Official Arian Foster - All Foster news, all the time (1 Viewer)

[MoveToSkypager]

What the interweb apparently isn't doing for you, is allowing to actually watch the games. Any Texan fan who watches every single game thinks you're an idiot for trolling that Foster is a quitter who doesn't want to play. Like most anti Foster trolls this season, you waited until a injury took him out to start slamming his play and abilities while you remained silent for the month before hand when he was playing well. Also please explain how you are "rightfully questioning" a players desire to play? You have supplied zero evidence or examples. So it might as well be 1985, because the internet hasn't done #### for you besides taught you how to troll.

Again, wrong. I do watch the games. I also gave plenty of reasons. His stock garbage, his acting gigs, Foster doing overtime on his commercials, all that ####. Now he quit. Them's the facts.

Nothing that you said is actually a fact it is just a theory. I am going out on a limb and saying that you aren't in the locker room and I doubt you are in Foster's inner circle. So what you say is theory, which is fine but don't cache it as fact.

Your theory that he quit might hold up to more scrutiny if he had not gone to three doctors just looking for one who

would tell him that he could keep playing this season. That is a fact.

His weird stock deal is certainly something that I could understand rubbing people the wrong way but if you look at the deal Foster doesn't get paid unless his "IPO" generates a little over $10 mil. That is a fact.

Based upon those facts I will theorize that he wants that $10 mil and he understands that going on IR makes it highly unlikely that he will ever see that money. That is why he consulted three doctors and that really suggests that, for whatever reason, he really wanted to keep playing.

Nothing that has happened to Foster, not one single thing, supports the notion that he quit. Not sure why you are promoting that theory.

Thanks for disagreeing and being a normal human about it. I admit it's a theory, but I used facts for it. I never said Foster being a quitter was a fact. That was my opinion. Keep in mind that his stock deal isn't just what he makes as an NFL player. It includes endorsements and other related business revenue. That could mean lots and lots of things that doesn't necessitate him running the ball for money.

You did call it a fact, quite clearly actually (see bolded above).

How much endorsement money does Foster generate? Any way you look at it his value is significantly greater if he is on the field performing at a high level. Being on IR only hurts his value because playing is what generates his endorsement potential. Investors are not very likely to jump on an IPO for a guy on IR and possibly on the downward side of their career.

Foster quitting seems like a highly unlikely scenario.

The facts were the facts. My theory was my theory. You can re-read the quote you bolded. He already has acting gigs too.

 

[Shutout]

If Tate moves on and Foster is healthy entering FF drafts next year, where does he get drafted?

My guess would be late in round 2 or early in round 3 as a best case scenario. He's clearly an RB2 at this point.

I wouldn't totally agree with that. It depends how healthy he comes back and what he does in camp. In the full games he played before getting hurt, he was a RB1 even splitting with Tate. With no Tate next year and healthy, I see no reason he wouldn't be a clear RB1 in fantasy. Fear of "breaking down" would likely keep him out of round 1.

I'm going to respectfully disagree. FWIW, presuming Foster is completely healthy, running well in camp, and that Tate has moved on, I would take the following RBs over him:

1. Charles

2. Lynch

3. ADP

4. McCoy

5. Forte

6. Morris

7. Bernard

8. Lacy

To me Foster is in a large group of players that include Murray, Gore, Ridley, Rice, Tate, Johnson, D. Martin. On my board, in a best case scenario, he would check in as RB9 overall. For that to happen, everything would have to trend towards a rebound. That also presumes young bucks like Stacy, Bell, and Miller trend downward. Truthfully, it becomes a jumbled mess IMO after those 8 guys. Couple that with elite WRs and a few elite QBs and Foster's injury, I'm not taking him before the top of round #3 at this point.

I'd be curious to get other's feedback.

I think you would be making the "Adrian Peterson" mistake by letting him fall late enough into rounds 2 or 3 that he basically makes some guy's team. I agree that it will probably happen because people love to downgrade running backs, especially ones that have had an injury, and people particularly love to be on the "Arian foster is falling" watch. They have been for years so proclaiming his demise brings a bit of extra joy to a select group of people.

However, if we keep in mind that all RBs get hurt from time to time (there are NONE that I know of that have played effectively for 3-4 straight years and had no injuries) then we also might accept that many Rbs go through a trough but then ascend again.

So, if we look at it from that perspective, let's paint the scenario where we just write off this season for Foster because he clearly has been hurt. So he gets repaired and we are left with the product of his work he has shown us. Its REALLY good. Then he comes back but you know what's changed? He is healthy, he is motivated and, not that he had much sharing to do before, but that Tate guy isn't here any more either and the guy that is here now is most definitely not a high draft pick. So if he is healthy, and someone grabs him the 3rd, they are basically getting the same production as the guy that spent their top five on whomever they loved.

It's a decent enough theory but what happens if he comes back and is not the guy you hope he will be? You wasted a top 5 pick.

I am as big of a Foster fan as you will find but even I acknowledge that Foster is nowhere near the athlete that Peterson is. A good deal of Foster's success comes from the system (which may or may not be in place next year) and the fact that he was running behind one of the best lines in the league (which is not as good this year as it was in the past and may or may not improve next year).

Lots of variables surrounding Foster and I think you need to start from a position that Foster is not Adrian Peterson.

I don't think you actually use a top five on him. I am just saying you can't let him fall to late 2nd or 3rd. Someone needs to find that perfect balance of risk/reward and prevent somebody from ending up with a Calvin/Gronk/Foster trio to save you all.

Personally, I think, today, that Foster will end up falling into that Reggie Bush spot. Somewhere around 2.4 or 2.5 and that justifies it both ways.

Unless injury red flags just refuse to go away (he gets hurt agains and again with little things, the surgery has setbacks, etc), then I think you have to look at him and accept what you know he can be and you put it in your head that "Well, Gronk was great and then Gronk was broke and now Gronk is great again. Injuries happen" or you think "Well, 33 year old FJAX has value. I guess 27/28 year old Foster has shown at least that much in the past and can again."

 

[Chaka]

The facts were the facts. My theory was my theory. You can re-read the quote you bolded. He already has acting gigs too.

If that is how you see it then you really need to work on your grammar because what you wrote suggests otherwise.

Since something about your writing is not conveying the actual message you are trying to get across would you please clarify a couple things?

What acting gigs are you talking about?

What does "doing overtime on his commercials" mean?

Again I wonder how his not being on the field helps his potential earnings in any way. Could you clarify your position on how being on IR helps him earn more money in the future? The way I see it a big part of his value is being on TV scoring TDs, if he doesn't have that then he doesn't have nearly the same amount of endorsement appeal.

 

[GregR]

The stock theory didn't make any sense in the first place.

Uncle Sam takes over 20% of most people's paycheck. Do you stop trying to maximize your paycheck because 20% of it no longer is part of your take home? Of course not.

More income means he keeps more money even with the stock deal. With the stock deal, with an income of $40m he ends up with $42m. An income of $60m he ends up with $58m. Either way you slice it, $58m is better than $42m. After making the stock deal, it is still in his best interest to earn every penny he can, same as anyone else.

 

[jsharlan]

If Tate moves on and Foster is healthy entering FF drafts next year, where does he get drafted?

My guess would be late in round 2 or early in round 3 as a best case scenario. He's clearly an RB2 at this point.

I wouldn't totally agree with that. It depends how healthy he comes back and what he does in camp. In the full games he played before getting hurt, he was a RB1 even splitting with Tate. With no Tate next year and healthy, I see no reason he wouldn't be a clear RB1 in fantasy. Fear of "breaking down" would likely keep him out of round 1.

I'm going to respectfully disagree. FWIW, presuming Foster is completely healthy, running well in camp, and that Tate has moved on, I would take the following RBs over him:

1. Charles

2. Lynch

3. ADP

4. McCoy

5. Forte

6. Morris

7. Bernard

8. Lacy

To me Foster is in a large group of players that include Murray, Gore, Ridley, Rice, Tate, Johnson, D. Martin. On my board, in a best case scenario, he would check in as RB9 overall. For that to happen, everything would have to trend towards a rebound. That also presumes young bucks like Stacy, Bell, and Miller trend downward. Truthfully, it becomes a jumbled mess IMO after those 8 guys. Couple that with elite WRs and a few elite QBs and Foster's injury, I'm not taking him before the top of round #3 at this point.

I'd be curious to get other's feedback.

I think you would be making the "Adrian Peterson" mistake by letting him fall late enough into rounds 2 or 3 that he basically makes some guy's team. I agree that it will probably happen because people love to downgrade running backs, especially ones that have had an injury, and people particularly love to be on the "Arian foster is falling" watch. They have been for years so proclaiming his demise brings a bit of extra joy to a select group of people.

However, if we keep in mind that all RBs get hurt from time to time (there are NONE that I know of that have played effectively for 3-4 straight years and had no injuries) then we also might accept that many Rbs go through a trough but then ascend again.

So, if we look at it from that perspective, let's paint the scenario where we just write off this season for Foster because he clearly has been hurt. So he gets repaired and we are left with the product of his work he has shown us. Its REALLY good. Then he comes back but you know what's changed? He is healthy, he is motivated and, not that he had much sharing to do before, but that Tate guy isn't here any more either and the guy that is here now is most definitely not a high draft pick. So if he is healthy, and someone grabs him the 3rd, they are basically getting the same production as the guy that spent their top five on whomever they loved.

It's a decent enough theory but what happens if he comes back and is not the guy you hope he will be? You wasted a top 5 pick.

I am as big of a Foster fan as you will find but even I acknowledge that Foster is nowhere near the athlete that Peterson is. A good deal of Foster's success comes from the system (which may or may not be in place next year) and the fact that he was running behind one of the best lines in the league (which is not as good this year as it was in the past and may or may not improve next year).

Lots of variables surrounding Foster and I think you need to start from a position that Foster is not Adrian Peterson.

I dunno if I would advocate a top 5 pick, but I think his value could be in the first round if he comes back healthy. That was the only argument I was making. I think the 2nd or 3rd round as you stated before is a vastly unfair downgrade.

 

[jsharlan]

The stock theory didn't make any sense in the first place.

Uncle Sam takes over 20% of most people's paycheck. Do you stop trying to maximize your paycheck because 20% of it no longer is part of your take home? Of course not.

More income means he keeps more money even with the stock deal. With the stock deal, with an income of $40m he ends up with $42m. An income of $60m he ends up with $58m. Either way you slice it, $58m is better than $42m. After making the stock deal, it is still in his best interest to earn every penny he can, same as anyone else.

You guys are wasting your time with him. He thinks random unrelated "facts" support his opinion when there is no correlation between the two. It's basically like me saying the sky is blue, therefore bears are lazy.

 

[MoveToSkypager]

The stock theory didn't make any sense in the first place.

Uncle Sam takes over 20% of most people's paycheck. Do you stop trying to maximize your paycheck because 20% of it no longer is part of your take home? Of course not.

More income means he keeps more money even with the stock deal. With the stock deal, with an income of $40m he ends up with $42m. An income of $60m he ends up with $58m. Either way you slice it, $58m is better than $42m. After making the stock deal, it is still in his best interest to earn every penny he can, same as anyone else.

You guys are wasting your time with him. He thinks random unrelated "facts" support his opinion when there is no correlation between the two. It's basically like me saying the sky is blue, therefore bears are lazy.

I'M A BIGGER TEXANS FAN THAN YOU, TROLL!

 

[MoveToSkypager]

The stock theory didn't make any sense in the first place.

Uncle Sam takes over 20% of most people's paycheck. Do you stop trying to maximize your paycheck because 20% of it no longer is part of your take home? Of course not.

More income means he keeps more money even with the stock deal. With the stock deal, with an income of $40m he ends up with $42m. An income of $60m he ends up with $58m. Either way you slice it, $58m is better than $42m. After making the stock deal, it is still in his best interest to earn every penny he can, same as anyone else.

That makes sense if you don't factor in that there aren't unlimited hours in a day/days in a year, that Foster might be concerned about his long term health, and that Foster is confident he can earn money in other ways.

 

[Chaka]

The stock theory didn't make any sense in the first place.

Uncle Sam takes over 20% of most people's paycheck. Do you stop trying to maximize your paycheck because 20% of it no longer is part of your take home? Of course not.

More income means he keeps more money even with the stock deal. With the stock deal, with an income of $40m he ends up with $42m. An income of $60m he ends up with $58m. Either way you slice it, $58m is better than $42m. After making the stock deal, it is still in his best interest to earn every penny he can, same as anyone else.

That makes sense if you don't factor in that there aren't unlimited hours in a day/days in a year, that Foster might be concerned about his long term health, and that Foster is confident he can earn money in other ways.

Again you are missing the point that his earning potential dramatically decreases the longer he is not on the field.

Playing football is what gives him value off the field endorsing products.

Once again it does not matter what you think the guy clearly wanted to be back on the field. Maybe it was for the team or maybe it was the fact that he understands being on the field increases his marketability it doesn't matter. What's odd is that for whatever reason you won't accept that.

And I am still wondering what acting jobs he is apparently taking or the whole "overtime" commercial comment was all about. Has he actively been acting or making commercials during this season?

 

[Reegus]

It is simple movetoskypager is butt hurt about his fantasy season and is using foster as a scape goat. /thread

 

[Grace Under Pressure]

No actual news on Foster today? I read that Phillips said that he's still on the roster. Thanks, Wade. Anyone hear more about the upcoming surgery?

 

[steelwind]

Bump. Is he heading to IR or not?

 

[Faust]

O'Brien: Arian Foster can fill third-down role for Texans Arian Foster expects more work in Texans' pass game

 

[Shutout]

O'Brien: Arian Foster can fill third-down role for Texans

Arian Foster expects more work in Texans' pass game

In the early years when he was used more in the passing game, I think we really saw what made him stand out as a RB and he was fantasy gold. This is good news for Foster owners

 

[msommer]

The Ryan Fitzpatrick news is worse news than this is good news

 

[cstu]

The Ryan Fitzpatrick news is worse news than this is good news

The only bright spot about Fitzpatrick for Foster is that Spiller had his best season with him at QB a couple years ago - 1700 total yards and 8 TD's - and that was with worse receivers than the Texans have.

 

[steveski]

He seems to be climbing back up draft boards. Dodds has him as RB5 in PPR. I like him too but I'm thinking that's a little high. I'd definitely take Lacy over him and probably Lynch as well.

 

[cstu]

He seems to be climbing back up draft boards. Dodds has him as RB5 in PPR. I like him too but I'm thinking that's a little high. I'd definitely take Lacy over him and probably Lynch as well.

I don't think Dodds' projections account for injury risk.

 

[Bayhawks]

The Ryan Fitzpatrick news is worse news than this is good news

Not necessarily. In 2011 & 2012 (the 2 full seasons when Fitzpatrick started at QB in Buff), Buffalo was ranked 13th & 6th in rushing, they averaged 5.1 YPC each season, and Buff RBs caught 83 & 86 passes for 785 & 759 yards, with 3 and 2 TDs in those 2 seasons.

Furthermore, once Fitzpatrick became the "permanent" starter at QB in Tenn last year (weeks 10-17), Titan RBs rushed 206 times for 813 yards (4.0 YPC), 7 TDs, 34 rec, 177 rec yds, and 2 rec TDs. That's in 8 games, so extrapolated over a full season, that's 412 rushes, 68 rec, 1980 rush/rec yards, & 18 total TDs,

I don't know that Fitzpatrick at QB is necessarily bad news for Foster.

 

[msommer]

The best RB finish for a team led by Fitzpatrick was BUF in 2012 when Spiller was RB7 at 6 ypc. That year Foster was RB3

In 2011 Fred Jackson was RB13. Arian Foster RB2

The weeks 10-17 Chris Johnson was RB9. Arian Foster injured.

Seems to me that Fitzpatrick is a downgrade from Foster's previous opportunities

 

[maf005]

The best RB finish for a team led by Fitzpatrick was BUF in 2012 when Spiller was RB7 at 6 ypc. That year Foster was RB3

In 2011 Fred Jackson was RB13. Arian Foster RB2

The weeks 10-17 Chris Johnson was RB9. Arian Foster injured.

Seems to me that Fitzpatrick is a downgrade from Foster's previous opportunities

wut

 

[Bayhawks]

The best RB finish for a team led by Fitzpatrick was BUF in 2012 when Spiller was RB7 at 6 ypc. That year Foster was RB3

In 2011 Fred Jackson was RB13. Arian Foster RB2

The weeks 10-17 Chris Johnson was RB9. Arian Foster injured.

Seems to me that Fitzpatrick is a downgrade from Foster's previous opportunities

Anyone who was expecting Foster's numbers in 2014 to be anything similar to what they were in 2011 & 2012 isn't very smart. Especially when you consider that Foster is 3 years older, the QB is different, the HC is different, the OC is different, and Foster is coming off of a major injury.

For those people who were expecting Foster to replicate his numbers from 2011 and 2012, some free tips here: don't count on Ray Rice (#1 RB in 2011), MJD (#3 RB in 2011), Michael Turner (#6 RB in 2011) to be top 10 RBs in 2014.

With regards to Foster's situation in 2014, compared to his situation in 2013, it's definitely not a downgrade. Fitzpatrick is an upgrade over 2013 Schaub, Case Keenum, and TJ Yates; a healthy (if he stays that way) Foster is an upgrade over a hurt Foster from 2013, and Andre Brown isn't as big a threat of stealing touches as Tate was.

 

[cstu]

The best RB finish for a team led by Fitzpatrick was BUF in 2012 when Spiller was RB7 at 6 ypc. That year Foster was RB3

In 2011 Fred Jackson was RB13. Arian Foster RB2

The weeks 10-17 Chris Johnson was RB9. Arian Foster injured.

Seems to me that Fitzpatrick is a downgrade from Foster's previous opportunities

Anyone who was expecting Foster's numbers in 2014 to be anything similar to what they were in 2011 & 2012 isn't very smart. Especially when you consider that Foster is 3 years older, the QB is different, the HC is different, the OC is different, and Foster is coming off of a major injury.

For those people who were expecting Foster to replicate his numbers from 2011 and 2012, some free tips here: don't count on Ray Rice (#1 RB in 2011), MJD (#3 RB in 2011), Michael Turner (#6 RB in 2011) to be top 10 RBs in 2014.

With regards to Foster's situation in 2014, compared to his situation in 2013, it's definitely not a downgrade. Fitzpatrick is an upgrade over 2013 Schaub, Case Keenum, and TJ Yates; a healthy (if he stays that way) Foster is an upgrade over a hurt Foster from 2013, and Andre Brown isn't as big a threat of stealing touches as Tate was.

One problem with your comparison - Foster was actually good when he played last year.

In his last 3 full games against the Seahawks, 49ers and Rams he averaged 162 total yards and 4.7 receptions.

 

[msommer]

The best RB finish for a team led by Fitzpatrick was BUF in 2012 when Spiller was RB7 at 6 ypc. That year Foster was RB3

In 2011 Fred Jackson was RB13. Arian Foster RB2

The weeks 10-17 Chris Johnson was RB9. Arian Foster injured.

Seems to me that Fitzpatrick is a downgrade from Foster's previous opportunities

Anyone who was expecting Foster's numbers in 2014 to be anything similar to what they were in 2011 & 2012 isn't very smart. Especially when you consider that Foster is 3 years older, the QB is different, the HC is different, the OC is different, and Foster is coming off of a major injury.

For those people who were expecting Foster to replicate his numbers from 2011 and 2012, some free tips here: don't count on Ray Rice (#1 RB in 2011), MJD (#3 RB in 2011), Michael Turner (#6 RB in 2011) to be top 10 RBs in 2014.

With regards to Foster's situation in 2014, compared to his situation in 2013, it's definitely not a downgrade. Fitzpatrick is an upgrade over 2013 Schaub, Case Keenum, and TJ Yates; a healthy (if he stays that way) Foster is an upgrade over a hurt Foster from 2013, and Andre Brown isn't as big a threat of stealing touches as Tate was.

Apart from CSTUs comment above: my point is someone is apparently giving him a top five grade (further above) for 2014. That seems unwarranted.

 

[Bayhawks]

The best RB finish for a team led by Fitzpatrick was BUF in 2012 when Spiller was RB7 at 6 ypc. That year Foster was RB3

In 2011 Fred Jackson was RB13. Arian Foster RB2

The weeks 10-17 Chris Johnson was RB9. Arian Foster injured.

Seems to me that Fitzpatrick is a downgrade from Foster's previous opportunities

Anyone who was expecting Foster's numbers in 2014 to be anything similar to what they were in 2011 & 2012 isn't very smart. Especially when you consider that Foster is 3 years older, the QB is different, the HC is different, the OC is different, and Foster is coming off of a major injury.

For those people who were expecting Foster to replicate his numbers from 2011 and 2012, some free tips here: don't count on Ray Rice (#1 RB in 2011), MJD (#3 RB in 2011), Michael Turner (#6 RB in 2011) to be top 10 RBs in 2014.

With regards to Foster's situation in 2014, compared to his situation in 2013, it's definitely not a downgrade. Fitzpatrick is an upgrade over 2013 Schaub, Case Keenum, and TJ Yates; a healthy (if he stays that way) Foster is an upgrade over a hurt Foster from 2013, and Andre Brown isn't as big a threat of stealing touches as Tate was.

One problem with your comparison - Foster was actually good when he played last year.

In his last 3 full games against the Seahawks, 49ers and Rams he averaged 162 total yards and 4.7 receptions.

And in his first 3 full games, against the Chargers, Titans, and Ravens, he averaged 75 total yards and 2.6 receptions. So in 1/2 his full games, he was crap, and 1/2 his full games he was good.

 

[Bayhawks]

The best RB finish for a team led by Fitzpatrick was BUF in 2012 when Spiller was RB7 at 6 ypc. That year Foster was RB3

In 2011 Fred Jackson was RB13. Arian Foster RB2

The weeks 10-17 Chris Johnson was RB9. Arian Foster injured.

Seems to me that Fitzpatrick is a downgrade from Foster's previous opportunities

Anyone who was expecting Foster's numbers in 2014 to be anything similar to what they were in 2011 & 2012 isn't very smart. Especially when you consider that Foster is 3 years older, the QB is different, the HC is different, the OC is different, and Foster is coming off of a major injury.

For those people who were expecting Foster to replicate his numbers from 2011 and 2012, some free tips here: don't count on Ray Rice (#1 RB in 2011), MJD (#3 RB in 2011), Michael Turner (#6 RB in 2011) to be top 10 RBs in 2014.

With regards to Foster's situation in 2014, compared to his situation in 2013, it's definitely not a downgrade. Fitzpatrick is an upgrade over 2013 Schaub, Case Keenum, and TJ Yates; a healthy (if he stays that way) Foster is an upgrade over a hurt Foster from 2013, and Andre Brown isn't as big a threat of stealing touches as Tate was.

Apart from CSTUs comment above: my point is someone is apparently giving him a top five grade (further above) for 2014. That seems unwarranted.

His finishes in 2011 and 2012 have NOTHING to do with his top-5 ranking (or any ranking) in 2014. Situations have changed, and the value of RBs in FF has changed. According to the FBG projections, Foster's RB4 finish in 2011 would make him RB2 in 2014, by almost 25 points.

 

[cstu]

The best RB finish for a team led by Fitzpatrick was BUF in 2012 when Spiller was RB7 at 6 ypc. That year Foster was RB3

In 2011 Fred Jackson was RB13. Arian Foster RB2

The weeks 10-17 Chris Johnson was RB9. Arian Foster injured.

Seems to me that Fitzpatrick is a downgrade from Foster's previous opportunities

Anyone who was expecting Foster's numbers in 2014 to be anything similar to what they were in 2011 & 2012 isn't very smart. Especially when you consider that Foster is 3 years older, the QB is different, the HC is different, the OC is different, and Foster is coming off of a major injury.

For those people who were expecting Foster to replicate his numbers from 2011 and 2012, some free tips here: don't count on Ray Rice (#1 RB in 2011), MJD (#3 RB in 2011), Michael Turner (#6 RB in 2011) to be top 10 RBs in 2014.

With regards to Foster's situation in 2014, compared to his situation in 2013, it's definitely not a downgrade. Fitzpatrick is an upgrade over 2013 Schaub, Case Keenum, and TJ Yates; a healthy (if he stays that way) Foster is an upgrade over a hurt Foster from 2013, and Andre Brown isn't as big a threat of stealing touches as Tate was.

One problem with your comparison - Foster was actually good when he played last year.

In his last 3 full games against the Seahawks, 49ers and Rams he averaged 162 total yards and 4.7 receptions.

And in his first 3 full games, against the Chargers, Titans, and Ravens, he averaged 75 total yards and 2.6 receptions. So in 1/2 his full games, he was crap, and 1/2 his full games he was good.

He didn't play the entire preseason due to back and calf injuries and still averaged over 4 YPC in weeks 2 and 3.

The only thing stopping him from having a top 10 season this year is injury.

 

[msommer]

The best RB finish for a team led by Fitzpatrick was BUF in 2012 when Spiller was RB7 at 6 ypc. That year Foster was RB3

In 2011 Fred Jackson was RB13. Arian Foster RB2

The weeks 10-17 Chris Johnson was RB9. Arian Foster injured.

Seems to me that Fitzpatrick is a downgrade from Foster's previous opportunities

Anyone who was expecting Foster's numbers in 2014 to be anything similar to what they were in 2011 & 2012 isn't very smart. Especially when you consider that Foster is 3 years older, the QB is different, the HC is different, the OC is different, and Foster is coming off of a major injury.

For those people who were expecting Foster to replicate his numbers from 2011 and 2012, some free tips here: don't count on Ray Rice (#1 RB in 2011), MJD (#3 RB in 2011), Michael Turner (#6 RB in 2011) to be top 10 RBs in 2014.

With regards to Foster's situation in 2014, compared to his situation in 2013, it's definitely not a downgrade. Fitzpatrick is an upgrade over 2013 Schaub, Case Keenum, and TJ Yates; a healthy (if he stays that way) Foster is an upgrade over a hurt Foster from 2013, and Andre Brown isn't as big a threat of stealing touches as Tate was.

Apart from CSTUs comment above: my point is someone is apparently giving him a top five grade (further above) for 2014. That seems unwarranted.

His finishes in 2011 and 2012 have NOTHING to do with his top-5 ranking (or any ranking) in 2014. Situations have changed, and the value of RBs in FF has changed. According to the FBG projections, Foster's RB4 finish in 2011 would make him RB2 in 2014, by almost 25 points.

Got some lottery numbers too?

 

[SelenaCat]

I don't think Dodds' projections account for injury risk.

I'm not sure this is entirely true. He always projected Vick in the 12-14 game range as a way to simulate some level of risk. I'll agree that his projections do tend towards best-case scenarios, but that's what the projections are actually *supposed* to do. It's up to the individual drafter to decide whether they're comfortable drafting a player at their best-case point, or at some discount due to their perceived risk.

 

[Bayhawks]

The best RB finish for a team led by Fitzpatrick was BUF in 2012 when Spiller was RB7 at 6 ypc. That year Foster was RB3

In 2011 Fred Jackson was RB13. Arian Foster RB2

The weeks 10-17 Chris Johnson was RB9. Arian Foster injured.

Seems to me that Fitzpatrick is a downgrade from Foster's previous opportunities

Anyone who was expecting Foster's numbers in 2014 to be anything similar to what they were in 2011 & 2012 isn't very smart. Especially when you consider that Foster is 3 years older, the QB is different, the HC is different, the OC is different, and Foster is coming off of a major injury.

For those people who were expecting Foster to replicate his numbers from 2011 and 2012, some free tips here: don't count on Ray Rice (#1 RB in 2011), MJD (#3 RB in 2011), Michael Turner (#6 RB in 2011) to be top 10 RBs in 2014.

With regards to Foster's situation in 2014, compared to his situation in 2013, it's definitely not a downgrade. Fitzpatrick is an upgrade over 2013 Schaub, Case Keenum, and TJ Yates; a healthy (if he stays that way) Foster is an upgrade over a hurt Foster from 2013, and Andre Brown isn't as big a threat of stealing touches as Tate was.

Apart from CSTUs comment above: my point is someone is apparently giving him a top five grade (further above) for 2014. That seems unwarranted.

His finishes in 2011 and 2012 have NOTHING to do with his top-5 ranking (or any ranking) in 2014. Situations have changed, and the value of RBs in FF has changed. According to the FBG projections, Foster's RB4 finish in 2011 would make him RB2 in 2014, by almost 25 points.

Got some lottery numbers too?

I wish.

The point is that RB stats from a few years ago aren't really comparable. We aren't seeing as many RBs with a high volume of touches, so IF Foster is healthy, and IF he is a 3-down RB (as recent talk from he and his HC seems to indicate), he can be a top RB, IN 2014, based on volume, even if the offense around him isn't as good as it was in 2011/2012, because it will surely be better than it was in 2013.

 

[msommer]

The best RB finish for a team led by Fitzpatrick was BUF in 2012 when Spiller was RB7 at 6 ypc. That year Foster was RB3

In 2011 Fred Jackson was RB13. Arian Foster RB2

The weeks 10-17 Chris Johnson was RB9. Arian Foster injured.

Seems to me that Fitzpatrick is a downgrade from Foster's previous opportunities

Anyone who was expecting Foster's numbers in 2014 to be anything similar to what they were in 2011 & 2012 isn't very smart. Especially when you consider that Foster is 3 years older, the QB is different, the HC is different, the OC is different, and Foster is coming off of a major injury.

For those people who were expecting Foster to replicate his numbers from 2011 and 2012, some free tips here: don't count on Ray Rice (#1 RB in 2011), MJD (#3 RB in 2011), Michael Turner (#6 RB in 2011) to be top 10 RBs in 2014.

With regards to Foster's situation in 2014, compared to his situation in 2013, it's definitely not a downgrade. Fitzpatrick is an upgrade over 2013 Schaub, Case Keenum, and TJ Yates; a healthy (if he stays that way) Foster is an upgrade over a hurt Foster from 2013, and Andre Brown isn't as big a threat of stealing touches as Tate was.

Apart from CSTUs comment above: my point is someone is apparently giving him a top five grade (further above) for 2014. That seems unwarranted.

His finishes in 2011 and 2012 have NOTHING to do with his top-5 ranking (or any ranking) in 2014. Situations have changed, and the value of RBs in FF has changed. According to the FBG projections, Foster's RB4 finish in 2011 would make him RB2 in 2014, by almost 25 points.

Got some lottery numbers too?

I wish.

The point is that RB stats from a few years ago aren't really comparable. We aren't seeing as many RBs with a high volume of touches, so IF Foster is healthy, and IF he is a 3-down RB (as recent talk from he and his HC seems to indicate), he can be a top RB, IN 2014, based on volume, even if the offense around him isn't as good as it was in 2011/2012, because it will surely be better than it was in 2013.

You may be right, but you realize you are basing your evaluation on RB stats from a few years ago, right?

 

[Bayhawks]

The best RB finish for a team led by Fitzpatrick was BUF in 2012 when Spiller was RB7 at 6 ypc. That year Foster was RB3

In 2011 Fred Jackson was RB13. Arian Foster RB2

The weeks 10-17 Chris Johnson was RB9. Arian Foster injured.

Seems to me that Fitzpatrick is a downgrade from Foster's previous opportunities

Anyone who was expecting Foster's numbers in 2014 to be anything similar to what they were in 2011 & 2012 isn't very smart. Especially when you consider that Foster is 3 years older, the QB is different, the HC is different, the OC is different, and Foster is coming off of a major injury.

For those people who were expecting Foster to replicate his numbers from 2011 and 2012, some free tips here: don't count on Ray Rice (#1 RB in 2011), MJD (#3 RB in 2011), Michael Turner (#6 RB in 2011) to be top 10 RBs in 2014.

With regards to Foster's situation in 2014, compared to his situation in 2013, it's definitely not a downgrade. Fitzpatrick is an upgrade over 2013 Schaub, Case Keenum, and TJ Yates; a healthy (if he stays that way) Foster is an upgrade over a hurt Foster from 2013, and Andre Brown isn't as big a threat of stealing touches as Tate was.

Apart from CSTUs comment above: my point is someone is apparently giving him a top five grade (further above) for 2014. That seems unwarranted.

His finishes in 2011 and 2012 have NOTHING to do with his top-5 ranking (or any ranking) in 2014. Situations have changed, and the value of RBs in FF has changed. According to the FBG projections, Foster's RB4 finish in 2011 would make him RB2 in 2014, by almost 25 points.

Got some lottery numbers too?

I wish.

The point is that RB stats from a few years ago aren't really comparable. We aren't seeing as many RBs with a high volume of touches, so IF Foster is healthy, and IF he is a 3-down RB (as recent talk from he and his HC seems to indicate), he can be a top RB, IN 2014, based on volume, even if the offense around him isn't as good as it was in 2011/2012, because it will surely be better than it was in 2013.

You may be right, but you realize you are basing your evaluation on RB stats from a few years ago, right?

Not really. I was responding to a poster who said Fitzpatrick being named the starter in Houston was bad news for Foster. I pointed out that, AS A TEAM, Buffalo was a good rushing team during his 2 full years as a starter, and that, AS A TEAM, the Titans had more success running the ball when Fitz became the QB at the end of last year than they had in the beginning of the year. Therefore, concluding that Fitz at QB=downgrade for the running game isn't necessarily valid.

I didn't bring up individual RB stats or FF value/rank until someone else brought up Spiller and/or Foster's FF finishes from a few years ago.

 

[Chaka]

The biggest problem for Foster is the loss of Kubs, incidentally that is also the best thing to happen to Ray Rice.

I like Foster but even if he were completely healthy, with a new system I wouldn't expect anything approximating his top form.

 

[Bojang0301]

The biggest problem for Foster is the loss of Kubs, incidentally that is also the best thing to happen to Ray Rice.

I like Foster but even if he were completely healthy, with a new system I wouldn't expect anything approximating his top form.

Ya when Ray Rice sees the field around week 8 or so...

 

[cstu]

The biggest problem for Foster is the loss of Kubs, incidentally that is also the best thing to happen to Ray Rice.

I like Foster but even if he were completely healthy, with a new system I wouldn't expect anything approximating his top form.

The offense is still going to revolve around Foster as long as Fitzpatrick is the QB.

Fitzpatrick's first year in Buffalo the Spiller and Jackson combined for 1500 rushing yards and 78 receptions. The next year they had over 1700 rushing and 77 receptions.

All I fear with him are reports he tweaked something in practice or his back hurts.

 

[Chaka]

The biggest problem for Foster is the loss of Kubs, incidentally that is also the best thing to happen to Ray Rice.

I like Foster but even if he were completely healthy, with a new system I wouldn't expect anything approximating his top form.

The offense is still going to revolve around Foster as long as Fitzpatrick is the QB.

Fitzpatrick's first year in Buffalo the Spiller and Jackson combined for 1500 rushing yards and 78 receptions. The next year they had over 1700 rushing and 77 receptions.

All I fear with him are reports he tweaked something in practice or his back hurts.

I am sure Foster will be a big part of the offense but I really don't see how what happened in Buffalo has to do with what is happening in Houston. Different coaches and schemes. We know very little about how Hou will run the offense, Foster as the primary weapon makes sense but I wouldn't assume based upon that alone that it makes Foster a top 10 RB.

 

[Chaka]

The biggest problem for Foster is the loss of Kubs, incidentally that is also the best thing to happen to Ray Rice.

I like Foster but even if he were completely healthy, with a new system I wouldn't expect anything approximating his top form.

Ya when Ray Rice sees the field around week 8 or so...

For a first offense where he entered a pre-trial diversion program that will prevent the trial entirely? Doubtful he misses even two games.

 

[Shutout]

The biggest problem for Foster is the loss of Kubs, incidentally that is also the best thing to happen to Ray Rice.

I like Foster but even if he were completely healthy, with a new system I wouldn't expect anything approximating his top form.

Ya when Ray Rice sees the field around week 8 or so...

For a first offense where he entered a pre-trial diversion program that will prevent the trial entirely? Doubtful he misses even two games.

Most reports in the media are suggesting a lot more than two games

 

[Chaka]

The biggest problem for Foster is the loss of Kubs, incidentally that is also the best thing to happen to Ray Rice.

I like Foster but even if he were completely healthy, with a new system I wouldn't expect anything approximating his top form.

Ya when Ray Rice sees the field around week 8 or so...

For a first offense where he entered a pre-trial diversion program that will prevent the trial entirely? Doubtful he misses even two games.

Most reports in the media are suggesting a lot more than two games

Okay

 

[Rolling_akg]

The biggest problem for Foster is the loss of Kubs, incidentally that is also the best thing to happen to Ray Rice.

I like Foster but even if he were completely healthy, with a new system I wouldn't expect anything approximating his top form.

The offense is still going to revolve around Foster as long as Fitzpatrick is the QB.Fitzpatrick's first year in Buffalo the Spiller and Jackson combined for 1500 rushing yards and 78 receptions. The next year they had over 1700 rushing and 77 receptions.

All I fear with him are reports he tweaked something in practice or his back hurts.

I feel/fear the same

 

[Faust]

Rotoworld:

Arian Foster - RB - Texans

Arian Foster is sidelined at Texans camp with what is believed to be a hamstring injury.

Although the Texans insist Foster's injury is "minor," it's pretty troubling he's already missing time after battling hamstring woes over the years. "Hes dealing with something," coach Bill OBrien said. "Hell be fine. Hell be back. Its a minor deal. You know, its a long season. Hell be out there."

Source: Houston Chronicle

Jul 29 - 3:26 PM

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

The biggest problem for Foster is the loss of Kubs, incidentally that is also the best thing to happen to Ray Rice.

I like Foster but even if he were completely healthy, with a new system I wouldn't expect anything approximating his top form.

yeah, ordinarily coaching and scheme changes are a big part of my thinking on players, and I'm always leery when a top producer changes schemes because I think opportunity is such a big part in production, but in this particular case, and I am a little nervouse about a rb leaving the kubiak nest, I think this is probably about as benign as a scheme change as you're likely to get.

if it weren't for the fact that kubiak was already in town, I'd see o'brien as a big plus for foster.

you could even make the case that there are a few things that have improved his situation.

 

[TheFly06]

I really think rookie Alfred Blue, picked in the 6th round, will be a fantasy factor at some point this season. Foster having back surgery is nothing to sneeze at. Kubiak really ran him into the ground in 2012. This could be his Larry Johnson-like decline. As a Texans fan I hate to admit that, but his best durable days are behind him. Once the hamstrings go, that's it.

 

[Chaka]

Yeah I don't think I want much to do with Arian unless he comes at a big discount, which I think is a legitimate possibility.

 

[Ilov80s]

This has nightmare season written all over it for Houston. I wouldn't be surprised if they end up with the first pick in next years draft.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

This has nightmare season written all over it for Houston. I wouldn't be surprised if they end up with the first pick in next years draft.

seriously?

you're that down on o'brien?

what, in particular, makes you think their season is past mediocre to the point where they barely scrounge 2 wins?

 

[ILUVBEER99]

Yeah I don't think I want much to do with Arian unless he comes at a big discount, which I think is a legitimate possibility.

i'm pretty shocked how high he's going at the present time. He's coming off back/hammy injuries and is older, plus he had a huge workload previously.

Not touching him anywhere near his ADP.

 

[Ilov80s]

This has nightmare season written all over it for Houston. I wouldn't be surprised if they end up with the first pick in next years draft.

seriously?

you're that down on o'brien?

what, in particular, makes you think their season is past mediocre to the point where they barely scrounge 2 wins?

It had less to do with the coach and more to do with the talent, aging offensive stars and a major QB problem.

 

[Kool-Aid Larry]

I will peg hou for no fewer wins than carolina

MARK IT DOWN !!!!!!!!!!

 

[Raiderfan32904]

I will peg hou for no fewer wins than carolina

MARK IT DOWN !!!!!!!!!!

playoffs !!!!!!!11111!!!