Raider backfield (1 Viewer)

[Banger]

So in the season it looks as if he Raiders are going to lean on Bush and use McFadden as a COP type back...Bush breaks his thumb and then McFadden mania takes place and he looks like the SOD after a few games, then as has been his pattern so far he comes up lame after Bush gets healthy and then Bush has a great game vs. a division rival for their 1st win of the year.

This backfield has literally been like a ping pong ball bouncing back and forth as both have looked good when they got their shots. My thought is that when McFadden comes back he gets about 40% of the carries and the majority of the catches while Bush gets the majority (60%) of the carries, the goal line looks and an odd few catches here or there. I'm not really sure which is the better back to own at this point. I own Bush and I'm not quite sure the direction I want to go...do you try and acquire McFadden and have a full blown RBBC on your hands (not a fan of this)? do you deal Bush to the McFadden owner off his strong game? or do you hold? Personally, I'm leaning toward trying to package him up for an upgrade or otherwise holding onto him for the weeks when McFadden goes down. What are the pools thoughts on this situation and how it's going to shake out and if you are trying to acquire or deal McFadden or Bush.

 

[sandlotshrink]

This might help....

http://forums.footballguys.com/forum/index...amp;hl=McFadden

 

[eoMMan]

So in the season it looks as if he Raiders are going to lean on Bush and use McFadden as a COP type back...Bush breaks his thumb and then McFadden mania takes place and he looks like the SOD after a few games, then as has been his pattern so far he comes up lame after Bush gets healthy and then Bush has a great game vs. a division rival for their 1st win of the year. This backfield has literally been like a ping pong ball bouncing back and forth as both have looked good when they got their shots. My thought is that when McFadden comes back he gets about 40% of the carries and the majority of the catches while Bush gets the majority (60%) of the carries, the goal line looks and an odd few catches here or there. I'm not really sure which is the better back to own at this point. I own Bush and I'm not quite sure the direction I want to go...do you try and acquire McFadden and have a full blown RBBC on your hands (not a fan of this)? do you deal Bush to the McFadden owner off his strong game? or do you hold? Personally, I'm leaning toward trying to package him up for an upgrade or otherwise holding onto him for the weeks when McFadden goes down. What are the pools thoughts on this situation and how it's going to shake out and if you are trying to acquire or deal McFadden or Bush.

How do you get a carry breakdown of 40% for Bush and 60% for McFadden? I can see Mcfadden getting the majority of the touches (at least 75%) with Bush getting the short yardage carries and goal lines. They are different types of backs and this is what would suit the team best.

 

[Banger]

So in the season it looks as if he Raiders are going to lean on Bush and use McFadden as a COP type back...Bush breaks his thumb and then McFadden mania takes place and he looks like the SOD after a few games, then as has been his pattern so far he comes up lame after Bush gets healthy and then Bush has a great game vs. a division rival for their 1st win of the year. This backfield has literally been like a ping pong ball bouncing back and forth as both have looked good when they got their shots. My thought is that when McFadden comes back he gets about 40% of the carries and the majority of the catches while Bush gets the majority (60%) of the carries, the goal line looks and an odd few catches here or there. I'm not really sure which is the better back to own at this point. I own Bush and I'm not quite sure the direction I want to go...do you try and acquire McFadden and have a full blown RBBC on your hands (not a fan of this)? do you deal Bush to the McFadden owner off his strong game? or do you hold? Personally, I'm leaning toward trying to package him up for an upgrade or otherwise holding onto him for the weeks when McFadden goes down. What are the pools thoughts on this situation and how it's going to shake out and if you are trying to acquire or deal McFadden or Bush.

How do you get a carry breakdown of 40% for Bush and 60% for McFadden? I can see Mcfadden getting the majority of the touches (at least 75%) with Bush getting the short yardage carries and goal lines. They are different types of backs and this is what would suit the team best.

it's because I think Bush is a better between the tackle, ground and pound RB that will be leaned on to be the workhorse (like yesterday) and McFadden is more of a breakaway back and a very good receiver. There is no possible way that the split will be 75/25. McFadden hasn't proven that he can hold up to anything close to that type of work.

 

[eoMMan]

So in the season it looks as if he Raiders are going to lean on Bush and use McFadden as a COP type back...Bush breaks his thumb and then McFadden mania takes place and he looks like the SOD after a few games, then as has been his pattern so far he comes up lame after Bush gets healthy and then Bush has a great game vs. a division rival for their 1st win of the year. This backfield has literally been like a ping pong ball bouncing back and forth as both have looked good when they got their shots. My thought is that when McFadden comes back he gets about 40% of the carries and the majority of the catches while Bush gets the majority (60%) of the carries, the goal line looks and an odd few catches here or there. I'm not really sure which is the better back to own at this point. I own Bush and I'm not quite sure the direction I want to go...do you try and acquire McFadden and have a full blown RBBC on your hands (not a fan of this)? do you deal Bush to the McFadden owner off his strong game? or do you hold? Personally, I'm leaning toward trying to package him up for an upgrade or otherwise holding onto him for the weeks when McFadden goes down. What are the pools thoughts on this situation and how it's going to shake out and if you are trying to acquire or deal McFadden or Bush.

How do you get a carry breakdown of 40% for Bush and 60% for McFadden? I can see Mcfadden getting the majority of the touches (at least 75%) with Bush getting the short yardage carries and goal lines. They are different types of backs and this is what would suit the team best.

it's because I think Bush is a better between the tackle, ground and pound RB that will be leaned on to be the workhorse (like yesterday) and McFadden is more of a breakaway back and a very good receiver. There is no possible way that the split will be 75/25. McFadden hasn't proven that he can hold up to anything close to that type of work.

Hasn't proven?McFadden was the main RB during the first few weeks of the season while Bush was out. Are you a Bush owner or something?

 

[Banger]

So in the season it looks as if he Raiders are going to lean on Bush and use McFadden as a COP type back...Bush breaks his thumb and then McFadden mania takes place and he looks like the SOD after a few games, then as has been his pattern so far he comes up lame after Bush gets healthy and then Bush has a great game vs. a division rival for their 1st win of the year. This backfield has literally been like a ping pong ball bouncing back and forth as both have looked good when they got their shots. My thought is that when McFadden comes back he gets about 40% of the carries and the majority of the catches while Bush gets the majority (60%) of the carries, the goal line looks and an odd few catches here or there. I'm not really sure which is the better back to own at this point. I own Bush and I'm not quite sure the direction I want to go...do you try and acquire McFadden and have a full blown RBBC on your hands (not a fan of this)? do you deal Bush to the McFadden owner off his strong game? or do you hold? Personally, I'm leaning toward trying to package him up for an upgrade or otherwise holding onto him for the weeks when McFadden goes down. What are the pools thoughts on this situation and how it's going to shake out and if you are trying to acquire or deal McFadden or Bush.

How do you get a carry breakdown of 40% for Bush and 60% for McFadden? I can see Mcfadden getting the majority of the touches (at least 75%) with Bush getting the short yardage carries and goal lines. They are different types of backs and this is what would suit the team best.

it's because I think Bush is a better between the tackle, ground and pound RB that will be leaned on to be the workhorse (like yesterday) and McFadden is more of a breakaway back and a very good receiver. There is no possible way that the split will be 75/25. McFadden hasn't proven that he can hold up to anything close to that type of work.

Hasn't proven?McFadden was the main RB during the first few weeks of the season while Bush was out. Are you a Bush owner or something?

and where is he now after 3 weeks? I am a Bush owner and have said as much in my post but doesn't change/alter my opinion. I'm trying to objectively look at the situation and assess the strenghts and weaknesses of each of the players and trying to project out how they'll be used.

 

[Jackstraw]

So in the season it looks as if he Raiders are going to lean on Bush and use McFadden as a COP type back...Bush breaks his thumb and then McFadden mania takes place and he looks like the SOD after a few games, then as has been his pattern so far he comes up lame after Bush gets healthy and then Bush has a great game vs. a division rival for their 1st win of the year. This backfield has literally been like a ping pong ball bouncing back and forth as both have looked good when they got their shots. My thought is that when McFadden comes back he gets about 40% of the carries and the majority of the catches while Bush gets the majority (60%) of the carries, the goal line looks and an odd few catches here or there. I'm not really sure which is the better back to own at this point. I own Bush and I'm not quite sure the direction I want to go...do you try and acquire McFadden and have a full blown RBBC on your hands (not a fan of this)? do you deal Bush to the McFadden owner off his strong game? or do you hold? Personally, I'm leaning toward trying to package him up for an upgrade or otherwise holding onto him for the weeks when McFadden goes down. What are the pools thoughts on this situation and how it's going to shake out and if you are trying to acquire or deal McFadden or Bush.

How do you get a carry breakdown of 40% for Bush and 60% for McFadden? I can see Mcfadden getting the majority of the touches (at least 75%) with Bush getting the short yardage carries and goal lines. They are different types of backs and this is what would suit the team best.

it's because I think Bush is a better between the tackle, ground and pound RB that will be leaned on to be the workhorse (like yesterday) and McFadden is more of a breakaway back and a very good receiver. There is no possible way that the split will be 75/25. McFadden hasn't proven that he can hold up to anything close to that type of work.

Hasn't proven?McFadden was the main RB during the first few weeks of the season while Bush was out. Are you a Bush owner or something?

he made it a grand total of three weeks before going on the shelf.

 

[eoMMan]

So in the season it looks as if he Raiders are going to lean on Bush and use McFadden as a COP type back...Bush breaks his thumb and then McFadden mania takes place and he looks like the SOD after a few games, then as has been his pattern so far he comes up lame after Bush gets healthy and then Bush has a great game vs. a division rival for their 1st win of the year. This backfield has literally been like a ping pong ball bouncing back and forth as both have looked good when they got their shots. My thought is that when McFadden comes back he gets about 40% of the carries and the majority of the catches while Bush gets the majority (60%) of the carries, the goal line looks and an odd few catches here or there. I'm not really sure which is the better back to own at this point. I own Bush and I'm not quite sure the direction I want to go...do you try and acquire McFadden and have a full blown RBBC on your hands (not a fan of this)? do you deal Bush to the McFadden owner off his strong game? or do you hold? Personally, I'm leaning toward trying to package him up for an upgrade or otherwise holding onto him for the weeks when McFadden goes down. What are the pools thoughts on this situation and how it's going to shake out and if you are trying to acquire or deal McFadden or Bush.

How do you get a carry breakdown of 40% for Bush and 60% for McFadden? I can see Mcfadden getting the majority of the touches (at least 75%) with Bush getting the short yardage carries and goal lines. They are different types of backs and this is what would suit the team best.

it's because I think Bush is a better between the tackle, ground and pound RB that will be leaned on to be the workhorse (like yesterday) and McFadden is more of a breakaway back and a very good receiver. There is no possible way that the split will be 75/25. McFadden hasn't proven that he can hold up to anything close to that type of work.

Hasn't proven?McFadden was the main RB during the first few weeks of the season while Bush was out. Are you a Bush owner or something?

and where is he now after 3 weeks? I am a Bush owner and have said as much in my post but doesn't change/alter my opinion. I'm trying to objectively look at the situation and assess the strenghts and weaknesses of each of the players and trying to project out how they'll be used.

He has a hamstring injury that shouldn't keep out of action for too long. Look at it this way....he's missed less games than your boy Bush did. I agree with looking at the situation objectively and I really don't understand why you don't think they would lean on McFadden when he's healthy after seeing how productive he was in the first few games (554 total yards in only 4 games).

 

[eoMMan]

So in the season it looks as if he Raiders are going to lean on Bush and use McFadden as a COP type back...Bush breaks his thumb and then McFadden mania takes place and he looks like the SOD after a few games, then as has been his pattern so far he comes up lame after Bush gets healthy and then Bush has a great game vs. a division rival for their 1st win of the year. This backfield has literally been like a ping pong ball bouncing back and forth as both have looked good when they got their shots. My thought is that when McFadden comes back he gets about 40% of the carries and the majority of the catches while Bush gets the majority (60%) of the carries, the goal line looks and an odd few catches here or there. I'm not really sure which is the better back to own at this point. I own Bush and I'm not quite sure the direction I want to go...do you try and acquire McFadden and have a full blown RBBC on your hands (not a fan of this)? do you deal Bush to the McFadden owner off his strong game? or do you hold? Personally, I'm leaning toward trying to package him up for an upgrade or otherwise holding onto him for the weeks when McFadden goes down. What are the pools thoughts on this situation and how it's going to shake out and if you are trying to acquire or deal McFadden or Bush.

How do you get a carry breakdown of 40% for Bush and 60% for McFadden? I can see Mcfadden getting the majority of the touches (at least 75%) with Bush getting the short yardage carries and goal lines. They are different types of backs and this is what would suit the team best.

it's because I think Bush is a better between the tackle, ground and pound RB that will be leaned on to be the workhorse (like yesterday) and McFadden is more of a breakaway back and a very good receiver. There is no possible way that the split will be 75/25. McFadden hasn't proven that he can hold up to anything close to that type of work.

Hasn't proven?McFadden was the main RB during the first few weeks of the season while Bush was out. Are you a Bush owner or something?

he made it a grand total of three weeks before going on the shelf.

And Bush made it...oh wait....Bush was hurt from the start!

 

[basher]

He has a hamstring injury that shouldn't keep out of action for too long.

Look at it this way....he's missed less games than your boy Bush did.

I agree with looking at the situation objectively and I really don't understand why you don't think they would lean on McFadden when he's healthy after seeing how productive he was in the first few games (554 total yards in only 4 games).

You must be new to McFadden ownership.

 

[Multiple Scores]

Is dmac back this week?

 

[eoMMan]

He has a hamstring injury that shouldn't keep out of action for too long.

Look at it this way....he's missed less games than your boy Bush did.

I agree with looking at the situation objectively and I really don't understand why you don't think they would lean on McFadden when he's healthy after seeing how productive he was in the first few games (554 total yards in only 4 games).

You must be new to McFadden ownership.

No, sir, I drafted him and he's way out performed his draft spot.Please stay on topic.

 

[Scooby1974]

Is dmac back this week?

And if he is back, is he 100% or is he hobbled? If he's hobbled, how is he going to break off those long runs? Oakland had the luxury of not needing Bush for a few weeks, but the weeks ran out.

 

[Banger]

He has a hamstring injury that shouldn't keep out of action for too long. Look at it this way....he's missed less games than your boy Bush did. I agree with looking at the situation objectively and I really don't understand why you don't think they would lean on McFadden when he's healthy after seeing how productive he was in the first few games (554 total yards in only 4 games).

and he's had hammy and other injuries in the past. I'm not saying they won't use McFadden, I think they will. I think they'll use him in the passing game a lot and give him some handoffs as well but as an NFL coach if you can have a guy that pounds and wears down the defense and allows you to impose your will on them while moving the chains you are going to tend to lean on that guy. See T. Jones and Charles in KC and Bush>>T. Jones. McFadden has been constantly injured since he's been in the league and while talented they need to keep him on the field and that's not likely to happen if they give him 75% of the touches as you've stated. Also, please stop with the "my boy" type posts as if that's going to weaken the argument. I've been doing this a long time and I'm not going to support a guy just because he's on my team. Bush had 135 yards which works out to exactly what McFadden has averaged, he also got a critical red zone TD (and one last week) against a division rival and better competition than McFadden has faced. I'm thinking this is going to be a fantasy mess as they essentially split the touches since they both have strenghts the other doesn't possess.

 

[NatronIsMean]

The way I see it is McFadden 60/40 at this point with Bush for short yardage. It's hard to imagine them not using McFadden fairly exclusively between the 20s and Bush in short yardage. That's just my take after watching McFadden and due to his versatility in the passing game.

What can't be ignored is how good McFadden looked between the tackles the first 3 weeks. That's the key for me. With McFadden in, it could be an off tackle, sweep, screen, etc. The defense has no clue and it is all effective. He's simply far more versatile.

That said, when they get into a "pound it out" scenario late in games, I also would expect to see more Bush in that type of scenario.

 

[Cripster]

They both will play when DMC returns IMO. DMC is brittle, but much harder to game plan. They would have been in a committee from the start had they both been healthy at the same time.

 

[eoMMan]

He has a hamstring injury that shouldn't keep out of action for too long. Look at it this way....he's missed less games than your boy Bush did. I agree with looking at the situation objectively and I really don't understand why you don't think they would lean on McFadden when he's healthy after seeing how productive he was in the first few games (554 total yards in only 4 games).

and he's had hammy and other injuries in the past. I'm not saying they won't use McFadden, I think they will. I think they'll use him in the passing game a lot and give him some handoffs as well but as an NFL coach if you can have a guy that pounds and wears down the defense and allows you to impose your will on them while moving the chains you are going to tend to lean on that guy. See T. Jones and Charles in KC and Bush>>T. Jones. McFadden has been constantly injured since he's been in the league and while talented they need to keep him on the field and that's not likely to happen if they give him 75% of the touches as you've stated. Also, please stop with the "my boy" type posts as if that's going to weaken the argument. I've been doing this a long time and I'm not going to support a guy just because he's on my team. Bush had 135 yards which works out to exactly what McFadden has averaged, he also got a critical red zone TD (and one last week) against a division rival and better competition than McFadden has faced. I'm thinking this is going to be a fantasy mess as they essentially split the touches since they both have strenghts the other doesn't possess.

They've both had injuries in the past. Please don't act like McFadden is the new Fred Taylor. I agree that they both have their own skillsets. I just don't understand why you are so quick to say Bush will get the majority of the carries after he has one good game.

 

[TheDirtyWord]

I can see Cable taking a page from the Todd Haley offensive playbook and splitting it down the middle. Face is, McFadden and Bush have already dealt with injuries thus far this season so I'd think there would be a desire to keep them fresh.

Both will be significant contributing members to an NFL offense, but will cannibalize each others fantasy ceilings so long as they are both healthy.

 

[basher]

He has a hamstring injury that shouldn't keep out of action for too long.

Look at it this way....he's missed less games than your boy Bush did.

I agree with looking at the situation objectively and I really don't understand why you don't think they would lean on McFadden when he's healthy after seeing how productive he was in the first few games (554 total yards in only 4 games).

You must be new to McFadden ownership.

No, sir, I drafted him and he's way out performed his draft spot.Please stay on topic.

I am on topic and you clearly are new to DMC ownership. You say "he shouldn't be kept out of action long with a hamstring injury" clearly showing your naivety. Also, with the QB play what it is behind the Raiders I see both of these two getting into a heavy RBBC when DMC returns.

 

[eoMMan]

He has a hamstring injury that shouldn't keep out of action for too long.

Look at it this way....he's missed less games than your boy Bush did.

I agree with looking at the situation objectively and I really don't understand why you don't think they would lean on McFadden when he's healthy after seeing how productive he was in the first few games (554 total yards in only 4 games).

You must be new to McFadden ownership.

No, sir, I drafted him and he's way out performed his draft spot.Please stay on topic.

I am on topic and you clearly are new to DMC ownership. You say "he shouldn't be kept out of action long with a hamstring injury" clearly showing your naivety. Also, with the QB play what it is behind the Raiders I see both of these two getting into a heavy RBBC when DMC returns.

I DRAFTED HIM.

Regarding the hamstring injury, how long do you expect him to be out?

I think missing less than 3 or 4 weeks isn't that long of a time.

 

[Banger]

He has a hamstring injury that shouldn't keep out of action for too long. Look at it this way....he's missed less games than your boy Bush did. I agree with looking at the situation objectively and I really don't understand why you don't think they would lean on McFadden when he's healthy after seeing how productive he was in the first few games (554 total yards in only 4 games).

and he's had hammy and other injuries in the past. I'm not saying they won't use McFadden, I think they will. I think they'll use him in the passing game a lot and give him some handoffs as well but as an NFL coach if you can have a guy that pounds and wears down the defense and allows you to impose your will on them while moving the chains you are going to tend to lean on that guy. See T. Jones and Charles in KC and Bush>>T. Jones. McFadden has been constantly injured since he's been in the league and while talented they need to keep him on the field and that's not likely to happen if they give him 75% of the touches as you've stated. Also, please stop with the "my boy" type posts as if that's going to weaken the argument. I've been doing this a long time and I'm not going to support a guy just because he's on my team. Bush had 135 yards which works out to exactly what McFadden has averaged, he also got a critical red zone TD (and one last week) against a division rival and better competition than McFadden has faced. I'm thinking this is going to be a fantasy mess as they essentially split the touches since they both have strenghts the other doesn't possess.

They've both had injuries in the past. Please don't act like McFadden is the new Fred Taylor. I agree that they both have their own skillsets. I just don't understand why you are so quick to say Bush will get the majority of the carries after he has one good game.

or why McFadden will get them after having 3 good games. Essentially, each game each guy was the starter they looked good and had very similar stats. Prior to the year begining before Bush broke his thumb, the plan seemed to be to lean on Bush between the tackles and have McFadden be the COP/receiver and when they are both healthy I don't see why that would change.This is McFadden's 3rd year, the 1st he missed 3 games, the 2nd he missed 4 games, this year after 4 games he's missed one so basically he's been on the shelf for 25% of his career. Most of the injuries he's had are the nagging/leg type injuries and for a back that relies on explosiveness, that's an issue.

 

[basher]

In the past McFadden has had issues with hamstring pulls and he seems to have a tendency to be a slow healer. My guess is he will be out the full 4 weeks which is a lot for hamstring pulls.

Also, you kind of want him to make sure his wheels are good to go because he isn't the banger type to be able to operate slow.

 

[eoMMan]

He has a hamstring injury that shouldn't keep out of action for too long. Look at it this way....he's missed less games than your boy Bush did. I agree with looking at the situation objectively and I really don't understand why you don't think they would lean on McFadden when he's healthy after seeing how productive he was in the first few games (554 total yards in only 4 games).

and he's had hammy and other injuries in the past. I'm not saying they won't use McFadden, I think they will. I think they'll use him in the passing game a lot and give him some handoffs as well but as an NFL coach if you can have a guy that pounds and wears down the defense and allows you to impose your will on them while moving the chains you are going to tend to lean on that guy. See T. Jones and Charles in KC and Bush>>T. Jones. McFadden has been constantly injured since he's been in the league and while talented they need to keep him on the field and that's not likely to happen if they give him 75% of the touches as you've stated. Also, please stop with the "my boy" type posts as if that's going to weaken the argument. I've been doing this a long time and I'm not going to support a guy just because he's on my team. Bush had 135 yards which works out to exactly what McFadden has averaged, he also got a critical red zone TD (and one last week) against a division rival and better competition than McFadden has faced. I'm thinking this is going to be a fantasy mess as they essentially split the touches since they both have strenghts the other doesn't possess.

They've both had injuries in the past. Please don't act like McFadden is the new Fred Taylor. I agree that they both have their own skillsets. I just don't understand why you are so quick to say Bush will get the majority of the carries after he has one good game.

or why McFadden will get them after having 3 good games. Essentially, each game each guy was the starter they looked good and had very similar stats. Prior to the year begining before Bush broke his thumb, the plan seemed to be to lean on Bush between the tackles and have McFadden be the COP/receiver and when they are both healthy I don't see why that would change.This is McFadden's 3rd year, the 1st he missed 3 games, the 2nd he missed 4 games, this year after 4 games he's missed one so basically he's been on the shelf for 25% of his career. Most of the injuries he's had are the nagging/leg type injuries and for a back that relies on explosiveness, that's an issue.

No, you are incorrect. There was not "plan" in place prior to Bush breaking his thumb. It was still up in the air on how they were both going to be used in the preseason. They were both going to play but it wasn't determined on who was going to get more touches. McFadden had his hamstring injury in the preseason and Bush had his thumb injury a little later on. There was no plan.

Darren McFadden-RB- Raiders Aug. 6 - 11:53 am et Raiders coach Tom Cable remains noncommittal about how he intends to use Darren McFadden and Michael Bush this season.Cable told both backs that it's an open competition before camp opened, and he's not going to tip his hand this early. The two have very different styles, making it easy for Oakland to use them in complementary roles. Still, it's one of the summer's most interesting battles from a fantasy perspective. If one can emerge, he'd be a very nice value pick in fantasy drafts.Source: San Jose Mercury News Related: Michael Bush

 

[shnikies]

He has a hamstring injury that shouldn't keep out of action for too long.

Look at it this way....he's missed less games than your boy Bush did.

I agree with looking at the situation objectively and I really don't understand why you don't think they would lean on McFadden when he's healthy after seeing how productive he was in the first few games (554 total yards in only 4 games).

and he's had hammy and other injuries in the past. I'm not saying they won't use McFadden, I think they will. I think they'll use him in the passing game a lot and give him some handoffs as well but as an NFL coach if you can have a guy that pounds and wears down the defense and allows you to impose your will on them while moving the chains you are going to tend to lean on that guy. See T. Jones and Charles in KC and Bush>>T. Jones. McFadden has been constantly injured since he's been in the league and while talented they need to keep him on the field and that's not likely to happen if they give him 75% of the touches as you've stated. Also, please stop with the "my boy" type posts as if that's going to weaken the argument. I've been doing this a long time and I'm not going to support a guy just because he's on my team. Bush had 135 yards which works out to exactly what McFadden has averaged, he also got a critical red zone TD (and one last week) against a division rival and better competition than McFadden has faced. I'm thinking this is going to be a fantasy mess as they essentially split the touches since they both have strenghts the other doesn't possess.

They've both had injuries in the past. Please don't act like McFadden is the new Fred Taylor. I agree that they both have their own skillsets. I just don't understand why you are so quick to say Bush will get the majority of the carries after he has one good game.

Fred Taylor? Number 15 on the all-time rushing list? Yeah, nobody will ever think McFadden will be as good as him.

 

[fantasizing]

The good news for the Raiders and the bad news for a fantasy owner who owns just one of the two backs is that Oakland

will probably use both about equal amount.

Oakland's passing game is still strungling, and McFadden helps move the chains in the passing game. He's basically like

another receiver out there, and there's no way Oakland will abandon having that type of receiving threat.

McFadden probably won't get many touchdowns going forward, unless he pops a long one, but will get lots of touches running

and receiving.

Bush will probably get all the short yardage and goalline carries and will outscore McFadden touchdown wise.

It's a tough scenario to be in if you have to start one of the two backs. At the end of the day, their fantasy production

may end up being quite similar.

It's almost like the CJ/Lendale White situation a couple of years back.

Personally, I'd rather start McFadden becuase he will get lots of touches (running & receiving), and therefore will get his yardage, and he is a threat to break a long one for a TD (although that is just bonus).

With Bush, you're basically banking on him getting a goaline TD or two. If that doesn't happen, he produces a below average fantasy output.

 

[Banger]

No, you are incorrect. There was not "plan" in place prior to Bush breaking his thumb. It was still up in the air on how they were both going to be used in the preseason. They were both going to play but it wasn't determined on who was going to get more touches. McFadden had his hamstring injury in the preseason and Bush had his thumb injury a little later on. There was no plan.

Darren McFadden-RB- Raiders Aug. 6 - 11:53 am et Raiders coach Tom Cable remains noncommittal about how he intends to use Darren McFadden and Michael Bush this season.Cable told both backs that it's an open competition before camp opened, and he's not going to tip his hand this early. The two have very different styles, making it easy for Oakland to use them in complementary roles. Still, it's one of the summer's most interesting battles from a fantasy perspective. If one can emerge, he'd be a very nice value pick in fantasy drafts.Source: San Jose Mercury News Related: Michael Bush

and I can find a handful of articles that say that Bush was supposed to be the lead back or that it was supposed to be a job share since both have complimentary attributes (which is the way I see it breaking down).

 

[eoMMan]

No, you are incorrect. There was not "plan" in place prior to Bush breaking his thumb. It was still up in the air on how they were both going to be used in the preseason. They were both going to play but it wasn't determined on who was going to get more touches. McFadden had his hamstring injury in the preseason and Bush had his thumb injury a little later on. There was no plan.

Darren McFadden-RB- Raiders Aug. 6 - 11:53 am et Raiders coach Tom Cable remains noncommittal about how he intends to use Darren McFadden and Michael Bush this season.Cable told both backs that it's an open competition before camp opened, and he's not going to tip his hand this early. The two have very different styles, making it easy for Oakland to use them in complementary roles. Still, it's one of the summer's most interesting battles from a fantasy perspective. If one can emerge, he'd be a very nice value pick in fantasy drafts.Source: San Jose Mercury News Related: Michael Bush

and I can find a handful of articles that say that Bush was supposed to be the lead back or that it was supposed to be a job share since both have complimentary attributes (which is the way I see it breaking down).

You can find articles from August 2010 that say Bush is supposed to be the lead back?

 

[davidwb]

ideally, the Raiders use them as New Orleans uses Bush and Thomas. Of course, that fact that 3 of the four are hurt right now makes this difficult -- but it might make the comparison even more apt!

 

[grouse]

McFadden didn't come close to sniffing the practice field last week, so his return this week is no lock. The Raiders have two home wins so far, one with McFadden as the feature guy and the other with Bush. Now they go on the road to take on a desperate cross-town rival. If Bush's game travels well and helps grind out a rare Raiders road win against the 49ers, it will go a long way to ensuring a big role for him the rest of the way. Winning is everything. The big concern is that this eventually becomes a Wells/Hightower scenario, which may be inevitable. I think there's more value in Bush/McFadden especially in lieu of the checkered injury history, but if both these guys are healthy, neither of them will be a reliable fantasy starter without volume.

 

[richn]

No, you are incorrect. There was not "plan" in place prior to Bush breaking his thumb. It was still up in the air on how they were both going to be used in the preseason. They were both going to play but it wasn't determined on who was going to get more touches. McFadden had his hamstring injury in the preseason and Bush had his thumb injury a little later on. There was no plan.

Darren McFadden-RB- Raiders Aug. 6 - 11:53 am et Raiders coach Tom Cable remains noncommittal about how he intends to use Darren McFadden and Michael Bush this season.Cable told both backs that it's an open competition before camp opened, and he's not going to tip his hand this early. The two have very different styles, making it easy for Oakland to use them in complementary roles. Still, it's one of the summer's most interesting battles from a fantasy perspective. If one can emerge, he'd be a very nice value pick in fantasy drafts.Source: San Jose Mercury News Related: Michael Bush

and I can find a handful of articles that say that Bush was supposed to be the lead back or that it was supposed to be a job share since both have complimentary attributes (which is the way I see it breaking down).

You can find articles from August 2010 that say Bush is supposed to be the lead back?

who's that chick in your avatar? she looks hot

 

[eoMMan]

No, you are incorrect. There was not "plan" in place prior to Bush breaking his thumb. It was still up in the air on how they were both going to be used in the preseason. They were both going to play but it wasn't determined on who was going to get more touches. McFadden had his hamstring injury in the preseason and Bush had his thumb injury a little later on. There was no plan.

Darren McFadden-RB- Raiders Aug. 6 - 11:53 am et Raiders coach Tom Cable remains noncommittal about how he intends to use Darren McFadden and Michael Bush this season.Cable told both backs that it's an open competition before camp opened, and he's not going to tip his hand this early. The two have very different styles, making it easy for Oakland to use them in complementary roles. Still, it's one of the summer's most interesting battles from a fantasy perspective. If one can emerge, he'd be a very nice value pick in fantasy drafts.Source: San Jose Mercury News Related: Michael Bush

and I can find a handful of articles that say that Bush was supposed to be the lead back or that it was supposed to be a job share since both have complimentary attributes (which is the way I see it breaking down).

You can find articles from August 2010 that say Bush is supposed to be the lead back?

who's that chick in your avatar? she looks hot

Raven Riley.....she's very NSFW (not safe for work).

 

[Banger]

No, you are incorrect. There was not "plan" in place prior to Bush breaking his thumb. It was still up in the air on how they were both going to be used in the preseason. They were both going to play but it wasn't determined on who was going to get more touches. McFadden had his hamstring injury in the preseason and Bush had his thumb injury a little later on. There was no plan.

Darren McFadden-RB- Raiders Aug. 6 - 11:53 am et Raiders coach Tom Cable remains noncommittal about how he intends to use Darren McFadden and Michael Bush this season.Cable told both backs that it's an open competition before camp opened, and he's not going to tip his hand this early. The two have very different styles, making it easy for Oakland to use them in complementary roles. Still, it's one of the summer's most interesting battles from a fantasy perspective. If one can emerge, he'd be a very nice value pick in fantasy drafts.Source: San Jose Mercury News Related: Michael Bush

and I can find a handful of articles that say that Bush was supposed to be the lead back or that it was supposed to be a job share since both have complimentary attributes (which is the way I see it breaking down).

You can find articles from August 2010 that say Bush is supposed to be the lead back?

I remember reading over the summer, I don't have them at my finger tips but it's really pointless now. What matters is how it's going to be handled going forward and the coaching staff isn't going to come out and state anything publicly so we have to try and figure it out on our own. I think this is going to be a job share which = fantasy mess albeit they may be productive week to week I don't see either one being clearly ahead of the other when healthy.

 

[basher]

who's that chick in your avatar? she looks hot

Raven Riley.....she's very NSFW (not safe for work).

She also has a club foot

 

[richn]

who's that chick in your avatar? she looks hot

Raven Riley.....she's very NSFW (not safe for work).

She also has a club foot

Thanks have to check her out, bro I don't care if she has no feet

 

[Babu Bhatt2]

No, you are incorrect. There was not "plan" in place prior to Bush breaking his thumb. It was still up in the air on how they were both going to be used in the preseason. They were both going to play but it wasn't determined on who was going to get more touches. McFadden had his hamstring injury in the preseason and Bush had his thumb injury a little later on. There was no plan.

Darren McFadden-RB- Raiders Aug. 6 - 11:53 am et Raiders coach Tom Cable remains noncommittal about how he intends to use Darren McFadden and Michael Bush this season.Cable told both backs that it's an open competition before camp opened, and he's not going to tip his hand this early. The two have very different styles, making it easy for Oakland to use them in complementary roles. Still, it's one of the summer's most interesting battles from a fantasy perspective. If one can emerge, he'd be a very nice value pick in fantasy drafts.Source: San Jose Mercury News Related: Michael Bush

and I can find a handful of articles that say that Bush was supposed to be the lead back or that it was supposed to be a job share since both have complimentary attributes (which is the way I see it breaking down).

You can find articles from August 2010 that say Bush is supposed to be the lead back?

Yes. Players and coaches were referring to Bush as the "bell cow."

 

[KellysHeroes]

as an owner of both backs in multiple leagues, I will continue to play Bush over McFadden even when DMC is back until I see McFadden retake the starting role.

 

[eoMMan]

who's that chick in your avatar? she looks hot

Raven Riley.....she's very NSFW (not safe for work).

She also has a club foot

Figures YOU would be focused on her foot.

 

[gandalas]

He has a hamstring injury that shouldn't keep out of action for too long.

Look at it this way....he's missed less games than your boy Bush did.

I agree with looking at the situation objectively and I really don't understand why you don't think they would lean on McFadden when he's healthy after seeing how productive he was in the first few games (554 total yards in only 4 games).

You must be new to McFadden ownership.

No, sir, I drafted him and he's way out performed his draft spot.Please stay on topic.

That quote IS on topic...I drafted him as well...1st overall in my rookie draft in 2 different leagues. He in NO way has out-performed his draft spot, especially when I could have taken any of: Chris Johnson, Rashard Mendenhall, Jonathan Stewart, Matt Forte, Ray Rice, Jamaal Charles. I certainly hope that I can finally get some return on my investment after 3 years, but a healthy McFadden has been an illusion so far in his career.

 

[eoMMan]

No, you are incorrect. There was not "plan" in place prior to Bush breaking his thumb. It was still up in the air on how they were both going to be used in the preseason. They were both going to play but it wasn't determined on who was going to get more touches. McFadden had his hamstring injury in the preseason and Bush had his thumb injury a little later on. There was no plan.

Darren McFadden-RB- Raiders Aug. 6 - 11:53 am et Raiders coach Tom Cable remains noncommittal about how he intends to use Darren McFadden and Michael Bush this season.Cable told both backs that it's an open competition before camp opened, and he's not going to tip his hand this early. The two have very different styles, making it easy for Oakland to use them in complementary roles. Still, it's one of the summer's most interesting battles from a fantasy perspective. If one can emerge, he'd be a very nice value pick in fantasy drafts.Source: San Jose Mercury News Related: Michael Bush

and I can find a handful of articles that say that Bush was supposed to be the lead back or that it was supposed to be a job share since both have complimentary attributes (which is the way I see it breaking down).

You can find articles from August 2010 that say Bush is supposed to be the lead back?

Yes. Players and coaches were referring to Bush as the "bell cow."

Link?

 

[eoMMan]

He has a hamstring injury that shouldn't keep out of action for too long.

Look at it this way....he's missed less games than your boy Bush did.

I agree with looking at the situation objectively and I really don't understand why you don't think they would lean on McFadden when he's healthy after seeing how productive he was in the first few games (554 total yards in only 4 games).

You must be new to McFadden ownership.

No, sir, I drafted him and he's way out performed his draft spot.Please stay on topic.

That quote IS on topic...I drafted him as well...1st overall in my rookie draft in 2 different leagues. He in NO way has out-performed his draft spot, especially when I could have taken any of: Chris Johnson, Rashard Mendenhall, Jonathan Stewart, Matt Forte, Ray Rice, Jamaal Charles. I certainly hope that I can finally get some return on my investment after 3 years, but a healthy McFadden has been an illusion so far in his career.

WTF?We aren't talking about dynasty. When people talk about draft spots, they are usually talking about the current year in a redraft league....not a dynasty league.

 

[Babu Bhatt2]

You can find articles from August 2010 that say Bush is supposed to be the lead back?

Yes. Players and coaches were referring to Bush as the "bell cow."

Link?

http://articles.sfgate.com/2010-09-04/spor...-tennessee-game

 

[eoMMan]

You can find articles from August 2010 that say Bush is supposed to be the lead back?

Yes. Players and coaches were referring to Bush as the "bell cow."

Link?

http://articles.sfgate.com/2010-09-04/spor...-tennessee-game

Sorry, but I don't really put much value in Michael Bennett's opinion on Bush as a "bell cow".

 

[Babu Bhatt2]

You can find articles from August 2010 that say Bush is supposed to be the lead back?

Yes. Players and coaches were referring to Bush as the "bell cow."

Link?

http://articles.sfgate.com/2010-09-04/spor...-tennessee-game

Sorry, but I don't really put much value in Michael Bennett's opinion on Bush as a "bell cow".

Apparently not, since you drafted McFadden.

 

[eoMMan]

Apparently not, since you drafted McFadden.

 

[Herm23]

You can find articles from August 2010 that say Bush is supposed to be the lead back?

Yes. Players and coaches were referring to Bush as the "bell cow."

Link?

http://articles.sfgate.com/2010-09-04/spor...-tennessee-game

Sorry, but I don't really put much value in Michael Bennett's opinion on Bush as a "bell cow".

But you do put value on your own opinion...someone who does not play in the NFL...is not associated the the Oakland Raiders...and is not compensated for your football acumen? Interesting.I think this is a fairly easy backfield situation to figure out, to be honest. When McFadden comes back, I believe he will get the small majority of the carries, based on the fact that he is a more explosive runner and brings more to the table overall. That being said, when I say small majority, I foresee something the neighborhood of a 60/40 or 55/45 split, with Bush getting goal line touches. I believe that neither player will be anything more than an RB3 when both are healthy, as they kill kill eachothers stats.

 

[gandalas]

He has a hamstring injury that shouldn't keep out of action for too long.

Look at it this way....he's missed less games than your boy Bush did.

I agree with looking at the situation objectively and I really don't understand why you don't think they would lean on McFadden when he's healthy after seeing how productive he was in the first few games (554 total yards in only 4 games).

You must be new to McFadden ownership.

No, sir, I drafted him and he's way out performed his draft spot.Please stay on topic.

That quote IS on topic...I drafted him as well...1st overall in my rookie draft in 2 different leagues. He in NO way has out-performed his draft spot, especially when I could have taken any of: Chris Johnson, Rashard Mendenhall, Jonathan Stewart, Matt Forte, Ray Rice, Jamaal Charles. I certainly hope that I can finally get some return on my investment after 3 years, but a healthy McFadden has been an illusion so far in his career.

WTF?We aren't I am not talking about dynasty. When people /I talk about draft spots, they are I am usually talking about the current year in a redraft league....not a dynasty league.

Fixed that quote for you there...I would say that a good percentage of Shark Pool owners are dynasty leaguers...

 

[az_prof]

You can find articles from August 2010 that say Bush is supposed to be the lead back?

Yes. Players and coaches were referring to Bush as the "bell cow."

Link?

http://articles.sfgate.com/2010-09-04/spor...-tennessee-game

Sorry, but I don't really put much value in Michael Bennett's opinion on Bush as a "bell cow".

June 22, Tom Cable says both back are "#1s" http://www.fantasysp.com/nfl_player_news/M...rchive/06-2010/Aug 3, Cable says both are doing well and "why wouldn't they split carries?" http://www.fantasysp.com/player/nfl/Michael_Bush/1075507

McFadden didn't play much in preseason and Bush was the default starter. At this point, the situation is far from settled. McFadden had three weeks with no competition for touches and did well. Cable's track record in the past is that he likes to use multiple backs. My best guess is that the carries will be split over the course of the season 50/50, but Cable will ride the hot hand and so it could vary wildly from week to week. I would guess that McFadden will be better in PPR formats because catching the ball is one thing he clearly does better. I would guess that Bush will be better in TD scoring leagues because goal line running is one thing he clearly does better. Beyond that, no one knows.

 

[eoMMan]

But you do put value on your own opinion...someone who does not play in the NFL...is not associated the the Oakland Raiders...and is not compensated for your football acumen? Interesting.I think this is a fairly easy backfield situation to figure out, to be honest. When McFadden comes back, I believe he will get the small majority of the carries, based on the fact that he is a more explosive runner and brings more to the table overall. That being said, when I say small majority, I foresee something the neighborhood of a 60/40 or 55/45 split, with Bush getting goal line touches. I believe that neither player will be anything more than an RB3 when both are healthy, as they kill kill eachothers stats.

What does Bennett have to do with the situation? He's not a coach. If it was a coach saying, "Bush will be our bell cow this year" I would understand but Bennett is a nobody. His opinion has absolutely no relevance on this discussion. He has nothing to do with the team and how the team uses their backs.How does his opinion on the Bush mean anything to how Bush or McFadden will be used?Please answer this.

 

[az_prof]

But you do put value on your own opinion...someone who does not play in the NFL...is not associated the the Oakland Raiders...and is not compensated for your football acumen? Interesting.I think this is a fairly easy backfield situation to figure out, to be honest. When McFadden comes back, I believe he will get the small majority of the carries, based on the fact that he is a more explosive runner and brings more to the table overall. That being said, when I say small majority, I foresee something the neighborhood of a 60/40 or 55/45 split, with Bush getting goal line touches. I believe that neither player will be anything more than an RB3 when both are healthy, as they kill kill eachothers stats.

What does Bennett have to do with the situation? He's not a coach. If it was a coach saying, "Bush will be our bell cow this year" I would understand but Bennett is a nobody. His opinion has absolutely no relevance on this discussion. He has nothing to do with the team and how the team uses their backs.How does his opinion on the Bush mean anything to how Bush or McFadden will be used?Please answer this.

Bennett is a player, and insider. While he doesn't have a coach's authority, he is privy to what goes on behind closed doors. He hears the coaches every day. He sees McFadden and Bush practicing. His opinion matters more than ours and more than most reporters--but you are right--he isn't the HC. Still, to completely discount what he says seems blind to the reality that he is a daily, first hand witness to what goes on with running back and coaches.

 

[eoMMan]

Fixed that quote for you there...I would say that a good percentage of Shark Pool owners are dynasty leaguers...

I'm sure the Shark Pool does have it's share of dynasty leaguers, but talking about a player's draft spot is still usually assuming that the player is drafted in a redraft format unless a dynasty league is specifically mentioned.Sorry. That's just the way it is.