Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
"Special Talent" in Foster?
I must have missed that.
Foster has always been known for his special skills and talent. Skill has never been his problem it has been injury."Special Talent" in Foster?
I fail to see his skill as anything above an average starting RB. 4.1 YPC...average.Foster has been average when he is healthy. There are 20 or so RBs in the NFL that are just as skilled as Foster....I wouldn't call that "special talent".Foster has always been known for his special skills and talent. Skill has never been his problem it has been injury."Special Talent" in Foster?
this question popped up on SEA/CAR thread... when goings took over for about a six game stretch at the end of 2004 in their furious but aborted playoff push, he was a real workhorse...if they need him to (game is close or they are in the lead), he should be up for 30+ carries... he must have relatively fresh legs with davis & foster getting bulk of the work this season.
No. Deshaun Foster is the Michael Vick of runningbacks. Everyone talks about how special he is, but the on-field results very rarely warrent the fuss. In fact, Foster is easily the most overrated RB in the NFL.Foster has three 100 yard rushing games this season. Two came against the Falcons. One came against a NYG team without any linebackers (Foster averaged 5.5 per carry that game, and Goings averaged 5.25). Last week, both backs averaged 3.4 yards per carry. In fact, Deshaun Foster has never shown me that he's any better of a runningback than Nick Goings. Given the choice, I'd take Goings, since he's going to more consistantly get yards, while Foster will run for 0, 0, -1, 2, 1, 22, and fool people into thinking that since his average was decent, so was his performance.
I was looking at the stretch when Goings was featured last year to see if there was any indication that could help determine this.Off hand if Goings ran for less than 100 yards the Panthers lost (@ATL and vs NO)
The drop-off is worse from Goings to Robertson than it was from Foster to Goings. Goings is serviceable. He is not as good at making moves as Foster, but he makes up for some of that with his excellent vision. He sees the hole and gets to it in a hurry. The problem will be when Goings has to be spelled. It will be either Robertson, who does well against 3rd stringers, or He Hate Me might get involved. At least Roberston has been getting some touches on kick-off returns this year. agreed. carolina's running game is similar to the Broncos IMO in that it is not so much the running back as it is the scheme and system. put just about anyone back and they'll do pretty well. i don't expect much dropoff whatsoever from foster to goings.
Look for Hoover to get a couple extra carries and lotsa quick hitters to Smith like we saw in the Chicago game. Those are just like running plays except to a WR.
I agree that Carolina's running game is consistant. Consistantly bad.To wit: Denver has the second-highest ypc in the NFL (highest if you discount Michael Vick). Carolina has the FOURTH LOWEST. All Carolina RBs have been consistantly awful this season, but their total numbers are decent because Carolina runs so OFTEN.
Look for Hoover to get a couple extra carries and lotsa quick hitters to Smith like we saw in the Chicago game. Those are just like running plays except to a WR.
In the 2 previous games before Foster got hurt and Carolina needed wins Foster ran for 316 yards and a TD.Now I am not saying Foster is the second coming of God, but the guy has skill and Carolina will miss that skill this weekend.
Goings is more reliable when it comes to generating positive yards - the guy isn't spectacular (3.7 YPC career average), but he is decisive and takes what a defense will give him. During the final 7 weeks of 2004, he hit 100+ yards rushing 5 out of 7 games, and scored TDs in 4 out of 7 weeks. During his career, he's compiled 380/1406/6 rushing (not including playoffs) and 97/772/2 - during his stint in 2004, the guy hauled in 45/394/1 receiving, ending the season with 1215 all-purpose yards and 7 TDs. He's an accomplished receiver, as the numbers show.
So true...you read my mind.
I think that is absurd. How can a running back who wasn't even the starter until the season was half way over, be considered overrated? Stephen Davis who missed all of summer camp coming back from surgery still held the starting job, even though Foster was healthy since last spring. How is Foster overrated? I would say Willis McGahee is overrated way before I'd chose DeShaun Foster.
the answer is NO, IMO..Goings had 6 consecutive 100 yard games in 2004...he is a very underrated runner, and does things Foster doesn't do well, like run between tackles and not try to bounce everything outside..
That's EXACTLY how he's considered overrated. Not by the coaching staff, but by the casual fans.Everyone keeps making posts about what a "special" talent Foster is, and how he's finally coming into his own, and how Foster makes such a huge difference to his team... when in reality, Foster is such a borderline RB that he couldn't even beat out an old, slow, and not-100% Stephen Davis for the job.I think that is absurd. How can a running back who wasn't even the starter until the season was half way over, be considered overrated? Stephen Davis who missed all of summer camp coming back from surgery still held the starting job, even though Foster was healthy since last spring. How is Foster overrated? I would say Willis McGahee is overrated way before I'd chose DeShaun Foster.
He is overrated in the fantasy football community. But that doesn't mean that he doesn't have any talent. Many Panther fans, including myself, were often scratching our heads at why it took so long for Fox to insert Foster into the starting role this year. While he hasn't tore it up in every game, he did improve the Carolina rushing attack after finally taking over for Stephen Davis. The jury is still out as to whether he can put together a whole season, but from my personal viewing of his running I would say that he is somewhere between an average and a good back.
I don't think it's fair to say he isn't a "special" talent. He has shown he is talented on several occasions. Unfortunately for him, he has never been a starter long enough to really show what all he is possibly capable of. I do think he is better than an average back.
What "special talent" has he shown that other RBs don't have?I am sorry, but when I can name at least 20-30 RBs in the NFL who are better, then I fail to see how someone has "special talent".
I've seen him do some special things in games before, and I'm not talking about just this year. He looked really good in the Super Bowl, and carried Eagle defenders on his back to score in the NFC Championship. He also had an impressive game against the Colts in 2003. These are just a few examples right off my head. If you think he is a dud then that is your opinion, but I'm of the opinion that the kid does have some good talent in him. SSOG is the one who used the word "special", I was only quoting him and wouldn't necessarily use the word "special", but I do think Foster is talented.
What's so "special" about a 4.1 career ypc?
I only used "special" because that's the word I see used to describe Deshaun Foster most frequently. I could run a search to find all the times in the past week that Foster has been called a "special" talent, if you like.Obviously Foster is talented to even be playing in the NFL. That said, I'd call him one of the least talented backs in the league. In my not-so-humble opinion, Deshaun Foster is Quentin Griffin version 2.0.
the RBs that finished between 5-7 in rushing yards this season... in order - edgerrin james, LT & rudi johnson... all have career averages of 4.2-4.3... rushing average must be a pretty blunt instrument by which to evaluate RBs if those caliber RBs are going to be falling by the same criteria.where are all these people that say foster is a superstar? i've seen a few on this thread... i see more that view him as average to above average... maybe it is because you are so adamant in your opinion that foster is below average the few times it comes up it stands out for you... maybe a few people have started threads (i don't count this one as i was pretty neutral & stated that goings is a capable & effective replacement)... that doesn't mean thousands of people see him as the second coming of eric dickerson.
I never claimed that people were calling him the second coming of Eric Dickerson. I believe they were simply calling him a good runningback. I disagree. I don't think he's one of the top-30 RBs in the entire NFL.And the fact that he has never done much is the only way he CAN be overrated. The hype with Foster ("special talent") has never matched up with the production.
Wouldn't that make Steven Davis and Nick Goings way below average?That's EXACTLY how he's considered overrated. Not by the coaching staff, but by the casual fans.Everyone keeps making posts about what a "special" talent Foster is, and how he's finally coming into his own, and how Foster makes such a huge difference to his team... when in reality, Foster is such a borderline RB that he couldn't even beat out an old, slow, and not-100% Stephen Davis for the job.I think that is absurd. How can a running back who wasn't even the starter until the season was half way over, be considered overrated? Stephen Davis who missed all of summer camp coming back from surgery still held the starting job, even though Foster was healthy since last spring. How is Foster overrated? I would say Willis McGahee is overrated way before I'd chose DeShaun Foster.
Deshaun Foster isn't a "special" talent. He isn't the best backup RB in the league. He's a guy that couldn't crack the starting lineup of a team averaging the fourth-fewest yards per carry in the entire NFL. He's not a great runningback, he's not a good runningback... he's not even an AVERAGE runningback.
DeShaun Foster 205 879 4.3 70 2 Stephen Davis 180 549 3.1 39 12 Nick Goings 37 133 3.6 17 0No, apparently they don't need our help, they were playing the better RB, S. Davis, when they were both healthy. Go figure.
Just like P. Holmes was better then L. Johnson this year.
Playing a prover veteran who has been solid in the league before does not mean the back up RB is bad. Also see L. Jordan playing behind C. Martin. It is all about opportunity and coaches being loyal and trusting their vets. Carolina started Davis and were mostly just getting by. When they made the switch to Foster the offense looked much better. Again I don't think Foster is a superstar, but the guy has starting RB skill.If the Panthers need someone to break a long run, Foster better fits the bill. But if they're nursing a lead late in the game, Goings is the better option.The question is...will they have that lead to nurse? I think they just might. Seattle didn't impress much last week. Maybe Alexander's return changes that, but he's never been a force in the playoffs.
No one said the backup is bad.Foster just isn't this "special talent" people say he is. In fact, Lofa Tatupu just said in his press conference that going from Foster to Goings is not really a drop off at all. If the drop off from Foster to Goings is neglible, then I find it hard to call Foster a "special talent".Just like P. Holmes was better then L. Johnson this year.
Well according to the Hawks' press conference, Lofa said that Goings is not even a drop off from foster, so they aren't just overlooking him.
Of course Tatupu is going to say that Goings is not a huge drop off from Foster. Do you think it would be smart of him to say "yes I think we are very fortunate to be playing against a much less big play player in Goings which gives us a huge advantage." Tatupu is not dumb, if he makes a comment like that and Goings burns them then how would he look? But, if he makes a statement like he did he is covering his ###.Now Goings is definitely a servicable RB and has proven to be a chain mover, but he does not possess as much big play ability as Foster does. There is a reason Foster was in the line up and that was/is for that special talent of being a big play guy who has great speed and can take it to the house on any given play both catching and recieving the football. Seattle is very fortunate that Foster is not playing. Seattle will be showing 7 man fronts in an effort to slow down S. Smith and Foster would have had much more capability to break big ones in comparison to Goings.No one said the backup is bad.Foster just isn't this "special talent" people say he is. In fact, Lofa Tatupu just said in his press conference that going from Foster to Goings is not really a drop off at all. If the drop off from Foster to Goings is neglible, then I find it hard to call Foster a "special talent".Just like P. Holmes was better then L. Johnson this year.
There are many RBs, both starting and backups, who are better or at the same level as Foster. He is not a "special talent". Foster is about the same level as Pittman IMO.
Foster is big time overrated, no doubt about it. Quit buying into the hype, cause he is surely nothing special.Of course Tatupu is going to say that Goings is not a huge drop off from Foster. Do you think it would be smart of him to say "yes I think we are very fortunate to be playing against a much less big play player in Goings which gives us a huge advantage." Tatupu is not dumb, if he makes a comment like that and Goings burns them then how would he look? But, if he makes a statement like he did he is covering his ###.Now Goings is definitely a servicable RB and has proven to be a chain mover, but he does not possess as much big play ability as Foster does. There is a reason Foster was in the line up and that was/is for that special talent of being a big play guy who has great speed and can take it to the house on any given play both catching and recieving the football. Seattle is very fortunate that Foster is not playing. Seattle will be showing 7 man fronts in an effort to slow down S. Smith and Foster would have had much more capability to break big ones in comparison to Goings.No one said the backup is bad.Foster just isn't this "special talent" people say he is. In fact, Lofa Tatupu just said in his press conference that going from Foster to Goings is not really a drop off at all. If the drop off from Foster to Goings is neglible, then I find it hard to call Foster a "special talent".Just like P. Holmes was better then L. Johnson this year.
There are many RBs, both starting and backups, who are better or at the same level as Foster. He is not a "special talent". Foster is about the same level as Pittman IMO.
Goings went down while the Seahawks were still running on pure adrenalin - he met Tatupu and knocked the MLB back, but was concussed on the play, so we'll never know how much impact he might have had in the second Q and beyond... 5/2/0 was not a great start, but he barely had time to feel out the D before his injury. Anyone who wants to count coup on Going's injury-shortened performance is being uncharitable, IMO.
DeShaun Foster's best season amounted to 205/879/2 rushing and 34/372/1 receiving (during this year) - or 1251 all-purpose yards and 3 TDs.
On balance, I'd rather have Goings' reliable 3-4 yard runs and 8-9 yard receptions than Foster's sometimes-on, sometimes-off production.
Goings provides a solid baseline that forces opposing defenses to respect the run (and dump-off passes) allowing Smith (and company) some latitude in the passing phase. ~3.7 yards rushing per snap (consistently) equals a lot of first downs...
