What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

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

Foster- Talk me off this cliff (1 Viewer)

lostby1

Footballguy
Getting ready to draft in a 12 team non ppr league and it looks like Foster will be there at my pick at #6. It's hard not to take him.

What's the Pool say?

 
Assuming that AP, Charles, and Martin are gone, the list of RB's I'd take ahead of foster is small. Do you plan on McCoy being gone? Richardson? I don't know, I just haven't felt like taking Foster all year. Which is why I never took him despite having several opportunities.

There are enough great options this year that you don't HAVE to take anybody, anywhere.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Your first round pick will rarely WIN you your league... but it could certainly aid you in LOSING.

Obviously a tough call as he has top-3 potential but all signs point to him being a risk. Take what appears to be more of a "sure thing".

 
Assuming that AP, Charles, and Martin are gone, the list of RB's I'd take ahead of foster is small. Do you plan on McCoy being gone? Richardson? I don't know, I just haven't felt like taking Foster all year. Which is why I never took him despite having several opportunities.

There are enough great options this year that you don't HAVE to take anybody, anywhere.
AP, Charles, and Martin will be drafted. Have McCoy in other leagues and want to spread my risk. I am torn between Richardson and Foster. That is my main issue.

 
Assuming 1.01-1.05 is Peterson, Martin, Charles, Rice, McCoy and Spiller... I'd probably take Foster at 1.06.

The one downside if that you HAVE to take Tate early.

 
Slightly off topic, I'm wondering for those who do draft Foster, how early is too early to grab Tate.

Edit to add: I know to an extent it depends on starting lineup requirements etc...

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Assuming that AP, Charles, and Martin are gone, the list of RB's I'd take ahead of foster is small. Do you plan on McCoy being gone? Richardson? I don't know, I just haven't felt like taking Foster all year. Which is why I never took him despite having several opportunities.

There are enough great options this year that you don't HAVE to take anybody, anywhere.
AP, Charles, and Martin will be drafted. Have McCoy in other leagues and want to spread my risk. I am torn between Richardson and Foster. That is my main issue.
I'm not a huge fan of T-Rich but there are a host of folks that think he's due for a huge year. I am starting to warm on him given the pretty plain facts.... no competition for carries, catches the ball out of the backfield, obviously the team's best offensive weapon, etc.... I won't directly compare him to AP but there are similarities there.

Foster just has too many question marks. I would go T-Rich in that situation.

 
Assuming that AP, Charles, and Martin are gone, the list of RB's I'd take ahead of foster is small. Do you plan on McCoy being gone? Richardson? I don't know, I just haven't felt like taking Foster all year. Which is why I never took him despite having several opportunities.

There are enough great options this year that you don't HAVE to take anybody, anywhere.
AP, Charles, and Martin will be drafted. Have McCoy in other leagues and want to spread my risk. I am torn between Richardson and Foster. That is my main issue.
I'm not a huge fan of T-Rich but there are a host of folks that think he's due for a huge year. I am starting to warm on him given the pretty plain facts.... no competition for carries, catches the ball out of the backfield, obviously the team's best offensive weapon, etc.... I won't directly compare him to AP but there are similarities there.

Foster just has too many question marks. I would go T-Rich in that situation.
I like the way you think. I hate when guys can't make up thier minds. Thanks everyone for your input.

 
On the other hand, if you're undecided, see if the guy at 1.07 loves one guy and if so, trade down one pick!

 
Assuming that AP, Charles, and Martin are gone, the list of RB's I'd take ahead of foster is small. Do you plan on McCoy being gone? Richardson? I don't know, I just haven't felt like taking Foster all year. Which is why I never took him despite having several opportunities.

There are enough great options this year that you don't HAVE to take anybody, anywhere.
AP, Charles, and Martin will be drafted. Have McCoy in other leagues and want to spread my risk. I am torn between Richardson and Foster. That is my main issue.
I think you should draft each league as its own entity. Because it is.

Besides, having the same guy in multiple leagues makes it easier to decide who you are rooting for, instead of being like...well, I have him starting in leagues A and C, but in league B I am against him, and in league D the guy I'm fighting for a playoff spot (or bye) has him...you can just yell TOUCHDOWN McCOY!!

.

I asked about McCoy and Richardson as those would be the guys I personally would be looking to take there.

 
poopdawg said:
Calvin. And don't look back....
good post..if the OP isnt married to taking a RB first, Calvin is better than who would be left at 6, he's as safe a pick as you'll find and with the depth at WR you could draft a #2 much later.

 
I would take 10 RB's over Foster. There are much surer things this year who will produce almost as much. If I'm wrong and Foster has a huge year, so be it.

 
CowboysHomer said:
The guy hasn't finished out of the top 4 RBs (standard, PPR) since he became a starter. Draft him and don't look back.
He also had the lowest YPC of his career last year and this year is complaining of calf and back problems.

 
Avery said:
Slightly off topic, I'm wondering for those who do draft Foster, how early is too early to grab Tate.

Edit to add: I know to an extent it depends on starting lineup requirements etc...
Tate went in the 6th in one of my recent drafts.

 
Incase you missed this yesterday

ESPN's Chris Mortensen predicted on NFL Insiders that the Texans will open the season using a "timeshare" at tailback.

"I think we'll see more shared carries as we open the year," Mortensen said. It's a concern for Arian Foster because his per-play effectiveness has diminished so rapidly while handling the most touches in the NFL over the past three years. Meanwhile, Ben Tate has looked as sharp as ever in August, earning a larger role. Foster presents obvious risk in the first round of fantasy drafts.

Aug 26 - 2:47 PM CDT

 
CowboysHomer said:
The guy hasn't finished out of the top 4 RBs (standard, PPR) since he became a starter. Draft him and don't look back.
He also had the lowest YPC of his career last year and this year is complaining of calf and back problems.
His injuries sound like a 'vet' who wanted to skip preseason. He and Kubiak both didn't seem to be worried about his health, good enough for me. And who cares about YPC? He's getting the volume to produce at high RB1 levels.

I think having Hopkins there will help, it gives them a legit second option in the passing game now. Should open things up more for Foster underneath.

 
Buffaloes said:
drake_ovo said:
if u have doubts, then dont do it.
+1 listen to your heart dude
I'll tell you a story. When I was 15 I wanted to join the drama club. But my friends said look bro you're fast try out for football. I did and I was WR but mostly a bench warmer. Well senior year I was on the field in a blowout and caught an easy TD. No one was within 15 yards of me. I took a bad step and my knee just buckled. Here it is 25 years later and my knee has never been the same. Sometimes I wake up to throbbing bad enough that I want to cry. People don't blow their knees out in drama club. Remember that.

 
Incase you missed this yesterday

ESPN's Chris Mortensen predicted on NFL Insiders that the Texans will open the season using a "timeshare" at tailback.

"I think we'll see more shared carries as we open the year," Mortensen said. It's a concern for Arian Foster because his per-play effectiveness has diminished so rapidly while handling the most touches in the NFL over the past three years. Meanwhile, Ben Tate has looked as sharp as ever in August, earning a larger role. Foster presents obvious risk in the first round of fantasy drafts.

Aug 26 - 2:47 PM CDT
So Mort is basically repeating whats been said for the whole summer and it's being presented as a new story. It's as if the narrative on Foster has already been written. For some reason people can't wait for this almost 28 year old stud rb to fall off a cliff. He's missed three games in the past three years and the Texans are giving him a vet's rest.

 
So, Mort has no sources, it's just what he thinks. Got it. ESPN is looking more like a gossip club and less like a sports news network by the day.

 
Loving Richardson, that's the only other choice there IMO. He gets hurt too though or breaks down or whatever you want to call it.

Like others said, if your gut says so then skip him-go with Richardson.

Nothing's worse than regretting a pick minutes later and every week for 16 weeks. Leave your draft pleased.

 
Buffaloes said:
drake_ovo said:
if u have doubts, then dont do it.
+1 listen to your heart dude
I'll tell you a story. When I was 15 I wanted to join the drama club. But my friends said look bro you're fast try out for football. I did and I was WR but mostly a bench warmer. Well senior year I was on the field in a blowout and caught an easy TD. No one was within 15 yards of me. I took a bad step and my knee just buckled. Here it is 25 years later and my knee has never been the same. Sometimes I wake up to throbbing bad enough that I want to cry. People don't blow their knees out in drama club. Remember that.
You left off 'take it to the bank, brohans'.

 
CowboysHomer said:
The guy hasn't finished out of the top 4 RBs (standard, PPR) since he became a starter. Draft him and don't look back.
He also had the lowest YPC of his career last year and this year is complaining of calf and back problems.
His injuries sound like a 'vet' who wanted to skip preseason. He and Kubiak both didn't seem to be worried about his health, good enough for me. And who cares about YPC? He's getting the volume to produce at high RB1 levels.

I think having Hopkins there will help, it gives them a legit second option in the passing game now. Should open things up more for Foster underneath.
Agree. The only thing that has really been said on this whole thing is when Foster said he really doesn't like pre-season.

I really don't know why people can go a generation of watching star players miss entire pre-seasons and never blinking and then when its Foster, its like "this is it...this isit! I knew I was right when I said he was nothing." People just got burned on Foster and can't seem to stand the fact that a guy they didn't spend all summer talking up could do what he did but they need to get over it. He did it. And he's going to continue doing it. The guy just turned 27 a few days ago. Geez, we must have a lot of OLD members here because obviously a good number of them don't recall how quickly you bounce back from things at that age. Sorry if you can't run full court for an hour now and not feel it for three days now, but think back...you could do it when you were in your 20's :)

THis is pretty easy to see: The Texans know what they have in Foster and know how important he is to them and with Tate out last year he DID get more workload than normal. So rest him during fake games and play him during ones that count. That's simple. And the thoughts of him being in a timeshare? I'll take a "Texas Timeshare" any day. For those who have paid attention, Foster's timeshare with Tate when Tate was healthy was about 77% Foster. So, go ahead, cut it back to 67%; that's still about 5% more than about every other team in the league except 2-3. Let him be fresher and I'm sure that will translate late in the game when he rips off a big run for some nice points.

The Texans have a very defined timeshare, also. They are not one of these teams that says "he is in at this situation, he is out at this, etc". THey simply open the game with Foster on the first 2 series. The next guy almost always comes in on the 3rd. Then they go back to Foster and they generally switch it up back and forth until about 5-6 minutes left in the half and then it's all Foster. IF the Texans were on the field last during the half, sometimes they open up with guy #2 (especially if the Texans get the ball first). You can paractically go out and pick up a pizza knowing how they do it. Bottom line, he is in there a lot and he is in there when it matters and that is how he is has been a dominant RB with all those quality starts (more than any other player in the league the past 3 years) and all those TDs.

All these people Jonesing to push guys like Foster and Rice down (and bury guys like MJD and Gore) remind me of that movie "Dazed and Confused" (and that's probably a very appropriate title considering their logic).

Wooderson: That's what I love about these high school girls Young RBs, man. I get older, they stay the same age.

All these guys just want the next new thing because its trendy and they largely ignore proven players. Of course they can always justify it because one of these years they will be exactly right and a player will fall off. But at 27? And after the proven track record shown?

 
At 1.06 there's almost no way I'm taking Foster...

ADP, Martin, Charles, Spiller, McCoy, Richardson are all guys I'm taking over Foster. That gets you to 1.06... then at 1.07 I'm probably taking Calvin. So I'm not taking Foster in redraft until at least 1.08 this season... and even then I'm thinking of ways to avoid taking him and possibly taking someone like Graham at 1.08 and taking someone like Bush or CJ2K at the turn.

 
CowboysHomer said:
The guy hasn't finished out of the top 4 RBs (standard, PPR) since he became a starter. Draft him and don't look back.
He also had the lowest YPC of his career last year and this year is complaining of calf and back problems.
His injuries sound like a 'vet' who wanted to skip preseason.
So he took cortisone shots in his back just to keep up the illusion?

 
CowboysHomer said:
The guy hasn't finished out of the top 4 RBs (standard, PPR) since he became a starter. Draft him and don't look back.
He also had the lowest YPC of his career last year and this year is complaining of calf and back problems.
There is no RB who is more likely to lead the league in TDs than Foster. I'll risk a low YPC or missing a few games for the guy who is most likely to score 15+ TDs.

 
I see the names Martin, Charles, Spiller, McCoy and RIchardson being thrown around as better options than Foster. How many of those guys have 15+ TD potential?

Spiller is great on a per touch basis but he going to have trouble getting double digit TDs on that team. The line is terrible the QB is terrible and they simply aren't going to win many games. Plus I am not sure how Spiller has demonstrated the durability that everyone fears Foster lacks.

I like what Chip Kelly potentially means for RBs but McCoy has broken double digit TDs once since becoming the starter, he has missed games every season too and, like Foster, he also has an above average backup.

Charles is truly explosive but is he going to be used at the goalline? Are the Chiefs going to win a lot of games? Is Charles somehow not a risk for injury? In his first year as a starter he blew out his ACL in week 2 on a non contact injury. His high water mark is 320 touches (6TDs that year). Andy Ried has produced one season where a RB has totaled more 15+ TDs for a RB.

Martin still doesn't have his high priced guard in the lineup (Nicks) and while I like everything about him on paper why does no one worry about the fact that he put up 50% of his TD production (6 of 12)in back-to-back weeks? Does he really have 15+ TD upside on that team?

Richardson is more interesting to me. He has a good line, appears to be on an rising offense, plays very tough and you have to love Norv as his new OC. But no one seems worried by the fact that he was a walking injury report all last season and his YPC (something people are very critical of Foster for) was terrible (3.6). Still I think he looks healthier and I like his potential as a true all-purpose back with Norv calling the shots and no one on the team to competently spell him. Even though I am not sure Cleveland is really ready to take the next step and win a bunch of games (something RBs really need to push those TD numbers into the rarefied air of 15+ TDs) Richardson seems the most likely for 15+ TD upside,

 
I see the names Martin, Charles, Spiller, McCoy and RIchardson being thrown around as better options than Foster. How many of those guys have 15+ TD potential?

Spiller is great on a per touch basis but he going to have trouble getting double digit TDs on that team. The line is terrible the QB is terrible and they simply aren't going to win many games. Plus I am not sure how Spiller has demonstrated the durability that everyone fears Foster lacks.

I like what Chip Kelly potentially means for RBs but McCoy has broken double digit TDs once since becoming the starter, he has missed games every season too and, like Foster, he also has an above average backup.

Charles is truly explosive but is he going to be used at the goalline? Are the Chiefs going to win a lot of games? Is Charles somehow not a risk for injury? In his first year as a starter he blew out his ACL in week 2 on a non contact injury. His high water mark is 320 touches (6TDs that year). Andy Ried has produced one season where a RB has totaled more 15+ TDs for a RB.

Martin still doesn't have his high priced guard in the lineup (Nicks) and while I like everything about him on paper why does no one worry about the fact that he put up 50% of his TD production (6 of 12)in back-to-back weeks? Does he really have 15+ TD upside on that team?

Richardson is more interesting to me. He has a good line, appears to be on an rising offense, plays very tough and you have to love Norv as his new OC. But no one seems worried by the fact that he was a walking injury report all last season and his YPC (something people are very critical of Foster for) was terrible (3.6). Still I think he looks healthier and I like his potential as a true all-purpose back with Norv calling the shots and no one on the team to competently spell him. Even though I am not sure Cleveland is really ready to take the next step and win a bunch of games (something RBs really need to push those TD numbers into the rarefied air of 15+ TDs) Richardson seems the most likely for 15+ TD upside,
:thanks: So many people lose perspective. Its nice to have someone reel them back in every once in a while.

Foster gets criticized for actually being used in ff and passed over for guys that have more question marks than him.

Potential is a nice word people, but I think it is French for "hasn't done Sh#t yet!"

There are fine options that have performed well at the top of the draft but once you get past Peterson, who REALLY has a solid lock on 12+Tds being the expected starting point?

 
I see the names Martin, Charles, Spiller, McCoy and RIchardson being thrown around as better options than Foster. How many of those guys have 15+ TD potential?

Spiller is great on a per touch basis but he going to have trouble getting double digit TDs on that team. The line is terrible the QB is terrible and they simply aren't going to win many games. Plus I am not sure how Spiller has demonstrated the durability that everyone fears Foster lacks.

I like what Chip Kelly potentially means for RBs but McCoy has broken double digit TDs once since becoming the starter, he has missed games every season too and, like Foster, he also has an above average backup.

Charles is truly explosive but is he going to be used at the goalline? Are the Chiefs going to win a lot of games? Is Charles somehow not a risk for injury? In his first year as a starter he blew out his ACL in week 2 on a non contact injury. His high water mark is 320 touches (6TDs that year). Andy Ried has produced one season where a RB has totaled more 15+ TDs for a RB.

Martin still doesn't have his high priced guard in the lineup (Nicks) and while I like everything about him on paper why does no one worry about the fact that he put up 50% of his TD production (6 of 12)in back-to-back weeks? Does he really have 15+ TD upside on that team?

Richardson is more interesting to me. He has a good line, appears to be on an rising offense, plays very tough and you have to love Norv as his new OC. But no one seems worried by the fact that he was a walking injury report all last season and his YPC (something people are very critical of Foster for) was terrible (3.6). Still I think he looks healthier and I like his potential as a true all-purpose back with Norv calling the shots and no one on the team to competently spell him. Even though I am not sure Cleveland is really ready to take the next step and win a bunch of games (something RBs really need to push those TD numbers into the rarefied air of 15+ TDs) Richardson seems the most likely for 15+ TD upside,
Spiller: We really have no idea what this offense is going to look like to be completely honest. It could be a complete train wreck it could also be a really solid offense with Manuel. We have no real clue. It's one of the big reasons I've avoided Spiller this season in favor of guys like Charles (whom I feel we have a better handle on his situation. More on that later) or McCoy (same as Charles).

McCoy: Wait... was 2011 a mirage? Cause last I checked he missed 1 game in 2011 and scored 17 TDs rushing and another through the air. Maybe that didn't happen. But I'm 99% sure it did. He's going to be run into the ground this season with Kelly's offense. In all my leagues when Charles and McCoy were sitting there it was really difficult to decide between the two of them.

Charles: Who else is going to be used at the goal line? Honestly... Charles is the ONLY game in town. How is Charles a risk for injury anymore so than these other guys and especially any more so than Foster who has several lingering issues right now? He torn his ACL in a completely FREAK non-contact injury. Any other RB would have been in the same boat, he slipped on the flag for the down marker. It was a freak accident nothing more and besides hasn't AP taught us not to question these big time injuries as much? He was healthy all last year and there's no reason not to expect the same this season. Also on the TDs sure, 15+ is a lot of TDs though. McCoy did it in 2011 with 18, in 2008 Westbrook had 14, 2007 he had 12, 2006 he had 13. And at least I consider Charles a superior talent to Westbrook and McCoy. There's no reason to think he doesn't post 15+ TDs this season. Everyone keeps looking at Charles past TD production and completely ignoring his lack of coaching and team around him.

Martin: I don't think Martin will post more than 15 TDs. I've made that very clear tons of times on this board. That said I think he's a significantly safer pick than Foster as their floors and ceilings are almost identical and Martin doesn't have lingering injuries or over working concerns. He's also legitimately as Charles is, the only game in town.

Richardson: For all the reasons you explain is in for a big season if he can keep the knees healthy. His YPC average for now at least could probably be somewhat attributed to his nagging injuries all last year. For now he's healthy and we have to at least mostly assume he stays that way and his injury woes are behind him until proven otherwise.

Honestly, any of these guys could end the season RB1. I think they all are better picks than Foster because all of them possess the same floor and more often then not significantly more upside. I'd rank them this way after ADP is off the board.

1a) Charles

1b) McCoy

2) Richardson

3) Martin

4) Spiller

5) Foster

I honestly think you can flip a coin on McCoy and Charles... Charles probably wins out in PPR as he's likely to post 65-70 receptions easily this season. McCoy may be better in standard scoring but I still think it's a coin flip there. Me personally, I think Charles is primed for a 2000+ yard total season and 15 or so TDs overall and he's been my pick since way back in April to finish RB1 this season in all scoring formats.

 
I got Foster at 1.08 last week, but Tate got taken in the 5th or early 6th round if I remember correctly... and not by me. Not happy with how that went.

 
I see the names Martin, Charles, Spiller, McCoy and RIchardson being thrown around as better options than Foster. How many of those guys have 15+ TD potential?

Spiller is great on a per touch basis but he going to have trouble getting double digit TDs on that team. The line is terrible the QB is terrible and they simply aren't going to win many games. Plus I am not sure how Spiller has demonstrated the durability that everyone fears Foster lacks.

I like what Chip Kelly potentially means for RBs but McCoy has broken double digit TDs once since becoming the starter, he has missed games every season too and, like Foster, he also has an above average backup.

Charles is truly explosive but is he going to be used at the goalline? Are the Chiefs going to win a lot of games? Is Charles somehow not a risk for injury? In his first year as a starter he blew out his ACL in week 2 on a non contact injury. His high water mark is 320 touches (6TDs that year). Andy Ried has produced one season where a RB has totaled more 15+ TDs for a RB.

Martin still doesn't have his high priced guard in the lineup (Nicks) and while I like everything about him on paper why does no one worry about the fact that he put up 50% of his TD production (6 of 12)in back-to-back weeks? Does he really have 15+ TD upside on that team?

Richardson is more interesting to me. He has a good line, appears to be on an rising offense, plays very tough and you have to love Norv as his new OC. But no one seems worried by the fact that he was a walking injury report all last season and his YPC (something people are very critical of Foster for) was terrible (3.6). Still I think he looks healthier and I like his potential as a true all-purpose back with Norv calling the shots and no one on the team to competently spell him. Even though I am not sure Cleveland is really ready to take the next step and win a bunch of games (something RBs really need to push those TD numbers into the rarefied air of 15+ TDs) Richardson seems the most likely for 15+ TD upside,
Spiller: We really have no idea what this offense is going to look like to be completely honest. It could be a complete train wreck it could also be a really solid offense with Manuel. We have no real clue. It's one of the big reasons I've avoided Spiller this season in favor of guys like Charles (whom I feel we have a better handle on his situation. More on that later) or McCoy (same as Charles).

McCoy: Wait... was 2011 a mirage? Cause last I checked he missed 1 game in 2011 and scored 17 TDs rushing and another through the air. Maybe that didn't happen. But I'm 99% sure it did. He's going to be run into the ground this season with Kelly's offense. In all my leagues when Charles and McCoy were sitting there it was really difficult to decide between the two of them.

Charles: Who else is going to be used at the goal line? Honestly... Charles is the ONLY game in town. How is Charles a risk for injury anymore so than these other guys and especially any more so than Foster who has several lingering issues right now? He torn his ACL in a completely FREAK non-contact injury. Any other RB would have been in the same boat, he slipped on the flag for the down marker. It was a freak accident nothing more and besides hasn't AP taught us not to question these big time injuries as much? He was healthy all last year and there's no reason not to expect the same this season. Also on the TDs sure, 15+ is a lot of TDs though. McCoy did it in 2011 with 18, in 2008 Westbrook had 14, 2007 he had 12, 2006 he had 13. And at least I consider Charles a superior talent to Westbrook and McCoy. There's no reason to think he doesn't post 15+ TDs this season. Everyone keeps looking at Charles past TD production and completely ignoring his lack of coaching and team around him.

Martin: I don't think Martin will post more than 15 TDs. I've made that very clear tons of times on this board. That said I think he's a significantly safer pick than Foster as their floors and ceilings are almost identical and Martin doesn't have lingering injuries or over working concerns. He's also legitimately as Charles is, the only game in town.

Richardson: For all the reasons you explain is in for a big season if he can keep the knees healthy. His YPC average for now at least could probably be somewhat attributed to his nagging injuries all last year. For now he's healthy and we have to at least mostly assume he stays that way and his injury woes are behind him until proven otherwise.

Honestly, any of these guys could end the season RB1. I think they all are better picks than Foster because all of them possess the same floor and more often then not significantly more upside. I'd rank them this way after ADP is off the board.

1a) Charles

1b) McCoy

2) Richardson

3) Martin

4) Spiller

5) Foster

I honestly think you can flip a coin on McCoy and Charles... Charles probably wins out in PPR as he's likely to post 65-70 receptions easily this season. McCoy may be better in standard scoring but I still think it's a coin flip there. Me personally, I think Charles is primed for a 2000+ yard total season and 15 or so TDs overall and he's been my pick since way back in April to finish RB1 this season in all scoring formats.
Who was Charles' competition for touches last year when he only got 5 rushing tds? And why do you assume he will catch 70 balls easily? just because of Reid?

 
I see the names Martin, Charles, Spiller, McCoy and RIchardson being thrown around as better options than Foster. How many of those guys have 15+ TD potential?
I guess the answer to that is, at a minimum:

- The guy who scored 20 TD's two years ago, who has a radically improved Oline this season, and a new HC whose offense should be heavily reliant on the RB.

- The guy who scored 11 last year, as a rookie, playing with an injury, who is now lead back in a Norv Turner offense with no competition whatsoever for carries, 3rd down duties, or GL touches

- And the guy who scored 12 of them as a rookie last year and will be getting their league-elite offensive line back from injury this year.

Now back to you, I guess.

Of those, or the other guys you mentioned (who do a greater % of their damage with yardage), how many of them...

...Have a recent history of the sort of chronic overuse that has shown a tendency to lead to increased risk of breakdown in subsequent years?

...Have already shown declining per carry production two years running?

...Have already shown the sorts of symptoms and chronic injury complaints that one would expect to see from a RB suffering from that kind of chronic overuse?

...Share roster space with a backup who the team has shown 100% faith in, who it would be perfectly reasonable to expect them to rely on in the event Foster suffers even minor dings, to save their star for what they expect will be a post-season run? Who would make the team perfectly happy to rest their stud rather than hurry him back at any point during the year?

I don't think Foster is a bad bet. I just happen to be part of a group who think that there are other bets who are possibly safer and smarter early in the draft. :shrug:

Different valuations make this hobby interesting.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I see the names Martin, Charles, Spiller, McCoy and RIchardson being thrown around as better options than Foster. How many of those guys have 15+ TD potential?

Spiller is great on a per touch basis but he going to have trouble getting double digit TDs on that team. The line is terrible the QB is terrible and they simply aren't going to win many games. Plus I am not sure how Spiller has demonstrated the durability that everyone fears Foster lacks.

I like what Chip Kelly potentially means for RBs but McCoy has broken double digit TDs once since becoming the starter, he has missed games every season too and, like Foster, he also has an above average backup.

Charles is truly explosive but is he going to be used at the goalline? Are the Chiefs going to win a lot of games? Is Charles somehow not a risk for injury? In his first year as a starter he blew out his ACL in week 2 on a non contact injury. His high water mark is 320 touches (6TDs that year). Andy Ried has produced one season where a RB has totaled more 15+ TDs for a RB.

Martin still doesn't have his high priced guard in the lineup (Nicks) and while I like everything about him on paper why does no one worry about the fact that he put up 50% of his TD production (6 of 12)in back-to-back weeks? Does he really have 15+ TD upside on that team?

Richardson is more interesting to me. He has a good line, appears to be on an rising offense, plays very tough and you have to love Norv as his new OC. But no one seems worried by the fact that he was a walking injury report all last season and his YPC (something people are very critical of Foster for) was terrible (3.6). Still I think he looks healthier and I like his potential as a true all-purpose back with Norv calling the shots and no one on the team to competently spell him. Even though I am not sure Cleveland is really ready to take the next step and win a bunch of games (something RBs really need to push those TD numbers into the rarefied air of 15+ TDs) Richardson seems the most likely for 15+ TD upside,
Spiller: We really have no idea what this offense is going to look like to be completely honest. It could be a complete train wreck it could also be a really solid offense with Manuel. We have no real clue. It's one of the big reasons I've avoided Spiller this season in favor of guys like Charles (whom I feel we have a better handle on his situation. More on that later) or McCoy (same as Charles).

McCoy: Wait... was 2011 a mirage? Cause last I checked he missed 1 game in 2011 and scored 17 TDs rushing and another through the air. Maybe that didn't happen. But I'm 99% sure it did. He's going to be run into the ground this season with Kelly's offense. In all my leagues when Charles and McCoy were sitting there it was really difficult to decide between the two of them.

Charles: Who else is going to be used at the goal line? Honestly... Charles is the ONLY game in town. How is Charles a risk for injury anymore so than these other guys and especially any more so than Foster who has several lingering issues right now? He torn his ACL in a completely FREAK non-contact injury. Any other RB would have been in the same boat, he slipped on the flag for the down marker. It was a freak accident nothing more and besides hasn't AP taught us not to question these big time injuries as much? He was healthy all last year and there's no reason not to expect the same this season. Also on the TDs sure, 15+ is a lot of TDs though. McCoy did it in 2011 with 18, in 2008 Westbrook had 14, 2007 he had 12, 2006 he had 13. And at least I consider Charles a superior talent to Westbrook and McCoy. There's no reason to think he doesn't post 15+ TDs this season. Everyone keeps looking at Charles past TD production and completely ignoring his lack of coaching and team around him.

Martin: I don't think Martin will post more than 15 TDs. I've made that very clear tons of times on this board. That said I think he's a significantly safer pick than Foster as their floors and ceilings are almost identical and Martin doesn't have lingering injuries or over working concerns. He's also legitimately as Charles is, the only game in town.

Richardson: For all the reasons you explain is in for a big season if he can keep the knees healthy. His YPC average for now at least could probably be somewhat attributed to his nagging injuries all last year. For now he's healthy and we have to at least mostly assume he stays that way and his injury woes are behind him until proven otherwise.

Honestly, any of these guys could end the season RB1. I think they all are better picks than Foster because all of them possess the same floor and more often then not significantly more upside. I'd rank them this way after ADP is off the board.

1a) Charles

1b) McCoy

2) Richardson

3) Martin

4) Spiller

5) Foster

I honestly think you can flip a coin on McCoy and Charles... Charles probably wins out in PPR as he's likely to post 65-70 receptions easily this season. McCoy may be better in standard scoring but I still think it's a coin flip there. Me personally, I think Charles is primed for a 2000+ yard total season and 15 or so TDs overall and he's been my pick since way back in April to finish RB1 this season in all scoring formats.
Who was Charles' competition for touches last year when he only got 5 rushing tds? And why do you assume he will catch 70 balls easily? just because of Reid?
McCoy was on pace for 74 catches last year if he wasn't injured and he posted 78 in 15 games in 2010 and another 48 in 2011. Westbrook had 61, 77 and 90 receptions as a starter. So yea, I think he'll catch 70 balls easily just because of Reid. That's kind of how football works my friend. Certain systems are fits for the right players in the right situations. Do you think Cam Newton would be as good in Indy running a West Coast offense? No... he wouldn't.

There were zero competition for touches for Charles last year when he only got 5 rushing TDs. They were however the worst offense in football with no passing game what so ever and a awful defense that kept them passing consistently trying to play catch up. He also had 6 of his 16 starts where he received under 15 carries in the game that won't happen to Charles this season with Reid.

Also look at the difference in goal-line carries of Charles for the past few seasons vs a Reid starting RB...

Charles:

2012 - 31

2011 - 2 (injured all season)

2010 - 26

McCoy:

2012 - 36 *In 12 games, paced for 47

2011 - 65 *In 15 games, paced for 69

2010 - 51 *In 13 starts, paced for somewhere around 61

So... yes, I think Charles getting somewhere around double the amount of red zone carries he normally gets makes him more likely to get double the amount of TDs he normally gets. Which is why I feel like Charles is a good bet for 15+ TDs this season (10 rushing 5 receiving).

Some people seem to write off the Reid coming to KC thing as not that big of a deal. It's the biggest of deals. And even if they still had the weaker offensive line they had last season and still had Cassel behind center? I would STILL think Charles was in the running for better stats this season vs last. With those other two improvements on top of Reid? The sky is the limit for Charles this year. I honestly don't think another RB has a higher ceiling then him right now.

 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top