Dynasty Rankings (15 Viewers)

[Tau837]

FWIW, per PFF in the 2010-2012 seasons:

Lynch - 140 broken or avoided tackles on 697 touches - 1 per 5 touches

Turner - 139 broken or avoided tackles on 782 touches - 1 per 5.6 touches

Peterson - 112 broken or avoided tackles on 678 touches - 1 per 6.1 touches

McCoy - 112 broken or avoided tackles on 758 touches - 1 per 6.8 touches

Mendenhall - 90 broken or avoided tackles on 616 touches - 1 per 6.8 touches

Mathews - 72 broken or avoided tackles on 527 touches - 1 per 7.3 touches

McFadden - 68 broken or avoided tackles on 506 touches - 1 per 7.4 touches

DeAngelo - 49 broken or avoided tackles on 361 touches - 1 per 7.4 touches

MJD - 108 broken or avoided tackles on 819 touches - 1 per 7.6 touches

Gore - 72 broken or avoided tackles on 688 touches - 1 per 9.6 touches

S Jackson - 66 broken or avoided tackles on 778 touches - 1 per 11.8 touches

Rice - 73 broken or avoided tackles on 946 touches - 1 per 13 touches

 

[EBF]

When McFadden was entering the league I said he was overrated and that he would not live up to his billing as the next Peterson. Through five years he has exactly one 1000+ yard rushing season and has been a major disappointment more often than not. I've been wrong about plenty of guys, but my read was dead on here. Sorry if you don't see it that way.

Mendenhall has exactly two 1000 yard rushing seasons. Stewart has exactly one. So... You think McFadden is going to be terrible, he averages 11.08 points per game, and this is proof that you were right. You think Mendenhall is going to be great, he averages 11.22 points per make, and this is proof that you were right. You think that Stewart is going to be a stud, he averages 9.45 points per game, and this is proof that you were right. You think Mendenhall is going to be durable, he plays 53 games in 5 years, and this is proof that you were right. You think McFadden is going to be injury prone, he plays 50 games in 5 years, and this is proof that you were right. No wonder your read is dead on- the data apparently means whatever you want it to mean. When you like a guy who is a good receiver, those receiving numbers are your trump card. When you don't like a guy who is a good receiver, you pretend those receiving yards don't exist. You keep insisting that Mendenhall has had a better career than McFadden, but McFadden has put up 200 more yards in 3 fewer games at a half a yard more per carry for a worse team. Mendenhall's team is likely to let him walk at the end of the year. What are the chances Oakland lets McFadden walk?

Stewart is a great back whose career has been plagued by RBBC. Even so he has more total yards than McFadden. Probably a higher career YPC too. You and I both know that the only reason his per-game numbers don't look good is because he had the misfortune of landing on a team with another elite RB. That isn't something that guys like Mendenhall and McFadden have had to deal with. Put Stewart in Oakland and he would be a perennial top 10 producer. He is a situation-proof talent because he has a complete skill set. As for Mendenhall, I don't think my actual career prediction was that he would be some kind of awesome superstar. In fact, here is what I wrote about him around the time of the 2008 draft.

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=396445&st=0&p=8624056&hl="rookies"&fromsearch=1entry8624056

1. Rashard Mendenhall, RB, PIT

OUTLOOK - When you talk about the synergy of situation and talent, there's no better bet in this RB class than Rashard Mendenhall. He doesn't have the elite combine numbers I look for in a back, but he has good speed and an elite frame. He's a solid first round RB who should eventually step in and rack up several 300+ carry seasons. A lot of people are down on him because he landed on a team with a proven starter. Personally, I think it's a great spot for him. Pittsburgh has a phenomenal track record in the first round. Polamalu, Roethlisberger, Holmes, Hampton, Miller, Simmons, Faneca, Burress. This team drafts winners. The fact that they were willing to place their bets on Mendenhall improves his standing in my mind. More importantly, the presence of Roethlisberger and friends guarantees that Mendenhall will never be the focus of opposing defenses. I've always thought FWP was an overrated talent. Mendenhall should eventually nudge him out of the way and become another Joseph Addai type performer. Yes, you might have to wait a year or two, but if he lives up to his potential then it will be well worth it.

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=387246&st=0&p=8359968&hl="rookies"&fromsearch=1entry8359968

2. Rashard Mendenhall, RB, Illinois

Positives: Mendenhall is built like a rock with a top notch combination of size, speed, and strength. He is solid overall athlete who could start in almost any system. He just looks like an NFL RB. I knew from the first time I saw him play this year that he would be a first round pick. I think he will have excellent durability at the next level, as his frame is ideally proportioned for the position. Very sturdy build.

Negatives: Not as shifty as you look for. More of a no-nonsense North-South runner than a guy who will shake and bake. A little bit stiff in the hips, he doesn't flash the "wiggle" of a guy like Westbrook or Bush. Good at everything, yet elite at nothing.

Overall: I think Mendenhall is a very safe bet to become a decent NFL player. He is just a good, solid RB prospect who should step in and start for a team from day done. If he lands in a good spot on draft day then he will warrant consideration at the 1.01. The gap between him and Stewart is VERY narrow in my mind. I might even prefer Mendenhall with a gun to my head since he seems like the safer pick. At the same time, there's a little bit of Thomas Jones/Julius Jones risk if he lands on a team with a weak supporting cast. He's likely not exceptional enough to transcend a bad situation. IMO, his success will always mirror his supporting cast.

Apart from being wrong about his durability (for now), I'm not really seeing anything off target here. I recognized him for what he is: a solid starting caliber RB who can be a team's automatic #1 back and handle 300 carries. This notion that I somehow think he's up there with the Petersons and Tomlinsons of the world couldn't be more wrong. That was really never my stance. I always thought he was more along the lines of Lynch or Mathews. Good back, but not a once-per-decade guy.

It's dangerous to throw around terms like "mediocre" and "great" because they are relative. I think I did call Mendenhall a great back a few posts ago. That's both right and wrong. He is not great when you compare him to the very best players in the league, but you do not hold down a starting job on a playoff team for four straight years unless you are a damn good football player. From that standpoint, Mendenhall is absolutely a great talent. Any aspiring draft prospect would be very, very lucky to have his talent and career.

As far as all of the efficiency stats go, I'll just fall back on the point I made about players who have the ability to handle a high volume of touches and players who don't. Is McFadden more explosive than Mendenhall? Absolutely, but he is not a true workhorse who can handle 20 carries per game over a full season. Mendenhall has had his fair share of issues with injuries, but even with that being the case he has three seasons in which he's carried the ball 240+ times. He stayed completely healthy in two of those seasons and was injured in week 16 in the other. Meanwhile McFadden has one season of 150+ carries. 2010, when the stars aligned and he managed to stay healthy long enough to get 223 chances. Switch it from carries to touches and the overall picture still looks pretty similar.

In a nutshell, McFadden's problems are that he...

- Has an incomplete skill set that renders him ineffective in some situations and schemes.

- Has a combination of bad frame and bad running style that makes him incapable of enduring under a heavy workload.

You can keep pretending that a guy who was taken in the top 10 of the draft and billed as the next Peterson is a success because he had one good year out of five, but his body of work paints a different picture. His career doesn't even compare to the likes of Tomlinson and Peterson. From his draft class alone, Ray Rice, Matt Forte, and Chris Johnson have unequivocally had better careers. A strong case can be made for Rashard Mendenhall, Jamaal Charles, and Jonathan Stewart as well.

It is actually pretty hilarious that I even have to argue the idea that the guy has been a disappointment when it's so patently obvious.

 

[EBF]

Went back and read some of my stuff leading up to the 2008 draft. Fun times.

Well, it's tough to justify ranking him any higher than 1.04. Those top three guys are pretty good and they're all going to be picked before Rice. Yet Rice has the best running style in this draft, ideal bulk for the position, and apparently an elite set of physical skills. It's quite possible that he'll be the best back in this draft. It wouldn't surprise me at all to see it play out that way. I have 1.02 in one league and 1.03 in two leagues. I'll consider taking Rice that high. Like I said, I look for RBs who meet the following requirements:- Productive when given opportunities in college- Pass the eyeball test- Good workout numbers- Good draft pedigreeRay Rice fits the bill. What this news tells me is that he shouldn't be picked any lower than 1.04 and is quite possibly the top RB prospect available despite his relatively low draft profile. The one sticking point with him is his weight. The first round guys all have him by 10-30 pounds, which is significant. Teams may view Rice as a change of pace guy and that could kill his value. But if he gets a real shot to be a starter, I'll be very surprised if he disappoints.

The eyeball test is the most important factor. I would say Rice and Charles score the highest on that metric. I've liked Rice since the first time I watched him play. He runs low, has fluid hips, adequate burst, and good power. He looks and runs like an NFL RB should. The only issue with him is size. He has good thickness, but he's short. That keeps his weight down to a less than ideal level. It could limit his role in the NFL. He certainly has the talent to be effective though. There's no doubt in my mind about that. Charles is the most dynamic and explosive of the bunch. He makes the most "wow" type plays with his shiftiness and his burst of speed. He has a big upside. My main concern with him is a skinny frame that might not be suited for the rigors of 300 carries. If he was a little bit heavier then he would be a legit top 25 prospect. As it stands now he will probably be selected in the 25-45 range. Forte gets the third best marks on the eyeball test. Go back and do a search and you'll see that I was hyping him before his public profile really blew up, so I'm far from a hater. He has good overall athletic ability and football skills. What I like best about him is his quick stutter step and his shiftiness. He can be effective at the next level. However, his frame is not as good as Rice's. Forte is heavier, but he's built a lot taller with skinny legs that will be injury magnets in the NFL. Also, his overall athleticism is solid but unspectacular. He is like a poor man's ADP. Smith is an odd duck. I watched his whole bowl game this past season and came away pretty unimpressed. At times I'm intrigued by his slashing running style and his gliding stride in the open field. At other times I think he looks awkward running the football. His combine was a notch below the other players on this list. I still think he's an interesting prospect worth a shot in your rookie draft. He has the bulk to be a starter and the more you watch him run, the more you like him. But I'd probably rank him at the bottom of this quartet as of today.

I ultimately moved some of those guys down lower than where I should have after the draft (in some cases, MUCH lower), but clearly had some idea of what I was looking at. This also punches holes in the long-running myth that I always hated Matt Forte. Not the case at all. I just thought he was overvalued after his rookie year. He never struck me as a long term solution, though I was wrong about that.As for McFadden...

McFadden to the Raiders seems like the perfect storm of an overrated talent being sucked into a black hole of an organization. It's almost too perfect to not happen.

This trainwreck would be so perfect that it almost has to happen. Oakland is a rudderless ship right now. If there's a wrong move to be made, they'll probably make it. I don't "hate" McFadden as much as some other posters would have you believe, but I do think he's overrated and I do think there's a very good chance that Oakland will pick him. Toss him into that mix with Jamarcus Bustell and Javon "Microfracture" Walker and you suddenly have a very volatile trio with a high upside and a HUGE downside.

McFadden's biggest supporters compare him to Peterson. McFadden's biggest detractors compare him to Norwood. I think the reality lies somewhere in the middle. He'll be a good player who hits some home runs and makes some highlight reel plays, but people expecting the next Peterson or LT will probably be disappointed IMO.That body type of his is a genuine concern and I'm not sure he's a 300+ carry guy at the next level.

I think you're right about McFadden. He's more of a change of pace back than a workhorse. This is one of the things that's been really puzzling about all of the draft coverage I've been checking out on the internet because people LOVE this guy. The talking heads on ESPN are saying he's the best player in the draft. Guys like Scott Wright (whose archives reveal a very spotty record of evaluating talent) are saying he's the best player in the draft and a rare prospect. Almost every major media source is slobbering over DMC. It just doesn't jive with what I see on the field. McFadden doesn't run strong, he's not built like a RB, and (like you said in the podcast) you don't often see him flash the quick lateral step. Even after a long second look I can't rank him ahead of Stewart and Mendenhall. I think both of those guys more closely resemble NFL starters than McFadden does. IMO Mendenhall has the highest floor in this class and Stewart is the best overall RB talent. McFadden is more of a curiosity. He'll hit some home runs and have his supporters saying "I told you so" every now and then when he busts a long one, but I'll be very surprised if he justifies the hype.

The official EBF company line regarding Darren McFadden:- He's a great athlete who will break some long runs. He may even have multiple 1,000 rushing seasons, but...- He will never be the elite ADP or LT type of back some of his supporters envision.- He doesn't have the body type to be a workhorse back in the NFL.- When the dust settles on his career, he will be viewed as anything ranging from a mild disappointment to a major bust.

Seems pretty dead on to me. Or maybe I'm just in denial and incapable of admitting how wrong I was about this player. Anyways, I spent way too much time on this junk today. Never again.

 

[az_prof]

You can bend over backwards trying to convince yourself that he's a star. He isn't and he never will be. One good season after five years in the league. Not even among the top 5 backs in his draft class in terms of career total yardage. Less productive to date than Jonathan Stewart, who (ironically) is widely accepted to be a perennial tease and disappointment by the same people who keep drinking the DMC Kool-Aid every year.

Who is bending over backwards? I'm not the guy saying that ypc is a great indicator, except when a back I don't like has a great ypc, or a back I do like has a poor ypc. I'm not the guy making the "health is a skill" argument to justify putting one RB over another RB who has played a whopping 3 fewer games over the course of his career. I'm not the one who is conveniently forgetting that receiving yards exist whenever it is convenient to the narrative I'm trying to tell (especially after spending so many years talking about nothing but receptions and receiving yards to back up my support of Reggie Bush). Look, sometimes you take a moderate stance about a player, and then you're happy to admit that stance was wrong. Other times you take a heavy stance on a player, and you defend that stance to the death. Such was the case with Reggie Bush, who you continually lauded for his huge numbers of garbage receptions (making him PPR viable), while killing Forte over vastly superior efficiency metrics. Such is the case for McFadden, who has caused you to forget that PPR even exists as a scoring option. Such is the case with Mendenhall, a mediocre talent if ever there was one who consistently puts up blah rate stats. Such is the case with Crabtree, who you traded Calvin Freaking Johnson for. You never talk about AJ Green anymore, but for all I know, you're still not sold on him and think Blackmon will be a better pro. Look, sometimes someone takes a hard stance and is wrong. I thought for sure Devin Hester would be a 800-1000 yard receiver by now. I thought Marshall would have played his way out of the league, and Evans would be a perennial pro bowler. I thought Ocho would discover the fountain of youth and hold off Nicks in scoring for several more years. I was spectacularly wrong on all counts. Wesseling was all aboard on Knowshon Moreno for years after it was apparent he didn't have the goods. At some point, you just have to admit it and move on. You still want to tell me McFadden is a bad RB who just happens to possess elite straight line speed? Guess what: I've seen Felix Jones play. I've seen Tatum Bell play. I've seen Michael Bennett play. I've seen Darren McFadden play. I know the difference.

When McFadden was entering the league I said he was overrated and that he would not live up to his billing as the next Peterson. Through five years he has exactly one 1000+ yard rushing season and has been a major disappointment more often than not. I've been wrong about plenty of guys, but my read was dead on here. Sorry if you don't see it that way. If you think McFadden is a better football player than guys like Mendenhall and Stewart then I think you don't know what you're looking at/talking about. They are both better overall running backs, have had better careers to date, and will continue to outplay him. It's clear that DMC is one of those players like Roy Williams who people will insist is an elite talent long after the fact that he's been exposed as an average player with glaring flaws that prevent him from fulfilling his seemingly immense potential. You can keep pimping this turd as a top 10 dynasty RB and insisting that I have no credibility on the subject, but each passing season makes DMC look more and more like exactly what the player I said he would be.

I like both you guys. I have learned from both you guys over the years. But EBF is right about McFadden. He is a good back with limitations. He will have the occasional great game, but after five years where he has been given a starting gig and given every opportunity to succeed, and he just hasn't done it.

 

[az_prof]

How about if you name 5 RBs you feel are good at evading or breaking tackles, and let's compare their rates to McFadden's? (Ideally RBs who get a workload reasonably close to McFadden's (i.e., not role players with significantly smaller workloads.)

Here are ten of the most obvious guys that I'd rate above McFadden as NFL talents.

MJD

Rice

Peterson

McCoy

Lynch

S Jackson

Gore

Mathews

DeAngelo

Turner

That's 90 broken or avoided tackles over 616 touches - 1 per 6.8 touches. Over the course of 300 touches, Mendenhall will break or avoid 3.6 more tackles.

Do you think those numbers justify your stated view here on McFadden?

I don't think tackles broken or avoided is the sole criterion by which to judge a RB and have never suggested as much. I don't think I signed up for a Mendenhall vs. McFadden debate. However, I do think Rashard is the better overall RB and certainly a much better value when you consider his price of acquisition in FF leagues this past season compared to McFadden. I doubt many of the folks who spent top 15 picks on DMC are feeling very good about their "stud" RB right now.

I was addressing a specific statement you made:

I still think McFadden is exactly who I thought he was. An injury-prone linear runner who can't evade or break tackles.

I stated that I think there may be other valid reasons not to like McFadden but that this point - which you characterized as having been your original belief that you feel has proven out. Later, you stated you liked Mendenhall, so I simply used him as a point of comparison.Are you now backing off your statement about McFadden's ability to evade or break tackles?

I don't care what some fantasy website says about broken tackles. I know what I have seen. McFadden doesn't make his own yards. If he has a good hole, he will gauge you like nobody's business. But if he doesn't have a big hole, he is pedestrian. It isn't just this year that we have seen this. Ray Rice, MJD, Gore, and ADP all find ways to be effective even if their line isn't blocking well. They are elite. McFadden does not and is not.

 

[FF Newbie]

Any thoughts on Newton vs. Stafford in dynasty right now? Scoring is 4 points per passing TD (which favors Newton), but 1 point per 20 yards passing (which favors Stafford).

 

[EBF]

I'd take Newton over Stafford by a pretty wide margin.

Stafford is looking more like Jay Cutler than Aaron Rodgers with each passing week this season.

Newton has had his struggles as well, but still has a vastly superior YPA and is a constant threat on the ground.

 

[DoubleG]

When McFadden was entering the league I said he was overrated and that he would not live up to his billing as the next Peterson. Through five years he has exactly one 1000+ yard rushing season and has been a major disappointment more often than not. I've been wrong about plenty of guys, but my read was dead on here. Sorry if you don't see it that way.

Mendenhall has exactly two 1000 yard rushing seasons. Stewart has exactly one. So... You think McFadden is going to be terrible, he averages 11.08 points per game, and this is proof that you were right. You think Mendenhall is going to be great, he averages 11.22 points per make, and this is proof that you were right. You think that Stewart is going to be a stud, he averages 9.45 points per game, and this is proof that you were right. You think Mendenhall is going to be durable, he plays 53 games in 5 years, and this is proof that you were right. You think McFadden is going to be injury prone, he plays 50 games in 5 years, and this is proof that you were right. No wonder your read is dead on- the data apparently means whatever you want it to mean. When you like a guy who is a good receiver, those receiving numbers are your trump card. When you don't like a guy who is a good receiver, you pretend those receiving yards don't exist. You keep insisting that Mendenhall has had a better career than McFadden, but McFadden has put up 200 more yards in 3 fewer games at a half a yard more per carry for a worse team. Mendenhall's team is likely to let him walk at the end of the year. What are the chances Oakland lets McFadden walk?

Sorry SSOG - I love you and all, but I have to take a little issue with the bolded. While the Steelers are a better team, the Raiders offensive line (which is really one of the primary things to consider whe looking at YPG) is and has been arguably better than the Steelers. The Steelers are also NOT the run first team they once were. In 2009 & 2011 Big Ben is in the top 15 in attempts (despite missing a game each year). Feel free to compare the stats of Mendenhall and DMac - but the caveats trying to minimize Mendenhall's production in comparison is a little unfair, imho.

 

[SSOG]

It is actually pretty hilarious that I even have to argue the idea that the guy has been a disappointment when it's so patently obvious.

I'm not arguing that McFadden isn't a disappointment. He clearly has been. It took him two years to figure things out (which happens sometimes with rookies), put up an uberstud season, got hurt in a second uberstud season, and is now miscast and struggling in the wrong scheme. In arguing with you because you said, and I quote, that McFadden is "not a good football player". That's preposterous. Someone can be a disappointment and still be a fantastic football player. Witness Jonathan Stewart.

 

[Biabreakable]

Thoughts on Peterson? Is it time to sell?

Peterson is currently 27 years old. Trading him would largely depend on your roster and current chances to win a title and what you could get in return.I think Peterson has another solid 2-3 years left. Based on the gamer he is I could see him playing into his 30's even although likely not at the same level. I am not sure if I understand the timing of this question however. If you have Peterson right now it means you have weathered most of the storm with him. Why would you be looking to trade him now after that? The few players who I might consider upgrades from Peterson are not big upgrades if they are at all. I doubt someone is going to give what they would have given for Peterson pre-injury. I am just not seeing many good reasons to move him at this time unless you are rebuilding and he is one of your only pieces.

 

[Concept Coop]

I like both you guys. I have learned from both you guys over the years. But EBF is right about McFadden. He is a good back with limitations. He will have the occasional great game, but after five years where he has been given a starting gig and given every opportunity to succeed, and he just hasn't done it.

I like both as well, gain a lot from both - but put me down on the SSOG side of this debate. Clearly McFadden has failed to live up to his draft spot, mostly due to injury, but he is clearly a great player, when on the field.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

Think I'm officially off of the Jonathan Stewart bandwagon now. Just moved him for Steve Johnson in one league and in talks in a few others where I have him. Still fully believe in his talent, but really don't think that Carolina will produce a fantasy RB1 with Cam there running a shotgun spread offense. One of the most frustrating guys I've ever owned...

 

[JFS171]

Now more specifically about Peyton Manning who is 36 years old and head coach John Fox hired by Elway to run the Broncos.John Fox comes from the Bill Parcells coaching tree. That means a strong commitment to the running game and playing defense. This is how they believe the game of football is won, despite how the league is trending more towards wide open passing attacks each season in recent history. On a personal note I agree with John Fox and every other coach who believes that good defense and ball control is a winning formula. It has been proven over time, although there have been exceptions to this, particularly in recent history. But it does not matter what I or any coach believes so much as how that belief gets translated into the teams performance.Now pairing Peyton Manning with John Fox is a great match because Fox couldn't coach up a QB to save his job in Carolina. I do not think he has gained any ability to do so since then either. Fox wants a QB who is a game manager, not much more. Of course in Manning he has a lot more than that. He can basically turn the offense over to Manning and the OC and focus his attention to the defense. That is what we have seen happen and what I expect to see for the remainder of Mannings career with the Broncos.Currently Manning is 36 years old and great QBs like him have been known to extend their careers into their early 40's. Peyton could be the next QB to do so. Right now Manning seems to be playing at the same high level that he always has. His numbers are certainly on pace for him to match previous performance with the Colts. I could see Manning maintaining this pace over the next few seasons as well, but at some point within the next 3 seasons the wheels are going to fall off. Brett Favre is a recent example who at the age of 40 had perhaps his best season statistically as a pro but then the following year, for a combination of reasons was not capable of repeating that performance at age 41. I only point this out to say that when Manning does fall off the fall may be sudden and ungraceful, which will impact the skill players for that season in a negative way because you cannot bench Peyton Manning. With John Fox as the coach I do not have confidence in the back up QBs development and there may be a coaching change that will happen subsequent to Manning falling off. So I see 2 years of 2 negative impact coming from the year Peyton does not play up to his standards and the year following that of a QB not capable of picking up where Peyton left off.At this point I am only comfortable with projecting Manning to have a similarly successful 2013 as to what he is having currently. I could see Manning keeping up until possibly 2015-16 even but at 38 years old in 2014 I am going to be very wary of the end being closer for him and will want a back up plan in place in case this happens sooner than later.There are still a lot of other details to consider concerning this situation that I would be interested in others thoughts on. I for the most part agree that Peyton is worth a 1st round pick in trade value right now for a team that is contending for a title. Manning can help such a team. But a team that is rebuilding with a 1-2 year outlook before expectations of competing for a title does not have much use for Manning, even if Manning does extend his career a year or 2 beyond that.

Thanks for the detailed response - agree with a lot of it. Couple of thoughts:1) As a franchise-long fan of the Panthers, I can absolutely attest to the fact that John Fox does not value the QB position, and that he wants a game manager at best. Jake Delhomme was Fox's ideal QB. A guy that, at most points, wouldn't lose him a game, but would make the throws necessary to keep the D from completely focusing on his running backs. And a guy that, when in a pinch, could make some gutsy, clutch throws to bring them back from the dead. Delhomme pulled that off for most of his career in Carolina.2) There was a longstanding rule known to Carolina fans that drove all of us crazy, but Fox ABSOLUTELY does not believe in drafting QBs. Fox believes QBs are to be built to fit the offense, and that early round picks aren't reserved for that position. In Carolina, that meant the organization wasn't going to draft a QB to develop for the future, at least not with a high draft pick. The only time that actually happened was with Clausen while Fox was on the way out, and Hurney was completely in control of that draft. Epic failure, but Hurney's a completely different topic.3) While I believe Fox to be a solid CEO figure in terms of direction of coaching, hiring of assistants, etc. the knock on him was always that he was far too stubborn in his thinking about the game. The best defense Carolina ever put on the field under Fox was when Jack Del Rio was DC, a position he now holds in Denver. I personally believe Del Rio will get that defense to fairly elite levels in the future, but that depends on drafts and development as well. Without Del Rio, Fox's defenses were nothing to be excited about in Carolina.4) 10000000000000% agree with you that the pairing of Manning and Fox is a tremendous coup for Denver. Manning will essentially run that offense. My concerns when he was first signed were that Fox would attempt to mold Manning to his philosophy, but that's clearly not the case. This is vintage Manning we're seeing, and from what I can tell, the arm strength continues to improve. Fox will stay out of the way as long as they're winning. He'll manage the direction of the franchise, he'll stay the course, he'll provide leadership and a steady presence that's not too high in the wins, and not too low in the losses. That's his greatest asset as a HC in my opinion. It's a message that is quite effective for many franchises, but it lost it's effectiveness in Carolina after multiple failures to improve the offense.5) Regarding Manning, I think the window is three years, closing in 2014. I could see Manning putting up top 5-7 numbers consistently for the remainder of this season and two more, with the reigns of that offense. At that time, I see the decline coming, which, as you stated, could be sudden and steep. Unfortunately for Broncos fans, unless Elway forces the drafting of a QB, or the team pursues another FA, I don't see the transition ending well. Unless a QB is dropped in Fox's lap, this will likely be the last time he coaches a franchise-changing QB. All that said, I agree on the value of Manning as being worth a future first, possibly a little more depending on situation. If you've got an open window, he can be everything we've known Manning to be. But find that developmental QB behind him on your roster elsewhere, as I don't think Denver will produce it.

 

[squistion]

I don't care what some fantasy website says about broken tackles. I know what I have seen. McFadden doesn't make his own yards. If he has a good hole, he will gauge you like nobody's business. But if he doesn't have a big hole, he is pedestrian. It isn't just this year that we have seen this. Ray Rice, MJD, Gore, and ADP all find ways to be effective even if their line isn't blocking well. They are elite. McFadden does not and is not.

"Who you gonna believe? Me or some website that compiles broken tackle stats?"You don't have much more credibility in talking about McFadden than EBF does (and he has none). While he has been the #1 DMC hater since 2008, you have a run a close second, always dissing him and rarely having anything good to say.

Like EBF you see what you want to see in any game he plays and ignore anything else that does not confirm your bias.

At least you should give a disclaimer as to where you are really coming from with this player, otherwise people new to this forum might actually think you have some sort of unbiased, objective opinion.

 

[Time Kibitzer]

I have vacillated on the topic of McFadden more than I ever like to do with any player. Much like EBF, my general preference in fantasy football is to develop a very strong stance on a player and then stay true to that stance as long as possible until enough such evidence supports itself that I am forced to change my opinion. While this may cause me to miss out on a player from time to time, I tend to trust in my ability to identify talent and have found myself to be right more than often and have either gotten players at insane discounts (Arian Foster and Victor Cruz WAY before people really knew who they were as 2 recent examples) and stay away from and/or trade away people that I believe to be overrated. I'm FAR from the best at this and most people in this thread are probably better than I at identifying true talent, but I have managed to hold my own in any league that I have been in.As it pertains to McFadden, my initial read was that he was going to be HEAVILY overrated coming into the NFL for a variety of reasons. He then proceeded to confirm that belief for 2 full seasons, looking thoroughly mediocre and unimpressive as a runner. I'm not even counting injuries into that equation, as I generally ignore injuries unless they are the nagging "toughness" variety. What I mean by that is I feel Beanie Wells missing considerable time with injuries that other players likely could either tough out and play through or recover faster from. I feel McFadden has suffered more "fluke" injuries, such as the Lisfranc injury last year, which causes me to dismiss it as a negative against him. However, that doesn't change the fact that he looked COMPLETELY pedestrian as a runner during his entire 1st and 2nd season. I'm not just saying he didn't live up to his draft position, I'm saying that he literally looked like his running ability and style were best suited for change of pace and/or backup duty in the NFL. Outside of 1 game during his rookie season, he at no point looked like he belonged as the lead back in a backfield.Oakland then underwent an overhaul, bringing in new coaches and a new offensive system. Low and behold, McFadden suddenly began looking like a star and was lighting up both fantasy scoreboards and efficiency metrics. I will admit that my belief that he was a mediocre player began to waiver over the previous 2 seasons, as it was hard to argue that he suddenly looked explosive, electric, and like one of the best running backs in the league. Unfortunately, it did not generate wins, thus enter Dennis Allen as the new Raiders head coach this season, bringing with him yet another new offense. Suddenly McFadden goes back to looking the like the slow, unsure, tentative, and frankly non-explosive player that he showed himself to be during his first 2 seasons. What this has caused me to realize is that McFadden is a player who, through 5 seasons, has struggled fairly obviously when the running system isn't beneficial to him and his specific skill sets and has thrived when the system has benefited him.If we change Darren McFadden's name to Arian Foster, people would be bailing left and right and crying from the mountain tops that he was a system back and it was only a matter of time before the system changed for the worse and he would lose considerable value. I am not sure why the phenomenon of McFadden causes people to continue to miss this fact, but it is blatantly obvious to me at this point. I won't go so far as EBF did and call him a mediocre player anymore, as he has at least shown over the last 2 seasons that there is talent there. However, he has proven to me that unless the system is suited to him, he has no business being discussed among the best and/or most talented backs in the league. Even Arian Foster, the poster boy for system backs for most people, has managed to continue to produce at a VERY high rate despite the system seemingly regressing around him (this Texan's team is not the same dominant running team that it was even last year).All of that being said, that does not make McFadden useless, not valuable, mediocre, not starter worthy, or anything like that. All it says is that he should not be held in the same regard as the running backs in the league who CAN continue to thrive regardless of the situation and system around them. We have 5 years of evidence now that McFadden is not capable of doing that, I'm not sure what else people are waiting for to come to the same conclusion.Now that I have stuck my neck out on the topic, I'm sure I will proceed to watch McFadden go on a tear and average 110 yards a game for the rest of the season, seeing as the season is still quite young and we are all mostly still just projecting/guessing at this point. McFadden owners are all welcome in advance.

I think Herm does a good job here in looking at the success and failures of McFadden. I think he's right in that McFadden may very well be a system back who is currently not in a good system for him. So as far as dynasty leagues are concerned, although he has the potential to be a RB1 stud again in the future, given the Raiders new offense will most likely stay unchanged for at least a year or 2, I think he's a sell right now if you can find an owner still enamored with him.

 

[Concept Coop]

Just making a general point: becuase a back doesn't perform well in a certain system, doesn't make him a system back.

 

[Time Kibitzer]

Just making a general point: becuase a back doesn't perform well in a certain system, doesn't make him a system back.

McFadden has put up terrible efficiency numbers in 2 different systems (granted he can still turn it around this year). If this continues for the entire year, I don't think it'd be unfair to say McFadden is a system back.

 

[Herm23]

Just making a general point: becuase a back doesn't perform well in a certain system, doesn't make him a system back.

This is a very fare point. Also, in fairness we are talking about a season that is still early and there is every chance McFadden could end with nice numbers by the end of the year. However, if we are projecting his first 5 games to carry over for the rest of the season, this will mean:- He has been through THREE different coaches, each with wildly different offensive and running philosophies/approaches. This isn't a matter of a singular system shift, it's actually a significantly larger sample size (given what we are discussing- 3 different ground game philosophies is pretty ample and more than most running backs experience during their careers)- He will have failed to meet the lofty expectations many have placed on him, based on the assumption that he is among the most talented and best running backs in the league, in 2 of those 3 systems/offenses/philosophies- He will have lived up to the expectations and cost to acquire him in 1 of those 3 systems/offenses/philosophiesLet's not confuse the point here. I think the discussion got way off course with some hyperbole being thrown about that McFadden is mediocre, not talented, and comparing him specifically to Mendenhall. The point that is relevant to this discussion is whether McFadden is even CLOSE to as valuable as his current price tag suggests (that price tag being among the most expensive running backs in the league, thus putting him in the same company as the most talented running backs in the league). I could care less how he compares to Mendenhall because Mendenhall currently costs SIGNIFICANTLY less to acquire. I am interested in discerning whether McFadden really is a top level talent and this is a fluke start to his year or whether a lot of people are completely missing the many warts he has shown over his career thus far.I am personally not a fan of paying top dollar for a player that has proven over 5 years and 3 different running philosophies/systems that he is not bust proof, is not capable of producing no matter the talent around him, and needs a system suited to his running style to provide a return on investment. After being quite slow to warm up, I was beginning to come around to the idea that he is a damn talented player and was going to finally live up to his lofty expectations. However, his start to this season has left me with a very sour taste in my mouth and is causing me to re-evaluate his career as a whole to try and get a better read on just what type of player he is. As I said earlier, I am open to the possibility that I am making a rush judgement on too small of a sample size of games from this season as well. If McFadden turns his season fully around and ends up with solid to good numbers by the end of the year (which is certainly a realistic possibility), this argument starts to look different in my opinion.

 

[Concept Coop]

McFadden has put up terrible efficiency numbers in 2 different systems (granted he can still turn it around this year). If this continues for the entire year, I don't think it'd be unfair to say McFadden is a system back.

When, prior to this year, did he put up terrible numbers? And what are the sample sizes?

 

[Time Kibitzer]

McFadden has put up terrible efficiency numbers in 2 different systems (granted he can still turn it around this year). If this continues for the entire year, I don't think it'd be unfair to say McFadden is a system back.

When, prior to this year, did he put up terrible numbers? And what are the sample sizes?

He averaged 3.9 yards per carry on 217 carries in his first 2 seasons. I suppose calling that 3.9 yards per carry terrible is a bit of a hyperbole, but he was tremendously inconsistent averaging 3.0 yards per carry or worse in roughly a third of his games played and over 5.0 yards per carry in just 3 of 25 games over those 2 years.

 

[Concept Coop]

McFadden has put up terrible efficiency numbers in 2 different systems (granted he can still turn it around this year). If this continues for the entire year, I don't think it'd be unfair to say McFadden is a system back.

When, prior to this year, did he put up terrible numbers? And what are the sample sizes?

He averaged 3.9 yards per carry on 217 carries in his first 2 seasons. I suppose calling that 3.9 yards per carry terrible is a bit of a hyperbole, but he was tremendously inconsistent averaging 3.0 yards per carry or worse in roughly a third of his games played and over 5.0 yards per carry in just 3 of 25 games over those 2 years.

That is more than Arian Foster this season, who has more games under 4YPC than over.YPC is flawed, and I am not familiar enough with the Raiders situation at the time to know what to attribute to O-line and what not to.

 

[Time Kibitzer]

McFadden has put up terrible efficiency numbers in 2 different systems (granted he can still turn it around this year). If this continues for the entire year, I don't think it'd be unfair to say McFadden is a system back.

When, prior to this year, did he put up terrible numbers? And what are the sample sizes?

He averaged 3.9 yards per carry on 217 carries in his first 2 seasons. I suppose calling that 3.9 yards per carry terrible is a bit of a hyperbole, but he was tremendously inconsistent averaging 3.0 yards per carry or worse in roughly a third of his games played and over 5.0 yards per carry in just 3 of 25 games over those 2 years.

That is more than Arian Foster this season, who has more games under 4YPC than over.YPC is flawed, and I am not familiar enough with the Raiders situation at the time to know what to attribute to O-line and what not to.

It's not perfect, but it's definitely has value. As for Foster, despite his low YPC this year he hasn't been near as inconsistent as McFadden was back in 08/09.

 

[I was in the pool]

To put some metrics to this Darren McFadden debate going on....

His yards-after-contact (Yco/Att) has only been elite in 2010 and 2011 (one of the metrics that is considered to eliminate the OL contribution to an RB's production to some degree). They were mediocre in his first two seasons and by far the worst of his career (just 1.6 Ybco/Att) so far in 2012.

 

[Ernol]

So as far as dynasty leagues are concerned, although he has the potential to be a RB1 stud again in the future, given the Raiders new offense will most likely stay unchanged for at least a year or 2, I think he's a sell right now if you can find an owner still enamored with him.

I'd be one of them. There is some fairly extreme overreaction to McFadden's 2012 start for fantasy imo. Oakland's system has gone through an overhaul, and he's the only real weapon they have on offense (and the focus of every defense). You can expect some growing pains and yet, he is still RB13 in points per game in PPR. I think he's done just fine this year thus far and I expect his production only to increase from here. At least in my book, he is easily still a top 10 dynasty RB.

 

[traderallenpoe]

I had my inaugural PPR Dynasty draft this off season and was stuck with the unfortunate option of having #9 out of 16. I ended up taking McFadden at #9 and have no problems with building a team around him in my RB1 position. I will outlay the first round picks to give you guys an idea of how things turned out,

1. Rice

2. Rodgers

3. Foster

4. Mccoy

5. Brady

6. Calvin

7. CJ2k

8. Brees

9. MCFADDEN

10. Stafford

11. Forte

12. Newman

13. Fitz

14. AP

15. Graham

16. Eli

I then ended up getting Julio at 24 , Percy at 41 and then Ridley at 73. So my core 4 players that I am building around are: McFadden/Ridley/Julio/Percy. Not bad for a 16 team league?

Back to the debate over Mcfadden.. I have absolutely no regrets taking him at 9. I didnt have a chance to get a Brees/Brady/Rogers and its not like any of the other comparable backs outside of the big 4 have been that good this season.. CJ2K Forte AP MJD have all been pedestrian. I'm not going to get heavily involved in defending DMac, but I figured I would let some of the haters know that as someone who took him as a top 10 dynasty pick this year, I have yet to regret my decision and have no intentions of dealing him at this time.

 

[duaneok66]

I had my inaugural PPR Dynasty draft this off season and was stuck with the unfortunate option of having #9 out of 16. I ended up taking McFadden at #9 and have no problems with building a team around him in my RB1 position. I will outlay the first round picks to give you guys an idea of how things turned out,1. Rice2. Rodgers3. Foster4. Mccoy5. Brady6. Calvin7. CJ2k8. Brees9. MCFADDEN10. Stafford11. Forte12. Newman13. Fitz14. AP15. Graham16. EliI then ended up getting Julio at 24 , Percy at 41 and then Ridley at 73. So my core 4 players that I am building around are: McFadden/Ridley/Julio/Percy. Not bad for a 16 team league?Back to the debate over Mcfadden.. I have absolutely no regrets taking him at 9. I didnt have a chance to get a Brees/Brady/Rogers and its not like any of the other comparable backs outside of the big 4 have been that good this season.. CJ2K Forte AP MJD have all been pedestrian. I'm not going to get heavily involved in defending DMac, but I figured I would let some of the haters know that as someone who took him as a top 10 dynasty pick this year, I have yet to regret my decision and have no intentions of dealing him at this time.

great post. I love reading posts about past drafts and the analysis and details of each pick ( I am not a fan of the "look at my awesome team" posts). Thanks for the post!

 

[LivingTheDream]

I had my inaugural PPR Dynasty draft this off season and was stuck with the unfortunate option of having #9 out of 16. I ended up taking McFadden at #9 and have no problems with building a team around him in my RB1 position. I will outlay the first round picks to give you guys an idea of how things turned out,1. Rice2. Rodgers3. Foster4. Mccoy5. Brady6. Calvin7. CJ2k8. Brees9. MCFADDEN10. Stafford11. Forte12. Newman13. Fitz14. AP15. Graham16. EliI then ended up getting Julio at 24 , Percy at 41 and then Ridley at 73. So my core 4 players that I am building around are: McFadden/Ridley/Julio/Percy. Not bad for a 16 team league?Back to the debate over Mcfadden.. I have absolutely no regrets taking him at 9. I didnt have a chance to get a Brees/Brady/Rogers and its not like any of the other comparable backs outside of the big 4 have been that good this season.. CJ2K Forte AP MJD have all been pedestrian. I'm not going to get heavily involved in defending DMac, but I figured I would let some of the haters know that as someone who took him as a top 10 dynasty pick this year, I have yet to regret my decision and have no intentions of dealing him at this time.

No Richardson?

 

[Fly]

How much does Andre Johnson have left in the tank? Enough for owners in win now mode to use him for this year and maybe next year? Or is he a sell for whatever you can get for him?

 

[jdoggydogg]

Not saying I totally agree with EBF about the McFadden debate.

But you have to admit, this place would be really boring if we all agreed about talent.

 

[JFS171]

I realize we all play in varying levels of dynasty leagues, and waiver wires vary accordingly, but what are some of the pick-ups you've made lately?

It seems like most of the guys available are undrafted guys that are just now getting opportunities, or have potential to get those opportunities (Tanner, Grimes, Dunbar, etc.).

Any position you tend to stockpile more than others? RBs seem to have high turnover and volatility, so do you stockpile those the most?

 

[az_prof]

I don't care what some fantasy website says about broken tackles. I know what I have seen. McFadden doesn't make his own yards. If he has a good hole, he will gauge you like nobody's business. But if he doesn't have a big hole, he is pedestrian. It isn't just this year that we have seen this. Ray Rice, MJD, Gore, and ADP all find ways to be effective even if their line isn't blocking well. They are elite. McFadden does not and is not.

"Who you gonna believe? Me or some website that compiles broken tackle stats?"You don't have much more credibility in talking about McFadden than EBF does (and he has none). While he has been the #1 DMC hater since 2008, you have a run a close second, always dissing him and rarely having anything good to say.

Like EBF you see what you want to see in any game he plays and ignore anything else that does not confirm your bias.

At least you should give a disclaimer as to where you are really coming from with this player, otherwise people new to this forum might actually think you have some sort of unbiased, objective opinion.

Just because someone sees holes in a players game doesn't make him a "hater." Both EBF and I have always acknowledged that McFadden had talent. But he has always been overrated and has not lived up to the hype. I take pride in having been right about him. I said this off season that he was no good in the zone blocking scheme and I have been proven right. I have said that he lacks durability to be a true featured back, and in 5 years of being handed the job, he has repeatedly failed to be a bell weather back because of durability. That doesn't make me a hater: it makes me a realist. He is being used all wrong by the current coaching staff and i foresaw that. That doesn't make me a hater, that makes me a good fantasy football evaluator. His ideal role is as a change of pace back who is used heavily in the passing game and in the second half of games after the defense starts to tire. He can be effective in that role.

 

[duaneok66]

I realize we all play in varying levels of dynasty leagues, and waiver wires vary accordingly, but what are some of the pick-ups you've made lately?It seems like most of the guys available are undrafted guys that are just now getting opportunities, or have potential to get those opportunities (Tanner, Grimes, Dunbar, etc.). Any position you tend to stockpile more than others? RBs seem to have high turnover and volatility, so do you stockpile those the most?

I picked up Givens and Quick two weeks ago (20 man dynasty 12 team). I think that one of them is the answer (or even both if they move Amendola back to his natural slot position).

 

[squistion]

Not saying I totally agree with EBF about the McFadden debate.

But you have to admit, this place would be really boring if we all agreed about talent.

And it is so much fun to watch SSOG mop the floor with EBF, pointing out his illogical and contradictory positions on DMC versus other players, particularly cherry picking data that helps his argument while conveniently ignoring everything else. And of course, once EBF has been he then runs away saying essentially, "I have proven I am right and I am tired of arguing, so I am not going to discuss this anymore."

 

[jdoggydogg]

I realize we all play in varying levels of dynasty leagues, and waiver wires vary accordingly, but what are some of the pick-ups you've made lately?

Recent pickups in my league:(14 man roster, $100 dynasty salary cap league)

Gordon, Josh CLE WR for $6.00

Myers, Brandon OAK TE for $9.00

Jones, Felix DAL RB for $10.00

Stewart, Jonathan CAR RB for $3.00

Green, Alex GBP RB for $16.00

Kerley, Jeremy NYJ WR for $5.00

Take note that:

1) Every dollar you spend counts vs. your cap next year if you keep the player.

2) Every roster position has a max size limit. So being only able to keep four WR or four RB means there's always good talent on the wire.

 

[EBF]

I realize we all play in varying levels of dynasty leagues, and waiver wires vary accordingly, but what are some of the pick-ups you've made lately?It seems like most of the guys available are undrafted guys that are just now getting opportunities, or have potential to get those opportunities (Tanner, Grimes, Dunbar, etc.). Any position you tend to stockpile more than others? RBs seem to have high turnover and volatility, so do you stockpile those the most?

Grabbed these guys in a few deep leagues.TE Orson Charles, Cin - 4th rounder who fell because of off-field stuff. Could be a poor man's Hernandez.RB Dion Lewis, Phi - Big fan dating back to his college days. Would like to see what he could do with a run of carries.WR David Gettis, Car - 6'3" track star who flashed potential as a rookie before getting hurt last year.WR Kevin Elliott, Jax - Longshot who made the 53 man roster as a UDFA. Enough potential to maybe do something down the line.

 

[Donsmith753]

I realize we all play in varying levels of dynasty leagues, and waiver wires vary accordingly, but what are some of the pick-ups you've made lately?It seems like most of the guys available are undrafted guys that are just now getting opportunities, or have potential to get those opportunities (Tanner, Grimes, Dunbar, etc.). Any position you tend to stockpile more than others? RBs seem to have high turnover and volatility, so do you stockpile those the most?

Grabbed these guys in a few deep leagues.TE Orson Charles, Cin - 4th rounder who fell because of off-field stuff. Could be a poor man's Hernandez.RB Dion Lewis, Phi - Big fan dating back to his college days. Would like to see what he could do with a run of carries.WR David Gettis, Car - 6'3" track star who flashed potential as a rookie before getting hurt last year.WR Kevin Elliott, Jax - Longshot who made the 53 man roster as a UDFA. Enough potential to maybe do something down the line.

I grabbed Elliot and Josh Cooper recently in one league.16 teams and 30 man rosters though so the wire is completely bare.

 

[Ernol]

All the anti-McFadden sentiment going around right now led me to make (just a few hours ago) what after further thought were poor offers for him on the off chance that the McFadden owner was feeling the same way.

League A:

Jon Stewart and 1st (late) for McFadden

Rashard Mendenhall and 1st (late) for McFadden

I am a fan of all three of McFadden, Stewart and Mendenhall (and own Stew/Mendy in more leagues than McFadden) but I would probably trade both Stewart and Mendenhall (combined) for McFadden right now (not that the other owner would accept).

League B:

Mike Wallace for McFadden

All three offers were rejected immediately.

 

[EBF]

Either one of those guys (Stewart or Mendy) will probably have a better career going forward.

Sometimes someone will reject one of your trade offers and you'll be miffed about it only to realize months or years later that they were actually doing you a massive favor. I once offered Sproles for Keenan Burton in a ppr league. Glad the other owner passed on that one.

 

[ctrlaltdefeat]

When will you guys realize that Jonathan Stewart is nothing special, just a plain back that will likely never break out? Take him over McFadden? Haha good one

 

[EBF]

When will you guys realize that Jonathan Stewart is nothing special, just a plain back that will likely never break out? Take him over McFadden? Haha good one

I think he's actually a much better back than McFadden. Career 4.8 YPC average. Has a sick combination of strength, speed, and agility. It's hard to think of 10 backs in the league with more ability. He is better than guys like Arian Foster and Matt Forte. What he has lacked throughout his NFL career is the opportunity to carry the load. You can't produce if you aren't getting looks, and that's been the story of his career. The same is largely true of DeAngelo Williams, who at his peak was also probably a top 5 overall RB in the league. You stick guys like Alfred Morris and Arian Foster on the Panthers and they'd be even more unanimous than Stewart. That's just the way it goes in FF, where opportunity matters probably even more than talent at RB/WR (see: Amendola, Hartline, Morris). These guys are average starters at best, but they benefit from circumstance. Basically the opposite of Stewart.

 

[ctrlaltdefeat]

Ability, talent, potential - I hear these words all the time but Many times it doesn't translate to the field. I'd much rather have McFadden than Stewart in redrafts and dynasty. The one league I have Stewart in I'm always looking for someone else to start in his place. Almost like owning Chris Johnson except minus the breakout season.

 

[SSOG]

Not saying I totally agree with EBF about the McFadden debate.

But you have to admit, this place would be really boring if we all agreed about talent.

Hell yeah. Plus there'd never be anyone to trade with.

I don't care what some fantasy website says about broken tackles. I know what I have seen. McFadden doesn't make his own yards. If he has a good hole, he will gauge you like nobody's business. But if he doesn't have a big hole, he is pedestrian. It isn't just this year that we have seen this. Ray Rice, MJD, Gore, and ADP all find ways to be effective even if their line isn't blocking well. They are elite. McFadden does not and is not.

"Who you gonna believe? Me or some website that compiles broken tackle stats?"You don't have much more credibility in talking about McFadden than EBF does (and he has none). While he has been the #1 DMC hater since 2008, you have a run a close second, always dissing him and rarely having anything good to say.

Like EBF you see what you want to see in any game he plays and ignore anything else that does not confirm your bias.

At least you should give a disclaimer as to where you are really coming from with this player, otherwise people new to this forum might actually think you have some sort of unbiased, objective opinion.

Just because someone sees holes in a players game doesn't make him a "hater." Both EBF and I have always acknowledged that McFadden had talent. But he has always been overrated and has not lived up to the hype. I take pride in having been right about him. I said this off season that he was no good in the zone blocking scheme and I have been proven right. I have said that he lacks durability to be a true featured back, and in 5 years of being handed the job, he has repeatedly failed to be a bell weather back because of durability. That doesn't make me a hater: it makes me a realist. He is being used all wrong by the current coaching staff and i foresaw that. That doesn't make me a hater, that makes me a good fantasy football evaluator. His ideal role is as a change of pace back who is used heavily in the passing game and in the second half of games after the defense starts to tire. He can be effective in that role.

EBF said that Darren McFadden is not a good football player. That's a direct quote.

When will you guys realize that Jonathan Stewart is nothing special, just a plain back that will likely never break out? Take him over McFadden? Haha good one

He already broke out. He has a top 12 finish in half a season as a starter. He owns the NFL record for most rushing yards in a player's first three starts. Only three RBs in the entire NFL have a higher career ypc. It just happens that one of those three RBs shares a backfield with him.

 

[SSOG]

Ability, talent, potential - I hear these words all the time but Many times it doesn't translate to the field. I'd much rather have McFadden than Stewart in redrafts and dynasty. The one league I have Stewart in I'm always looking for someone else to start in his place. Almost like owning Chris Johnson except minus the breakout season.

No breakout season? There are a lot of 2009 championship banners hanging over mantles as a result of Jonathan Stewart.

 

[EBF]

Ability, talent, potential - I hear these words all the time but Many times it doesn't translate to the field. I'd much rather have McFadden than Stewart in redrafts and dynasty. The one league I have Stewart in I'm always looking for someone else to start in his place. Almost like owning Chris Johnson except minus the breakout season.

The only reason Stewart isn't a top 10 FF back is because he doesn't get enough opportunities. Nothing to it besides that. He has been consistently productive his whole career on the few touches he has been given.

But he has been insanely unlucky in terms of situational factors. Not only has he been stuck to compete with one of the best RBs in the NFL for his entire career, but he also happens to be stuck with probably the best running QB in the NFL as well. So he has not one, but two elite rushers vulturing his chances. That's pretty insanely unlucky. If Andrew Luck had come out for the draft last year like everyone expected, Carolina would've drafted him and Newton never would've arrived in town to snake so many rushing TDs.

It is easy to forget how good Stewart is given how unlucky his career has been, but this is a guy who would probably be the unquestioned workhorse back for 25 of the teams in the NFL. He absolutely smokes guys like Alfred Morris, Arian Foster, and Stevan Ridley from an ability standpoint, but we don't get to see the production because of where he plays. The only RB who has had it worse in recent years might have been Sproles when he was in San Diego with Tomlinson and Turner.

I'm still one of the suckers who would gladly buy Stewart for a reasonable price. He's only 25 years old and his game is reminiscent of several backs who have shown good longevity (Benson, Ricky, Jackson, Turner, MJD). I do think he's likely to have a window at some point in his career where he's a reliable weekly FF starter, but it might not be until he's 27 or 28. Whether it's age finally catching up with D-Will or Stewart finally changing teams, something has to give eventually for Stewart.

But don't let his lack of use convince you that he's not the goods when all of the objective factors indicate that he is in fact an elite player. The guy has a Trent Richardson-Michael Turner-Maurice Drew type of BMI, but still clocked 4.46 at the combine and jumped 36.5" in the vert and 10'8" in the broad jump. He was a top 15 draft pick and has backed it up by logging a career 4.8 YPC average and never dipping below 4.3 YPC in a single season. You know what Adrian Peterson, Ray Rice, Maurice Drew, Steven Jackson, Frank Gore, LeSean McCoy, and Ryan Mathews have in common? Not one of them has a higher career YPC than Stewart.

The guy is a bad dude.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ygCFW8DQWIo

 

[ctrlaltdefeat]

YPC is great on paper but who knows if he'll ever get a chance to be the feature back. Once deangelo is gone they'll bring in someone else for him to share carries with. Great players stay on the field every down because you can't afford to sit them. Stewart isn't that type of back.

 

[EBF]

YPC is great on paper but who knows if he'll ever get a chance to be the feature back. Once deangelo is gone they'll bring in someone else for him to share carries with. Great players stay on the field every down because you can't afford to sit them. Stewart isn't that type of back.

Sure he is. Just like Turner and Sproles were in San Diego. DeAngelo Williams in his prime has been one of the best backs in the league. There's really no shame in losing carries to a player like that.Don't confuse a back who is stuck in a committee for a committee back. There's a difference. Stewart would absolutely be the man for 25+ teams in the NFL. He just happens not to play for any of those teams.

 

[SSOG]

YPC is great on paper but who knows if he'll ever get a chance to be the feature back. Once deangelo is gone they'll bring in someone else for him to share carries with. Great players stay on the field every down because you can't afford to sit them. Stewart isn't that type of back.

Well, apparently neither are Aaron Rodgers or Steve Young or Ahman Green or Priest Holmes or Maurice Jones-Drew.

 

[Sabertooth]

YPC is great on paper but who knows if he'll ever get a chance to be the feature back. Once deangelo is gone they'll bring in someone else for him to share carries with. Great players stay on the field every down because you can't afford to sit them. Stewart isn't that type of back.

Well, apparently neither are Aaron Rodgers or Steve Young or Ahman Green or Priest Holmes or Maurice Jones-Drew.

Did anyone of those backs sit through their prime years like Stewart has? Maybe he's just not that great.

 

[Coeur de Lion]

YPC is great on paper but who knows if he'll ever get a chance to be the feature back. Once deangelo is gone they'll bring in someone else for him to share carries with. Great players stay on the field every down because you can't afford to sit them. Stewart isn't that type of back.

DeAngelo Williams is good enough to force at least a timeshare with literally any RB in the NFL. He'd probably put all but a handful of guys completely on the bench. His career YPC is higher than Barry Sanders', and he has played primarily on bad teams with minimal threat of a passing game. DeAngelo and Stewart would both be Pro Bowlers every year if they didn't play on the same team.

 

[Dr. Octopus]

When will you guys realize that Jonathan Stewart is nothing special, just a plain back that will likely never break out? Take him over McFadden? Haha good one

Never? Did you miss 2009?Stewart is certainly a frustarting player to own based on his usage and the fact he's been partnered up with another oustanding RB over the years and now competes with a running QB as well - but if some one can not see anything special about him as a runner there's little that you could say back to them that would be worth the effort.