sure Charles has more ability to take on more than a 3rd down role than Slaton. So in the end, YOUR arguements are weak....therefore the responses.

Bottom line....my agruement has been that Foster will be the main RB for Houston this year and very possibly an RB2/high end RB3...Slaton is no more than a handcuff/bye week filler. If you have FACTS to debate this then fine, let's debate, but "Charles situation" and "CJ's injury/recovery" as your facts, that somehow support that Slaton is the guy and we are all overrating Foster is simply not worth a response...additionally please try to refrain from the personal insults...they don't help you look less like an idiot.

Ok, I'm leaning towards dense now. Obviously you have a few reading comprehension issues, so let me break it down a bit for you. Lets remove the "Charles situation" from the debate, as I never mentioned him. Now on to Slaton. I was discussing the ability of a person to return after a similar injury which is easy to see when in context of the portion of the original quoted post that I bolded:

If the injury was bad enough to cause his terrible play last year, wouldn't you then be worried about Slaton's ability to be healthy enough to be a primary RB in the NFL?

Chris Johnson seems to be doing OK.

Now I left it bolded, but italicized the relevant question, which I then answered. Now, let us review the last sentence in your very confused post #'12166683'. Perhaps if you read the entirety of the posts in the thread that you decide to critique, and could actually make an argument (let's even assume your response fits what was posted) someone would take you seriously. If, however, you should state:

If you have FACTS to debate this then fine, let's debate, but "Charles situation" and "CJ's injury/recovery" as your facts, that somehow support that Slaton is the guy and we are all overrating Foster is simply not worth a response

...and then fail to give any facts and instead add opinion, such as, " I'm pretty sure Charles has more ability to take on more than a 3rd down role than Slaton" and "The nerve injury caused fumbles excuse is pretty funny" you lose a little credibility. The only fact you posted was that he did indeed have a nerve injury last year, and that he had 3.3 ypc. That is your basis for the entire tirade... oh, I was forgetting you posting his 2 ypc and a fumble outing in the first preseason game. Yep, that must seal the deal.

And you continue to avoid using facts to support you argument...You are clearly the one that is dense. If you take into contwxt the ENTIRE thread instead of one worthless post you will see that using CJ as an example doesn't provide anything that shows Slaton will comeback and be good enough to take enough carries away from Foster, that Foster will not be a valuable fantasy RB. That is the point...Cj comimg back from a similar injury means nothing....I never said that Slaton can't come back....I just don't think and it seems his coaches agree that he is anything more than a 3rd down back. That obviously puts Foster in a good situation.

If you ARE as smart as you like to pretend...please stop with your playing word games with my posts and actualy state your position on Slaton/Foster...How will they split time? How will they do with their opportunities? What information supports your argument? Let's see how smart the "smart guy" actually is.

 

[DansRams]

And you continue to avoid using facts to support you argument...You are clearly the one that is dense. If you take into contwxt the ENTIRE thread instead of one worthless post you will see that using CJ as an example doesn't provide anything that shows Slaton will comeback and be good enough to take enough carries away from Foster, that Foster will not be a valuable fantasy RB. That is the point...Cj comimg back from a similar injury means nothing....I never said that Slaton can't come back....I just don't think and it seems his coaches agree that he is anything more than a 3rd down back. That obviously puts Foster in a good situation.

If you ARE as smart as you like to pretend...please stop with your playing word games with my posts and actualy state your position on Slaton/Foster...How will they split time? How will they do with their opportunities? What information supports your argument? Let's see how smart the "smart guy" actually is.

I pass this challenge to Fanatic and sgtrobo as well...leave all the responding to others alone for a post and just try puting your argument and supporting facts in a post for once.

 

[sgtrobo]

And you continue to avoid using facts to support you argument...You are clearly the one that is dense. If you take into contwxt the ENTIRE thread instead of one worthless post you will see that using CJ as an example doesn't provide anything that shows Slaton will comeback and be good enough to take enough carries away from Foster, that Foster will not be a valuable fantasy RB. That is the point...Cj comimg back from a similar injury means nothing....I never said that Slaton can't come back....I just don't think and it seems his coaches agree that he is anything more than a 3rd down back. That obviously puts Foster in a good situation.If you ARE as smart as you like to pretend...please stop with your playing word games with my posts and actualy state your position on Slaton/Foster...How will they split time? How will they do with their opportunities? What information supports your argument? Let's see how smart the "smart guy" actually is. I pass this challenge to Fanatic and sgtrobo as well...leave all the responding to others alone for a post and just try puting your argument and supporting facts in a post for once.

I thought I didSlaton looked excellent for an entire season (2008) and then looked like crap in 2009. He was injured in 2009, perhaps that is why he looked like crap.Foster looked excellent for 2 games at the end of 2009, one of which was against a team that already had a playoff spot locked up. he looks like a solid back, but I've been watching football for entirely too long to think that's all it takes.Maybe Foster is the real deal. Maybe Slaton will return to 2008 form. To dismiss either possibility is just shortsighted.

 

[WVU Alum]

And you continue to avoid using facts to support you arguement...You are clearly the one that is dense. If you take into contwxt the ENTIRE thread instead of one worthless post you will see that using CJ as an example doesn't provide anything that shows Slaton will comeback and be good enough to take enough carries away from Foster, that Foster will not be a valuable fantasy RB. That is the point...Cj comimg back from a similar injury means nothing....I never said that Slaton can't come back....I just don't think and it seems his coaches agree that he is anything more than a 3rd down back. That obviously puts Foster in a good situation.

If you ARE as smart as you like to pretend...please stop with your playing word games with my posts and actualy state your position on Slaton/Foster...How will they split time? How will they do with their opportunities? What information supports your arguement? Let's see how smart the "smart guy" actually is.

Ok, let's play your game. Slaton has 4.4 speed and is back in a 195-200 lb body. He catches the ball well and can make people miss. He runs well and breaks tackles if the initial contact comes from a corner or safety. If it comes from a DL or LB he is likely to go down. He has good, not elite, vision. he is a one-cut back in a one-cut system. This comes from watching him in college and 2008. I discount much of 2009 because of injury. There are stats that indicate he had a fumbling issue one year in college. He had nerve damage in his wrist and subsequently had an operation. 2008 would indicate it was effective.I know nothing about Foster. I saw him play in two games. He got pulled from one for fumbling. There are stats available of his fumbling issues in college.

As to the neck injury. CJ had a similar injury and recovered fine. Yes, different people heal differently. talent has nothing to do with how well you heal. If it did Bo Jackson would have been indestructible.

I attempted to look up the total number of starting RBs since Kubiak got into town. Could not find it, though my Google-fu sucks. Off the top of my head we have Wali Lundy, Ron Dayne, Ahman Green, Chris Brown, Chris Taylor, Steve Slaton, Ryan Moats, Arian Foster, maybe Dominic Davis? None, with the exception of Slaton, has carried the load for more than a handful of games. Every quote I can find of Kubiak's says that one of these guys is the starter and he looks good, he should help the team, he has proven himself, etc. Most lost the starting job due to injury. Few to ineffective play. Slaton and Foster appear to be the only two. Hell though 14 games in 2007, Texans were last in rushing so you would assume more guys got yanked and maybe they did. Not sure, couldn't find it. We do know that Kubiak will pull these two for performance issues.

As far as I can tell, calling either of these guys the unquestioned starter beyond the next preseason game is foolish. Both have been pulled for fumbling. Both have shown a propensity for fumbling. That is why I limited my comment to the injury. That was the only argument I cared about. Good enough?

Now, at no point was I making an argument to anything other than the injury portion of the debate. You are hell-bent on proving that he sucks as a starter. With two years of data show why he isn't. Is he the 2008 Slaton or the 2009 Slaton? Was 2009 because of the injury or O-line, or talent? what I get from your arguments is it is because of a lack of talent. Then explain 2008. Until we see him this year, no one can state any "facts" that support their argument one way or the other without discounting the performance in the other year. So all this is, in the end, is an argument of opinion. So your calls for "facts" looks pretentious and ignorant. Feel free to continue this debate and maybe we will both end up in the Sig-worthy post in the FFA.

FYI, none of my previous arguments required any more facts than your posts, which was the only real thing I was commenting on. <--- this is like the Cliffsnotes version of the above post.

 

[DansRams]

And you continue to avoid using facts to support you argument...You are clearly the one that is dense. If you take into contwxt the ENTIRE thread instead of one worthless post you will see that using CJ as an example doesn't provide anything that shows Slaton will comeback and be good enough to take enough carries away from Foster, that Foster will not be a valuable fantasy RB. That is the point...Cj comimg back from a similar injury means nothing....I never said that Slaton can't come back....I just don't think and it seems his coaches agree that he is anything more than a 3rd down back. That obviously puts Foster in a good situation.If you ARE as smart as you like to pretend...please stop with your playing word games with my posts and actualy state your position on Slaton/Foster...How will they split time? How will they do with their opportunities? What information supports your argument? Let's see how smart the "smart guy" actually is. I pass this challenge to Fanatic and sgtrobo as well...leave all the responding to others alone for a post and just try puting your argument and supporting facts in a post for once.

I thought I didSlaton looked excellent for an entire season (2008) and then looked like crap in 2009. He was injured in 2009, perhaps that is why he looked like crap.Foster looked excellent for 2 games at the end of 2009, one of which was against a team that already had a playoff spot locked up. he looks like a solid back, but I've been watching football for entirely too long to think that's all it takes.Maybe Foster is the real deal. Maybe Slaton will return to 2008 form. To dismiss either possibility is just shortsighted.

I agree it would be shortsided....but you have to choose...only one will win. I say Foster. What is your choice?...

 

[shader]

A few things:

1. Please leave Chris Henry out of this. He's a terrible running back. I'm sure he looked good at camp. He usually does. He has jaw-dropping speed and strength. But perhaps the worst vision in NFL history.

2. Steve Slaton averaged 4.8 ypc in 2008. He was injured in 2009. As over-rated as he may have been going into last year, he's almost just as underrated going into this season.

3. Arian Foster had a few nice games but is essentially unproven.

What's the point? Anyone claiming that Slaton is only going to get 10 carries a game is deluding themselves.

If Slaton is healthy, and if he can return to 2008 form, than he has the seniority and has accomplished more, and could easily earn the majority of the carries.

That being said, if Slaton's healthy continues to be a problem and if he continues to play poorly, I'm sure Foster will get the majority.

The decision hasn't been made yet and is up to Slaton, imo.

 

[sgtrobo]

I agree it would be shortsided....but you have to choose...only one will win. I say Foster. What is your choice?...

It's not a "choose one" in my eyesI either get both or I don't bother. I don't trust either (nor do I trust Kubiak) enough to grab just one. I'd be VERY willing to bet, however, that BOTH of them will have games which will make owners of either say "nyah nyah, I told you so" and I'll be willing to bet that BOTH of them will have games that will drive their respective owners to substance abuse.I hate Shanahan backfields.

 

[Banger]

A few things:1. Please leave Chris Henry out of this. He's a terrible running back. I'm sure he looked good at camp. He usually does. He has jaw-dropping speed and strength. But perhaps the worst vision in NFL history. 2. Steve Slaton averaged 4.8 ypc in 2008. He was injured in 2009. As over-rated as he may have been going into last year, he's almost just as underrated going into this season. 3. Arian Foster had a few nice games but is essentially unproven.What's the point? Anyone claiming that Slaton is only going to get 10 carries a game is deluding themselves.If Slaton is healthy, and if he can return to 2008 form, than he has the seniority and has accomplished more, and could easily earn the majority of the carries.That being said, if Slaton's healthy continues to be a problem and if he continues to play poorly, I'm sure Foster will get the majority.The decision hasn't been made yet and is up to Slaton, imo.

Actually it's up to Foster. He's running with 1's and has been since last year so the ball is in his hands. Sometimes guys are put in the perfect situation and do great things that they never do again and I think that's the case with Slaton. It's fine to take a shot at Slaton but I think L. Washington has as good a chance to contribute as Slaton.

 

[Frills]

Foster will be able to keep Slaton on the pine until he fumbles...then it is no holds barred.

Foster is a better RB in most aspects of the game, although Slaton has slightly better hands.

Kubes loves his big bruising back, which is why I wouldn't be surprised to see them bring in a vet back who can handle the short distance situations. Of course they just might design a new play where Leach actually gets to carry the ball.

Bottom line is whoever fumbles last is the one who plays

 

[pantherclub]

Foster will be able to keep Slaton on the pine until he fumbles...then it is no holds barred.



Foster is a better RB in most aspects of the game, although Slaton has slightly better hands.

Kubes loves his big bruising back, which is why I wouldn't be surprised to see them bring in a vet back who can handle the short distance situations. Of course they just might design a new play where Leach actually gets to carry the ball.

Bottom line is whoever fumbles last is the one who plays

How can you possibly say this after 2 late season games? Are you forgetting Slatons incredible rookie season?

 

[humpback]

Foster will be able to keep Slaton on the pine until he fumbles...then it is no holds barred.



Foster is a better RB in most aspects of the game, although Slaton has slightly better hands.

Kubes loves his big bruising back, which is why I wouldn't be surprised to see them bring in a vet back who can handle the short distance situations. Of course they just might design a new play where Leach actually gets to carry the ball.

Bottom line is whoever fumbles last is the one who plays

How can you possibly say this after 2 late season games? Are you forgetting Slatons incredible rookie season?

Why haven't the coaches named Slaton the starter? They saw every one of the snaps from his "incredible rookie season", and for some reason, that's not enough for them to give him the job.

 

[Tango]

Kubes loves his big bruising back, which is why I wouldn't be surprised to see them bring in a vet back who can handle the short distance situations. Of course they just might design a new play where Leach actually gets to carry the ball.

First, if GK learned anything...they should be using Andre Johnson more around the goalline. He was actually pulled in the jumo through the first half of last year. GK finally figured out he could be a weapon there and he promptly scored on a 1 yarder. I'd expect more of that.Regarding free agents...it's a fairly weak class out there. Only Kolby Smith remains as a notable after the Westbrook and Betts signings. Of course Chris Brown is available (rolleyes). They'd have to wait until the roster cut-downs and see who is out there. And that won't be until we are all staring at week 1. Foster is big enough to be the f/t goalline guy. I doubt they look for a specialist there.

 

[sgtrobo]

i don't think it's a FA thing at all

I just think that it's quite premature to judge a guy like Arian Foster after 2 regular season games while completely ignoring an entire season's worth of work for Slaton. I mean, we're not even talking about a Ryan Grant 9-game finish like in 2007 or whatever it was, we're talking 2 games, one of which was against a team that had already clinched a playoff birth. Hell, 2 of his 3 TDs during 2009 came in the last 5 minutes of the season, AFTER it was already guaranteed that New England was in and had field position secured, AFTER it was already guaranteed that Houston wasn't going anywhere.

Lest anybody forget, the immortal Samkon Gado put up games with 103, 111, and 171 yards and had 6 TDs in about 5 games' worth of work a few seasons back. Remember Earnest Graham? 7 of his last 9 games in 2007 were well over 100 YFS and the few that weren't were damn close (84 and 74 yards, checking up)

All I'm saying is that for every Priest Holmes and Willie Parker, there are hundreds of Samkon Gado's. UDFAs that everyone roots for, who come out of nowhere to produce and dammit, they pass the eyeball test! They look good, they work hard, you are sure they're going to make it, and then they disappear about as quickly as they show up.

There's a reason they were UDFAs in the first place.....USUALLY.

as I stated earlier, I hate Shanahan backfields and avoid them like the plague. I can barely bring myself to draft obviously elite talent like DWill or Stewie because their situation is so hit or miss. I'd be VERY wary of drafting questionable talents like Slaton or Foster unless I get a darn good deal on them (and preferably could get them both)

 

[humpback]

i don't think it's a FA thing at allI just think that it's quite premature to judge a guy like Arian Foster after 2 regular season games while completely ignoring an entire season's worth of work for Slaton. I mean, we're not even talking about a Ryan Grant 9-game finish like in 2007 or whatever it was, we're talking 2 games, one of which was against a team that had already clinched a playoff birth. Hell, 2 of his 3 TDs during 2009 came in the last 5 minutes of the season, AFTER it was already guaranteed that New England was in and had field position secured, AFTER it was already guaranteed that Houston wasn't going anywhere.Lest anybody forget, the immortal Samkon Gado put up games with 103, 111, and 171 yards and had 6 TDs in about 5 games' worth of work a few seasons back. Remember Earnest Graham? 7 of his last 9 games in 2007 were well over 100 YFS and the few that weren't were damn close (84 and 74 yards, checking up)All I'm saying is that for every Priest Holmes and Willie Parker, there are hundreds of Samkon Gado's. UDFAs that everyone roots for, who come out of nowhere to produce and dammit, they pass the eyeball test! They look good, they work hard, you are sure they're going to make it, and then they disappear about as quickly as they show up.There's a reason they were UDFAs in the first place.....USUALLY. as I stated earlier, I hate Shanahan backfields and avoid them like the plague. I can barely bring myself to draft obviously elite talent like DWill or Stewie because their situation is so hit or miss. I'd be VERY wary of drafting questionable talents like Slaton or Foster unless I get a darn good deal on them (and preferably could get them both)

Haven't we been through this already? No one is annointing Foster a superstar (at least they shouldn't be), and I don't think anyone is completely ignoring Slaton's rookie season. All I know is, the coaches are favoring Foster over Slaton right now for some reason. If they like Foster better, then I'm probably going to go along with their judgement. Sure, Foster could be a bust, and/or Slaton could be for real. But for whatever reason, the Texans don't think so right now. I'm not drafting Foster as my #1 RB, but I'm certainly taking him ahead of Slaton. That's all I think most people are trying to say.

 

[sgtrobo]

I'm not drafting Foster as my #1 RB, but I'm certainly taking him ahead of Slaton. That's all I think most people are trying to say.

lots of folks were talking about him being a 4th rounder. That's when I stuck my nose in this thread. 7th/8th round? mebbeAhead of Slaton? mebbe4th round? Are you KIDDING me???

 

[Don't Noonan]

Let me start by saying I am an Oregon homer who has watched every Oregon game the past ten years. Jeremiah Johnson split carries with Jonathan Stewart at Oregon and they were interchangable. I would not be surprised to see JJ get heavily involved in Houston's offense this year. He missed last year due to a shoulder injury and he looked very good in the 1st preseason game. Salton came from nowhere a couple of years ago so I watch out for Johnson. The other thing JJ has going for him is that Houston has a run zone blocking scheme, the same system that works so well at Oregon. I will be watching this closely.