Report: Panthers release Foster (1 Viewer)

[kevinallen]

This is the type of RB that Williams is. He's a big-play type runner, that will unfortunately have a few negative runs during a game, but it's the end result that is impressive. It's the type of runner Carolina needed last year, note their 6-1 record on games where Williams had 10 or more carries. He's a threat to take it the distance, he's a threat to rip off a 30 yard run at anytime.

Let's be fair - here are those games:

GM DA DF

1 15-62 (4.1) 17-94 (5.5)

3 11-47 (4.3) 20-122 (6.1)

6 10-121 (12.1) 17-43 (2.5)

13 17-82 (4.8) 21-58 (2.8)

15 15-61 (4.1) 18-47 (2.6)

16 10-60 (6.0) 4-9 (2.3) <-- loss

17 20-121 (6.1) 11-46 (4.2)

Interestingly, in all the games they won (even when DA did NOT have 10+ carries) Foster also had over 10 carries. And in fact, in the only game where Foster did NOT have ten carries, but Williams did, the Panthers lost.

BTW in '06, the Panthers lost 3 games in which DA got 10+ carries.

I the last three years they've only lost 3 games where Foster received 20 carries.

What this tells me is that when the Panthers stick to the run, they win. When either back is used nearly exclusively, they lose. Neither RB is complete enough on his own, to be the answer. Foster lacks the explosiveness he had pre-injury. DeAngelo isn't suited for the power running, grind it out yards that Foster can handle. Neither is a complete back. Both are needed.

Foster is gone.  Over with, not a Panther anymore.  I know this is upsetting to you, but he's just been cut.  Now that we have that out of the way, let's get to the point, the point that not even you can [B]argue[/B].  Spin it anyway you want to, but when given the ball a sufficient amount of times a game, Williams succeeds.  Always has, even in 06 he did.  He doesnt turn the ball over, he gives them a big-play RB, something this offense badly needed when they didnt have a QB that could get SSmith the ball, and he's a threat out of the backfield.

I agree they will bring someone in like a Ron Dayne, but it wont be a RBBC.  Williams will have his chance, he will be the opening day starter.  Book it.

[/QUOTE]

 

[Banger]

It appears that the minority view is that this is an endorsement of DeAngelo going forward as the feature back, with someone brought in to complement him. Is this simply due to Fox's comments regarding a return to a power running game or concerns over DeAngelo's talent? I have not seen many Panther's games, so I don't have a valid basis to form an opinion. I do remember DeAngelo coming in and being highly regarded out of Memphis and to see so many questions on him seems a little confusing...

DeAngelo is great in the open field, but he has ZERO vision, doesn't hit holes well, and dances too much in the backfield. In addition to not being very good at other aspects of the game.Just my $0.02

Well I guess that perfectly explains a 5.0 YPC.

Actually, third down, and one fluky 75 yard run on a first down explain the 5.0 YPC this year. Last year is was 4.1. Without the 75 yarder, his 1st and 2nd down YPC is a mere 3.8.

Thanks for the insight. Basically your point is if you remove the dazzling, spectacular plays, he's just sort of average. I'm sure Barry Sanders was a below average RB in your eyes since you get to remove the long runs. Your 1st/2nd down focus seems silly. I'm guessing the vast majority of RBs have less production on 1st/2nd downs since most defenses anticipate the run on those downs. But why let common sense get in the way of a good bias.

play, not plays. Tatum Bell.

 

[BigJim®]

It appears that the minority view is that this is an endorsement of DeAngelo going forward as the feature back, with someone brought in to complement him. Is this simply due to Fox's comments regarding a return to a power running game or concerns over DeAngelo's talent? I have not seen many Panther's games, so I don't have a valid basis to form an opinion. I do remember DeAngelo coming in and being highly regarded out of Memphis and to see so many questions on him seems a little confusing...

DeAngelo is great in the open field, but he has ZERO vision, doesn't hit holes well, and dances too much in the backfield. In addition to not being very good at other aspects of the game.Just my $0.02

Well I guess that perfectly explains a 5.0 YPC.

Actually, third down, and one fluky 75 yard run on a first down explain the 5.0 YPC this year. Last year is was 4.1. Without the 75 yarder, his 1st and 2nd down YPC is a mere 3.8.

Thanks for the insight. Basically your point is if you remove the dazzling, spectacular plays, he's just sort of average. I'm sure Barry Sanders was a below average RB in your eyes since you get to remove the long runs. Your 1st/2nd down focus seems silly. I'm guessing the vast majority of RBs have less production on 1st/2nd downs since most defenses anticipate the run on those downs. But why let common sense get in the way of a good bias.

play, not plays. Tatum Bell.

Oh really? Removing all 3rd down runs somehow doesn't make this a plural? Please elaborate. TIA.

 

[kevinallen]

It appears that the minority view is that this is an endorsement of DeAngelo going forward as the feature back, with someone brought in to complement him. Is this simply due to Fox's comments regarding a return to a power running game or concerns over DeAngelo's talent? I have not seen many Panther's games, so I don't have a valid basis to form an opinion. I do remember DeAngelo coming in and being highly regarded out of Memphis and to see so many questions on him seems a little confusing...

DeAngelo is great in the open field, but he has ZERO vision, doesn't hit holes well, and dances too much in the backfield. In addition to not being very good at other aspects of the game.Just my $0.02

Well I guess that perfectly explains a 5.0 YPC.

Actually, third down, and one fluky 75 yard run on a first down explain the 5.0 YPC this year. Last year is was 4.1. Without the 75 yarder, his 1st and 2nd down YPC is a mere 3.8.

Thanks for the insight. Basically your point is if you remove the dazzling, spectacular plays, he's just sort of average. I'm sure Barry Sanders was a below average RB in your eyes since you get to remove the long runs. Your 1st/2nd down focus seems silly. I'm guessing the vast majority of RBs have less production on 1st/2nd downs since most defenses anticipate the run on those downs. But why let common sense get in the way of a good bias.

play, not plays. Tatum Bell.

6 carries for 20 yds or more. Not bad considering he only had 144 carries all year.

 

[Banger]

It appears that the minority view is that this is an endorsement of DeAngelo going forward as the feature back, with someone brought in to complement him. Is this simply due to Fox's comments regarding a return to a power running game or concerns over DeAngelo's talent? I have not seen many Panther's games, so I don't have a valid basis to form an opinion. I do remember DeAngelo coming in and being highly regarded out of Memphis and to see so many questions on him seems a little confusing...

DeAngelo is great in the open field, but he has ZERO vision, doesn't hit holes well, and dances too much in the backfield. In addition to not being very good at other aspects of the game.Just my $0.02

Well I guess that perfectly explains a 5.0 YPC.

Actually, third down, and one fluky 75 yard run on a first down explain the 5.0 YPC this year. Last year is was 4.1. Without the 75 yarder, his 1st and 2nd down YPC is a mere 3.8.

Thanks for the insight. Basically your point is if you remove the dazzling, spectacular plays, he's just sort of average. I'm sure Barry Sanders was a below average RB in your eyes since you get to remove the long runs. Your 1st/2nd down focus seems silly. I'm guessing the vast majority of RBs have less production on 1st/2nd downs since most defenses anticipate the run on those downs. But why let common sense get in the way of a good bias.

play, not plays. Tatum Bell.

Oh really? Removing all 3rd down runs somehow doesn't make this a plural? Please elaborate. TIA.

I was referring to the 75 yard run. Guys like this (Norwood, Bell, DWill) are in the spot they are for a reason. Too many FF'ers get too caught up in a gaudy YPC with limited touch's and think wow, if they can do that with 10 carries imagine what they could do with 20. There's a tremendous difference being an everydown back getting the ball 20-25 times a game in all runnning/passing situations as opposed to 10 touch's/game in favorable situations that accentuate your strengths/minimize your weakness's.

 

[Banger]

For those of you that like DWill and wonder why he isn't the starter, look at his play by play rushes. 54 of his 144 rushes last year (38%) went for negative to 1 yard. That's pathetic. You guys have to ask yourself as a coach would you rather have a guy like L. White that runs for 3, 2, 3, 4, 2, 5, 3, 5 (3.4 ypc) or a guy that runs for -1, 0, 14, 0, 10, -2, 15, 0 (4.5 ypc)?

Guys like that are drive killers and put your team in bad down and distances. The 10 yard runs are great but a coach like Fox (like most) wants to control the clock and drive the ball methodically down the field. There's a tremendous difference between a 3rd and 3 and a 3rd and 9. A guy that runs for -2 on 1st down kills the drive and removes half the plays from the playbook and makes the offense much more one dimensional. That's why DWill is not the starter.

 

[switz]

It appears that the minority view is that this is an endorsement of DeAngelo going forward as the feature back, with someone brought in to complement him. Is this simply due to Fox's comments regarding a return to a power running game or concerns over DeAngelo's talent? I have not seen many Panther's games, so I don't have a valid basis to form an opinion. I do remember DeAngelo coming in and being highly regarded out of Memphis and to see so many questions on him seems a little confusing...

DeAngelo is great in the open field, but he has ZERO vision, doesn't hit holes well, and dances too much in the backfield. In addition to not being very good at other aspects of the game.Just my $0.02

Well I guess that perfectly explains a 5.0 YPC.

Actually, third down, and one fluky 75 yard run on a first down explain the 5.0 YPC this year. Last year is was 4.1. Without the 75 yarder, his 1st and 2nd down YPC is a mere 3.8.

Thanks for the insight. Basically your point is if you remove the dazzling, spectacular plays, he's just sort of average. I'm sure Barry Sanders was a below average RB in your eyes since you get to remove the long runs. Your 1st/2nd down focus seems silly. I'm guessing the vast majority of RBs have less production on 1st/2nd downs since most defenses anticipate the run on those downs. But why let common sense get in the way of a good bias.

We know he's good on third down. The question is if he could be an "every down" back. As for most backs having worse 1st&2nd down YPCs than 3rd down, that's probably true... but they are still usually close.Here's a sample (1st&2nd/3rd):Lynch - 4.2/3.0Barber - 4.5/5.8Jacobs - 5.0/3.5Portis - 4.0/3.2Henry - 4.1/4.1Gore - 4.1/3.8McGahee - 4.0/2.3AD - 5.9/5.9FWP - 4.0/6.7Foster - 3.8/1.6Bush - 3.7/4.6MJD - 4.2/6.0FTaylor - 5.5/5.6Addai - 4.0/4.0DA - 4.4/8.1There is a much larger discrepancy between his third down YPC and his 1st & 2nd down YPC. His long runs also came primarily on third down, though his longest was on 1st and 10.I don't think DA sucks, or has no talent. I just don't see him cut out to be an every down RB. We'll see.BTW, this was a totally unintended hi-jack of this thread. For that I offer my apologies, and will move on to another topic.

 

[BigJim®]

For those of you that like DWill and wonder why he isn't the starter, look at his play by play rushes. 54 of his 144 rushes last year (38%) went for negative to 1 yard. That's pathetic. You guys have to ask yourself as a coach would you rather have a guy like L. White that runs for 3, 2, 3, 4, 2, 5, 3, 5 (3.4 ypc) or a guy that runs for -1, 0, 14, 0, 10, -2, 15, 0 (4.5 ypc)?

First, are you sure you aren't talking about Barry Sanders here? I seem to recall the same complaint regarding Sander's loss-yardage percentage. That hardly changed the fact he was widely considered one of the best RBs all time due to his ability and propensity to break one at any time. Also, you are completely ignoring the offensive line's role in creating holes. You seem to be under the impression there were always running lanes and getting 1 yard is squarely Deangelo's fault. I think that's highly debatable supposition. Care to explain what RB on Carolina's roster last year did more with carries? Was this 'failure' limited to Deangelo? I think not. In fact, the only difference between Deangelo and Foster is Deangelo had occasional success running.

Guys like that are drive killers and put your team in bad down and distances. The 10 yard runs are great but a coach like Fox (like most) wants to control the clock and drive the ball methodically down the field. There's a tremendous difference between a 3rd and 3 and a 3rd and 9. A guy that runs for -2 on 1st down kills the drive and removes half the plays from the playbook and makes the offense much more one dimensional. That's why DWill is not the starter.

Really? Why in the world are people supposed to believe any of this drivel when Carolina was 6-1 when Deangelo had 10+ carries? Doesn't that totally contradict your argument? Again, don't let reality get in the way of a good bias.

 

[Liquid Tension]

hello michael turner?

Right now I have Michael Turner going to every GOOD RUN BLOCKING team in the league

Fixed

 

[Liquid Tension]

It appears that the minority view is that this is an endorsement of DeAngelo going forward as the feature back, with someone brought in to complement him. Is this simply due to Fox's comments regarding a return to a power running game or concerns over DeAngelo's talent? I have not seen many Panther's games, so I don't have a valid basis to form an opinion. I do remember DeAngelo coming in and being highly regarded out of Memphis and to see so many questions on him seems a little confusing...

DeAngelo is great in the open field, but he has ZERO vision, doesn't hit holes well, and dances too much in the backfield. In addition to not being very good at other aspects of the game.Just my $0.02

I think Foster is a better runner and pass protector then DWill as well, but when you factor in the injuries and fumbling, Foster is too frustrating.Edited to change my tune from my original post

 

[Liquid Tension]

Folks, this is Turner's big chance to land the big contract, he'll have a few suitors to choose from, he's not going to get his best offer from a team looking for him to share duties as a RBBC partner, and the Panthers aren't going to offer a deal to him for feature back money. I think the chances are pretty remote that Carolina will be Turner's destination.

Hey, stop interjecting that...thing...logic

 

[Liquid Tension]

It appears that the minority view is that this is an endorsement of DeAngelo going forward as the feature back, with someone brought in to complement him. Is this simply due to Fox's comments regarding a return to a power running game or concerns over DeAngelo's talent? I have not seen many Panther's games, so I don't have a valid basis to form an opinion. I do remember DeAngelo coming in and being highly regarded out of Memphis and to see so many questions on him seems a little confusing...

DeAngelo is great in the open field, but he has ZERO vision, doesn't hit holes well, and dances too much in the backfield. In addition to not being very good at other aspects of the game.Just my $0.02

Well I guess that perfectly explains a 5.0 YPC.

Actually, third down, and one fluky 75 yard run on a first down explain the 5.0 YPC this year. Last year is was 4.1. Without the 75 yarder, his 1st and 2nd down YPC is a mere 3.8.

Thanks for the insight. Basically your point is if you remove the dazzling, spectacular plays, he's just sort of average. I'm sure Barry Sanders was a below average RB in your eyes since you get to remove the long runs. Your 1st/2nd down focus seems silly. I'm guessing the vast majority of RBs have less production on 1st/2nd downs since most defenses anticipate the run on those downs. But why let common sense get in the way of a good bias.

play, not plays. Tatum Bell.

Oh really? Removing all 3rd down runs somehow doesn't make this a plural? Please elaborate. TIA.

I was referring to the 75 yard run. Guys like this (Norwood, Bell, DWill) are in the spot they are for a reason. Too many FF'ers get too caught up in a gaudy YPC with limited touch's and think wow, if they can do that with 10 carries imagine what they could do with 20. There's a tremendous difference being an everydown back getting the ball 20-25 times a game in all runnning/passing situations as opposed to 10 touch's/game in favorable situations that accentuate your strengths/minimize your weakness's.

 

[plymkr]

For those of you that like DWill and wonder why he isn't the starter, look at his play by play rushes. 54 of his 144 rushes last year (38%) went for negative to 1 yard. That's pathetic. You guys have to ask yourself as a coach would you rather have a guy like L. White that runs for 3, 2, 3, 4, 2, 5, 3, 5 (3.4 ypc) or a guy that runs for -1, 0, 14, 0, 10, -2, 15, 0 (4.5 ypc)?Guys like that are drive killers and put your team in bad down and distances. The 10 yard runs are great but a coach like Fox (like most) wants to control the clock and drive the ball methodically down the field. There's a tremendous difference between a 3rd and 3 and a 3rd and 9. A guy that runs for -2 on 1st down kills the drive and removes half the plays from the playbook and makes the offense much more one dimensional. That's why DWill is not the starter.

Good Post, and exactly why Emmitt was better than Barry.

 

[Banger]

For those of you that like DWill and wonder why he isn't the starter, look at his play by play rushes. 54 of his 144 rushes last year (38%) went for negative to 1 yard. That's pathetic. You guys have to ask yourself as a coach would you rather have a guy like L. White that runs for 3, 2, 3, 4, 2, 5, 3, 5 (3.4 ypc) or a guy that runs for -1, 0, 14, 0, 10, -2, 15, 0 (4.5 ypc)?

First, are you sure you aren't talking about Barry Sanders here? I seem to recall the same complaint regarding Sander's loss-yardage percentage. That hardly changed the fact he was widely considered one of the best RBs all time due to his ability and propensity to break one at any time. Also, you are completely ignoring the offensive line's role in creating holes. You seem to be under the impression there were always running lanes and getting 1 yard is squarely Deangelo's fault. I think that's highly debatable supposition. Care to explain what RB on Carolina's roster last year did more with carries? Was this 'failure' limited to Deangelo? I think not. In fact, the only difference between Deangelo and Foster is Deangelo had occasional success running.

Guys like that are drive killers and put your team in bad down and distances. The 10 yard runs are great but a coach like Fox (like most) wants to control the clock and drive the ball methodically down the field. There's a tremendous difference between a 3rd and 3 and a 3rd and 9. A guy that runs for -2 on 1st down kills the drive and removes half the plays from the playbook and makes the offense much more one dimensional. That's why DWill is not the starter.

Really? Why in the world are people supposed to believe any of this drivel when Carolina was 6-1 when Deangelo had 10+ carries? Doesn't that totally contradict your argument? Again, don't let reality get in the way of a good bias.

Just because I have a differing opinion doesn't mean I have a bias. I have no bias whatsoever and have no horse in this race. I'm not a Panther fan, don't own either player and had Foster as a 4th back last year. I'm just giving my opinion based on what I've seen of him and similar backs and similar situations over the years. Please don't use DWill and Sanders in the same sentence. The comparison stops at DWill getting caught behind the line. The record with 10+ carries is funny. Darn, if someone would have just told Fox to give DWill the ball 11 times a game they would have been in the playoffs. Why is it drivel that a guy gets negative to 1 yard a carry in nearly 40% of their carries? That isn't bias, that's fact and I think that's extremely significant. Coach's want to move the chains, hold onto the ball, and have good down and distances to allow them to keep the defense off balance. Do you disagree with that?What are the chances you are a DWill owner?

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

something tells me DeWill is not the answer in Carolina

 

[maxwelledison]

I do agree that positive carries are better for a real football team than -2, -1, 37 and I think B. Sanders tends to be a bit overrated based on this theory. I also think D-Will is not in Sanders' class talent wise, although I believe him to be a significant talent in his own right. That said, the following arguments promoted by the pro-Foster crowd are curious at best:

1) If D-Will was so good he would have taken Foster's job some time ago. This position relies on a proposition that I, and others, do not accept; namely, that starters under Fox are appointed based on merit and the ability of the coaching staff to identify talent. I think Fox names his starters based on his own poor judgment and stubborn and often undeserved loyalty, which in this case happens to be a toxic combination.

2) D-Will is not an every down back. Basically there is no way to know this until he is given the chance to carry the ball on a regular basis. I do not use the absence of evidence here to argue that he is an every down back, only that we cannot know yet. And, given his history (college) I see no reason not to give him a chance to prove otherwise.

3) D-Will does not pass-block. In my opinion, this point is only interesting in that it raises (additional) questions regarding coaching and D-Will's desire to improve. Putting aside the veractiy of the claim, which I think debatable considering how often D-Will was in on passing downs, pass blocking from RB's is a skill that can be taught and basically comes down to "want-to". So, either Carolina is not teaching it effectively or D-Will doesn't want to do it. I have no evidence for either position right now and if D-Will is in fact pulling the Cedric Benson and simply unwilling to do it that will raise significant questions.

4) Foster is good. I don't know if this is just a franchise that has never seen a good running back or if people actually believe this but this claim is completely ridiculous. I find it very interesting that the pro-Foster people provide every excuse in the book as to why he has not performed (injuries, o-line, etc.) but then turn around and rush to discount other RB's performances (esp. D-Will's) in what can reasonably be described as highly similar circumstances. Very strange. And, by the way, Foster does suck...he lacks power, explosiveness and he is fumble-prone.

 

[Banger]

I do agree that positive carries are better for a real football team than -2, -1, 37 and I think B. Sanders tends to be a bit overrated based on this theory. I also think D-Will is not in Sanders' class talent wise, although I believe him to be a significant talent in his own right. That said, the following arguments promoted by the pro-Foster crowd are curious at best:

1) If D-Will was so good he would have taken Foster's job some time ago. This position relies on a proposition that I, and others, do not accept; namely, that starters under Fox are appointed based on merit and the ability of the coaching staff to identify talent. I think Fox names his starters based on his own poor judgment and stubborn and often undeserved loyalty, which in this case happens to be a toxic combination.

2) D-Will is not an every down back. Basically there is no way to know this until he is given the chance to carry the ball on a regular basis. I do not use the absence of evidence here to argue that he is an every down back, only that we cannot know yet. And, given his history (college) I see no reason not to give him a chance to prove otherwise.

3) D-Will does not pass-block. In my opinion, this point is only interesting in that it raises (additional) questions regarding coaching and D-Will's desire to improve. Putting aside the veractiy of the claim, which I think debatable considering how often D-Will was in on passing downs, pass blocking from RB's is a skill that can be taught and basically comes down to "want-to". So, either Carolina is not teaching it effectively or D-Will doesn't want to do it. I have no evidence for either position right now and if D-Will is in fact pulling the Cedric Benson and simply unwilling to do it that will raise significant questions.

4) Foster is good. I don't know if this is just a franchise that has never seen a good running back or if people actually believe this but this claim is completely ridiculous. I find it very interesting that the pro-Foster people provide every excuse in the book as to why he has not performed (injuries, o-line, etc.) but then turn around and rush to discount other RB's performances (esp. D-Will's) in what can reasonably be described as highly similar circumstances. Very strange. And, by the way, Foster does suck...he lacks power, explosiveness and he is fumble-prone.

The problem is I don't think either one is very good. Dwill might get his shot but I think it's more likely that they bring in a grinder/every down back and continue to use him in a situational role. The reason why I think Foster got more carries is that 49% of his carries went for between 2-6 yards as opposed to 38% for Williams. Consistent positive yardage is very important especially for a team that was as terrible as they were throwing the ball last year. Yes, Williams has more big runs than Foster but he wasn't nearly as consistent on a carry by carry basis.

 

[switz]

First off, nice, well thought out post...

1) If D-Will was so good he would have taken Foster's job some time ago. This position relies on a proposition that I, and others, do not accept; namely, that starters under Fox are appointed based on merit and the ability of the coaching staff to identify talent. I think Fox names his starters based on his own poor judgment and stubborn and often undeserved loyalty, which in this case happens to be a toxic combination.

I remember when people were saying the same thing re: Davis starting, and Foster backing him up. Now that Foster has started a few years, people recall Davis as the better RB. But in the playoffs in '03 people were talking about Foster being the more explosive player, etc. Early in '04 he had that 170+ yard game and people thought CAR found their RB, then he was injured. In '05 he returned, and toward the end of the season was tearing it up again. In '06 the Panthers drafted DeAngelo. Foster missed a few games with injury, but still, in every game he had 15+ touches, the Panthers won.Now Foster is Stephen Davis, and DeAngelo is Foster.

My point is, that Carolina fans have this particular love for the backup RB. Remember Brad Hoover of all people?

2) D-Will is not an every down back. Basically there is no way to know this until he is given the chance to carry the ball on a regular basis. I do not use the absence of evidence here to argue that he is an every down back, only that we cannot know yet. And, given his history (college) I see no reason not to give him a chance to prove otherwise.

I believe he will be given a chance, but not on a long leash.

3) D-Will does not pass-block. In my opinion, this point is only interesting in that it raises (additional) questions regarding coaching and D-Will's desire to improve. Putting aside the veractiy of the claim, which I think debatable considering how often D-Will was in on passing downs, pass blocking from RB's is a skill that can be taught and basically comes down to "want-to". So, either Carolina is not teaching it effectively or D-Will doesn't want to do it. I have no evidence for either position right now and if D-Will is in fact pulling the Cedric Benson and simply unwilling to do it that will raise significant questions.

Well, he's been in the league two years, it's not hard to learn, most rookies do by the end of their first season, as it's more technique than anything. I don't know. Obviously the coaches have had issues with him for some reason. But the beat writers around here love DeAngelo.

4) Foster is good. I don't know if this is just a franchise that has never seen a good running back or if people actually believe this but this claim is completely ridiculous. I find it very interesting that the pro-Foster people provide every excuse in the book as to why he has not performed (injuries, o-line, etc.) but then turn around and rush to discount other RB's performances (esp. D-Will's) in what can reasonably be described as highly similar circumstances. Very strange. And, by the way, Foster does suck...he lacks power, explosiveness and he is fumble-prone.

Foster does not suck. If you think so you have a short memory, or you only watched a couple games this year. He is worn down, I agree... he's lost a step, his knees never fully recovered from surgery. But ....2007 Wk3 20-122 6.1

2007 Wk1 17-95 5.5

2006 Wk5 24-106 4.4

2006 Wk4 16-105 6.6

2005 WCPO 27-151 5.6

2005 Wk17 18-165 9.2

2005 Wk13 24-131 5.5

Those aren't numbers put up by a runningback that sucks. Foster was a better RB than DA is when he came out of college, he had two severe injuries to his knees (I believe he had microfracture once) and it's taken a toll on him. Injuries != lack of talent.

 

[maxwelledison]

In my opinion Foster could never hold D-Will's jock but again we will have to agree to disagree.

Basically I like D-Will and you think he is a scat back. Time will tell.

 

[BigJim®]

Please don't use DWill and Sanders in the same sentence. The comparison stops at DWill getting caught behind the line.

Ok, I'll just pretend we aren't talking about the all-time NCAA career leader in all-purpose yards, and a 1st round NFL draft pick- a guy who put up 5.0 YPC in his second NFL season despite limited opportunity. For your sake, I'll pretend we are debating guy who doesn't belong in the same sentence as Sanders despite their apparent similarilties in NCAA success, draft profile, running styles, and shortcomings.

 

[switz]

Please don't use DWill and Sanders in the same sentence. The comparison stops at DWill getting caught behind the line.

Ok, I'll just pretend we aren't talking about the all-time NCAA career leader in all-purpose yards

Name the previous record holders before DWill, and what was thier success in the NFL?? Here, I'll help:1 Ricky Williams, Texas 1995-98 72062 Napoleon McCallum, Navy 1981-85 71723 Darrin Nelson, Stanford 1977-78, 80-81 68854 Kevin Faulk, LSU 1995-98 68335 Ron Dayne, Wisconsin 1996-99 6701A ton of great RBs there, huh?

 

[Banger]

Please don't use DWill and Sanders in the same sentence. The comparison stops at DWill getting caught behind the line.

Ok, I'll just pretend we aren't talking about the all-time NCAA career leader in all-purpose yards, and a 1st round NFL draft pick- a guy who put up 5.0 YPC in his second NFL season despite limited opportunity. For your sake, I'll pretend we are debating guy who doesn't belong in the same sentence as Sanders despite their apparent similarilties in NCAA success, draft profile, running styles, and shortcomings.

Barry Sanders rookie year 280-1470-14 (5.25 ypc)Williams career (2 years) 265-1218-5 (4.6 ypc)Barry's 1st 2 years - 3536 total yards 30 tds to 1708 - 7 for Williams. They don't look too close to me. Barry will probably have more td's in his first 2 years than Williams will have for his career.

 

[Phalic0192]

To just give my two cents. I think alot of people will look at the per carry basis and think that DeAngelo isn't a consistent yardage gainer. But this totally takes away the thought that he was used with a lot of tosses and sweeps. But here is the BIGGIE, the panther's offensive line is bad. Real bad. I cannot remember one time where they got any push on critical short yardage runs. I don't care who you are, there is not a runningback in the league that can run through 380lb lineman on a consistent basis.

But here is the part that I factor in that not everyone realizes with basic stats. MOMENTUM. Those long yardage runs by DeAngelo were great momentum swings. And led to scoring drives. Because that is the point of the game is to score. Yes on a theory basis running 4ypc everytime is really good. But what happens when there is a penalty? 4 yards and a cloud of dust won't get the first down. I mention this because the panther fanbase is very unenergetic. And to me personally the long drives are very boring. Big plays help momentum and get the fans back into the game.

Foster on the underhand had a propensity to kill momentum. The guy on one critical fourth down took a sweep and tried to reverse field. Then slipped and fumbled the ball backwards for a loss of like 25 yds. It was the absolute most disgusting play that could of happened. It is plays like that, that Foster was cut.

Now I have no clue what the Panthers FO will do in FreeAgency or the Draft, but I think this a good move by them to atleast trim some of the fat, and to say to their players "produce or hit the road"

 

[Spike]

I heard on NFL Radio that the Panthers may look to resign Foster at a much lower salary. I don`t think Foster will be much in demand so he may be back in Carolina next season.

This could be the most likely situation.

 

[Spike]

They both definitely have a weakness inside the 5, but they don't seem that similar to me. Parker has had some success, but I actually think DeAngelo is a much better player. Better receiver, more elusive, but not quite as fast. Put Williams on the Steelers and he could be better than Parker.

Then why on earth couldn't he beat out Foster? According to the majority here - Foster sucks. And apparently, DA is better than a top-10 fantasy RB.Is something wrong with this picture?

Just examining his stats...

Did you know in '06 his YPC was 4.1? Did you know that on first and second down carries in '07, his YPC is only 4.4, and if you take away his 75 yard run it drops to 3.8? Just trying to put things in perspective. A few gaudy plays do not make a good RB...

Even though I really like the prospects for Williams going forward, this is a great point.

 

[BigJim®]

Please don't use DWill and Sanders in the same sentence. The comparison stops at DWill getting caught behind the line.

Ok, I'll just pretend we aren't talking about the all-time NCAA career leader in all-purpose yards

Name the previous record holders before DWill, and what was thier success in the NFL?? Here, I'll help:1 Ricky Williams, Texas 1995-98 72062 Napoleon McCallum, Navy 1981-85 71723 Darrin Nelson, Stanford 1977-78, 80-81 68854 Kevin Faulk, LSU 1995-98 68335 Ron Dayne, Wisconsin 1996-99 6701A ton of great RBs there, huh?

Sorry, I'm not following your point. I would readily concede that NCAA success does not, by itself, promise NFL success. I never said it did, and I listed other similarities such as draft profile and running style. Do you agree with Banger that Deangelo doesn't belong in the same sentence with Sanders based upon your above information? Do you feel their running styles are so different that they are beyond comparison? I know you're a bright guy, so I'm sure you realize Barry Sanders is the NFL's all time leader in lost yardage. In fact, Barry lost yardage 446 times during his career, for -1114 yards. Those are mind-numbing totals. How exactly did that happen... poor vision? Danced too much? Didn't hit holes right? Be consistent about your misgiving about Deangelo; would you have argued Barry Sanders was better suited for change of pace RB duties?

 

[Spike]

For those of you that like DWill and wonder why he isn't the starter, look at his play by play rushes. 54 of his 144 rushes last year (38%) went for negative to 1 yard. That's pathetic. You guys have to ask yourself as a coach would you rather have a guy like L. White that runs for 3, 2, 3, 4, 2, 5, 3, 5 (3.4 ypc) or a guy that runs for -1, 0, 14, 0, 10, -2, 15, 0 (4.5 ypc)?Guys like that are drive killers and put your team in bad down and distances. The 10 yard runs are great but a coach like Fox (like most) wants to control the clock and drive the ball methodically down the field. There's a tremendous difference between a 3rd and 3 and a 3rd and 9. A guy that runs for -2 on 1st down kills the drive and removes half the plays from the playbook and makes the offense much more one dimensional. That's why DWill is not the starter.

Another excellent post.

 

[Jedimaster21]

First off, nice, well thought out post...

1) If D-Will was so good he would have taken Foster's job some time ago. This position relies on a proposition that I, and others, do not accept; namely, that starters under Fox are appointed based on merit and the ability of the coaching staff to identify talent. I think Fox names his starters based on his own poor judgment and stubborn and often undeserved loyalty, which in this case happens to be a toxic combination.

I remember when people were saying the same thing re: Davis starting, and Foster backing him up. Now that Foster has started a few years, people recall Davis as the better RB. But in the playoffs in '03 people were talking about Foster being the more explosive player, etc. Early in '04 he had that 170+ yard game and people thought CAR found their RB, then he was injured. In '05 he returned, and toward the end of the season was tearing it up again. In '06 the Panthers drafted DeAngelo. Foster missed a few games with injury, but still, in every game he had 15+ touches, the Panthers won.Now Foster is Stephen Davis, and DeAngelo is Foster.

My point is, that Carolina fans have this particular love for the backup RB. Remember Brad Hoover of all people?

2) D-Will is not an every down back. Basically there is no way to know this until he is given the chance to carry the ball on a regular basis. I do not use the absence of evidence here to argue that he is an every down back, only that we cannot know yet. And, given his history (college) I see no reason not to give him a chance to prove otherwise.

I believe he will be given a chance, but not on a long leash.

3) D-Will does not pass-block. In my opinion, this point is only interesting in that it raises (additional) questions regarding coaching and D-Will's desire to improve. Putting aside the veractiy of the claim, which I think debatable considering how often D-Will was in on passing downs, pass blocking from RB's is a skill that can be taught and basically comes down to "want-to". So, either Carolina is not teaching it effectively or D-Will doesn't want to do it. I have no evidence for either position right now and if D-Will is in fact pulling the Cedric Benson and simply unwilling to do it that will raise significant questions.

Well, he's been in the league two years, it's not hard to learn, most rookies do by the end of their first season, as it's more technique than anything. I don't know. Obviously the coaches have had issues with him for some reason. But the beat writers around here love DeAngelo.

4) Foster is good. I don't know if this is just a franchise that has never seen a good running back or if people actually believe this but this claim is completely ridiculous. I find it very interesting that the pro-Foster people provide every excuse in the book as to why he has not performed (injuries, o-line, etc.) but then turn around and rush to discount other RB's performances (esp. D-Will's) in what can reasonably be described as highly similar circumstances. Very strange. And, by the way, Foster does suck...he lacks power, explosiveness and he is fumble-prone.

Foster does not suck. If you think so you have a short memory, or you only watched a couple games this year. He is worn down, I agree... he's lost a step, his knees never fully recovered from surgery. But ....2007 Wk3 20-122 6.1

2007 Wk1 17-95 5.5

2006 Wk5 24-106 4.4

2006 Wk4 16-105 6.6

2005 WCPO 27-151 5.6

2005 Wk17 18-165 9.2

2005 Wk13 24-131 5.5

Those aren't numbers put up by a runningback that sucks. Foster was a better RB than DA is when he came out of college, he had two severe injuries to his knees (I believe he had microfracture once) and it's taken a toll on him. Injuries != lack of talent.

Your perception is still that Foster was a better prospect coming out, and that is simply not true. I posted this in 2007 and it is still true now:Now let's look at college dominance. Williams holds the NCAA record for yards from scrimmage. Does Foster hold any college records? Foster averaged 4.4 yards per carry (putrid college average), had 3194 yards rushing, 548 receiving yards, and 44 TDs at UCLA. DWill averaged 6.2 per carry (better career average than DeShaun's best single season in college), had 6026 yards rushing, 723 receiving, and scored 60 TDs for Memphis. Looks pretty close so far...let's look at some scouting reports...

This is from Rivals.com about Williams...

Pros: He has excellent quickness and acceleration coupled with the sharp cutting skills that allow him to change directions and break the big play. He gets to the corner quickly, showing the foot speed and lateral mobility to get outside the tackles and pressure the defense. As a receiver, he has very good hands and is well- developed to be a threat immediately in that role. He shows the ability to get into his routes easily and get consistently open. He displays fine route-running ability with a keen awareness of defensive coverage and soft spots in pass defense. He is dangerous after the catch and follows his blockers well, showing the ability to change speeds and set up defenders.

Cons: His main flaw at this point is his blocking and whether he can handle linebackers in single assignments, something he struggled with at the Senior Bowl. It is this weakness that would keep him on the bench as a rookie. He needs strength and technique work.

This is TSN's scouting report on Foster coming out...

Assets Explosive cutback runner with very good vision and instincts. Downhill runner who finishes his carries. Has soft hands. Runs well between the tackles and has a quick burst when he hits the secondary.

Flaws Tall, upright back who will lose leverage at times. Tends to wear down and may not be a 25-carry workhorse. Not a good blocker.

Career potential Excellent backup.

Now, I know that Foster has been in the NFL a few years, so this scouting report may be slightly meaningless. But it still gives us a feel for the perception of the players coming out of college. DWill was clearly a much better prospect, and Foster has been inconsistent, has fumbled quite a bit, has been very injury prone, and when healthy really hasn't been that effective. DWill hasn't displayed that much at the NFL level, but he is clearly a more natural, talented runner and receiver. At least DWill hasn't proved that he isn't elite...Foster has proved that he is nothing more than mediocre, at the college and NFL level.

It is just time to let it go, man. Foster wasn't that heralded coming out, he has never been good, and Carolina has moved on. Continuing to defend him just affects your credibility in other arguments.

 

[BigJim®]

Please don't use DWill and Sanders in the same sentence. The comparison stops at DWill getting caught behind the line.

Ok, I'll just pretend we aren't talking about the all-time NCAA career leader in all-purpose yards, and a 1st round NFL draft pick- a guy who put up 5.0 YPC in his second NFL season despite limited opportunity. For your sake, I'll pretend we are debating guy who doesn't belong in the same sentence as Sanders despite their apparent similarilties in NCAA success, draft profile, running styles, and shortcomings.

Barry Sanders rookie year 280-1470-14 (5.25 ypc)Williams career (2 years) 265-1218-5 (4.6 ypc)Barry's 1st 2 years - 3536 total yards 30 tds to 1708 - 7 for Williams. They don't look too close to me. Barry will probably have more td's in his first 2 years than Williams will have for his career.

So one guy was given the full load of carries and the other wasn't? That's the only pertinent part of your data. Your comment that Deangelo will not get 9 TDs for the rest of his career ends your debate with me; there's just no point in debating when I see Deangelo as being a potential stud when he's finally given opportunity. Agree to disagree.

 

[VaCatFan]

First off, nice, well thought out post...

1) If D-Will was so good he would have taken Foster's job some time ago. This position relies on a proposition that I, and others, do not accept; namely, that starters under Fox are appointed based on merit and the ability of the coaching staff to identify talent. I think Fox names his starters based on his own poor judgment and stubborn and often undeserved loyalty, which in this case happens to be a toxic combination.

I remember when people were saying the same thing re: Davis starting, and Foster backing him up. Now that Foster has started a few years, people recall Davis as the better RB. But in the playoffs in '03 people were talking about Foster being the more explosive player, etc. Early in '04 he had that 170+ yard game and people thought CAR found their RB, then he was injured. In '05 he returned, and toward the end of the season was tearing it up again. In '06 the Panthers drafted DeAngelo. Foster missed a few games with injury, but still, in every game he had 15+ touches, the Panthers won.Now Foster is Stephen Davis, and DeAngelo is Foster.

My point is, that Carolina fans have this particular love for the backup RB. Remember Brad Hoover of all people?

2) D-Will is not an every down back. Basically there is no way to know this until he is given the chance to carry the ball on a regular basis. I do not use the absence of evidence here to argue that he is an every down back, only that we cannot know yet. And, given his history (college) I see no reason not to give him a chance to prove otherwise.

I believe he will be given a chance, but not on a long leash.

3) D-Will does not pass-block. In my opinion, this point is only interesting in that it raises (additional) questions regarding coaching and D-Will's desire to improve. Putting aside the veractiy of the claim, which I think debatable considering how often D-Will was in on passing downs, pass blocking from RB's is a skill that can be taught and basically comes down to "want-to". So, either Carolina is not teaching it effectively or D-Will doesn't want to do it. I have no evidence for either position right now and if D-Will is in fact pulling the Cedric Benson and simply unwilling to do it that will raise significant questions.

Well, he's been in the league two years, it's not hard to learn, most rookies do by the end of their first season, as it's more technique than anything. I don't know. Obviously the coaches have had issues with him for some reason. But the beat writers around here love DeAngelo.

4) Foster is good. I don't know if this is just a franchise that has never seen a good running back or if people actually believe this but this claim is completely ridiculous. I find it very interesting that the pro-Foster people provide every excuse in the book as to why he has not performed (injuries, o-line, etc.) but then turn around and rush to discount other RB's performances (esp. D-Will's) in what can reasonably be described as highly similar circumstances. Very strange. And, by the way, Foster does suck...he lacks power, explosiveness and he is fumble-prone.

Foster does not suck. If you think so you have a short memory, or you only watched a couple games this year. He is worn down, I agree... he's lost a step, his knees never fully recovered from surgery. But ....2007 Wk3 20-122 6.1

2007 Wk1 17-95 5.5

2006 Wk5 24-106 4.4

2006 Wk4 16-105 6.6

2005 WCPO 27-151 5.6

2005 Wk17 18-165 9.2

2005 Wk13 24-131 5.5

Those aren't numbers put up by a runningback that sucks. Foster was a better RB than DA is when he came out of college, he had two severe injuries to his knees (I believe he had microfracture once) and it's taken a toll on him. Injuries != lack of talent.

Your perception is still that Foster was a better prospect coming out, and that is simply not true. I posted this in 2007 and it is still true now:Now let's look at college dominance. Williams holds the NCAA record for yards from scrimmage. Does Foster hold any college records? Foster averaged 4.4 yards per carry (putrid college average), had 3194 yards rushing, 548 receiving yards, and 44 TDs at UCLA. DWill averaged 6.2 per carry (better career average than DeShaun's best single season in college), had 6026 yards rushing, 723 receiving, and scored 60 TDs for Memphis. Looks pretty close so far...let's look at some scouting reports...

This is from Rivals.com about Williams...

Pros: He has excellent quickness and acceleration coupled with the sharp cutting skills that allow him to change directions and break the big play. He gets to the corner quickly, showing the foot speed and lateral mobility to get outside the tackles and pressure the defense. As a receiver, he has very good hands and is well- developed to be a threat immediately in that role. He shows the ability to get into his routes easily and get consistently open. He displays fine route-running ability with a keen awareness of defensive coverage and soft spots in pass defense. He is dangerous after the catch and follows his blockers well, showing the ability to change speeds and set up defenders.

Cons: His main flaw at this point is his blocking and whether he can handle linebackers in single assignments, something he struggled with at the Senior Bowl. It is this weakness that would keep him on the bench as a rookie. He needs strength and technique work.

This is TSN's scouting report on Foster coming out...

Assets Explosive cutback runner with very good vision and instincts. Downhill runner who finishes his carries. Has soft hands. Runs well between the tackles and has a quick burst when he hits the secondary.

Flaws Tall, upright back who will lose leverage at times. Tends to wear down and may not be a 25-carry workhorse. Not a good blocker.

Career potential Excellent backup.

Now, I know that Foster has been in the NFL a few years, so this scouting report may be slightly meaningless. But it still gives us a feel for the perception of the players coming out of college. DWill was clearly a much better prospect, and Foster has been inconsistent, has fumbled quite a bit, has been very injury prone, and when healthy really hasn't been that effective. DWill hasn't displayed that much at the NFL level, but he is clearly a more natural, talented runner and receiver. At least DWill hasn't proved that he isn't elite...Foster has proved that he is nothing more than mediocre, at the college and NFL level.

It is just time to let it go, man. Foster wasn't that heralded coming out, he has never been good, and Carolina has moved on. Continuing to defend him just affects your credibility in other arguments.

I get your point that Foster is and never was as highly thought of prospect as Williams. Foster is what he is. Not a great back, in any regards. However, these are the words from Fox and Hurney considering Foster: "DeShaun had the ability to make big plays in big games and always gave his best regardless of his role," Panthers coach John Fox said in a statement released by the team. "He never complained and was a professional in every sense of the word. We wish nothing but the best for DeShaun."His problem was that there weren't enough of the highlights to balance out the raw numbers of fumbles and yards. For all his talent, he still never reached 1,000 yards in any season and frustrated his coaches and teammates by putting the ball on the ground.

Still, he created a loyal following among the coaching staff for all the small things -- his blocking, his leadership, the way he worked back from injuries and played hurt. It was telling that when owner Jerry Richardson called up the leaders prior to last season, Foster was there among the obvious names such as Steve Smith and Julius Peppers.

"This was a hard decision," Hurney said. "The way he played, the type of person he was, the way he was in the locker room, ... he means so much to us."

I guess what I'm getting at is don't expect Williams to become the next Barry Sanders, Emmit Smith, or even Willie Parker. He's got a 50/50 shot, but he's got to step up and show more than he has. The next point as someone brought up was the offensive line. Right now, the offensive line is looking at probably 3 new people in different positions minimum. Could go as high as five depending on what they do with the guards and where they move Wharton and Gross to (possibly LG and LT). Whoever runs behind that line is going to have some trouble until they get their act together. Temper your enthusiasm a bit is all I"m saying.

 

[switz]

Your perception is still that Foster was a better prospect coming out, and that is simply not true. I posted this in 2007 and it is still true now:

Now let's look at college dominance. Williams holds the NCAA record for yards from scrimmage. Does Foster hold any college records? Foster averaged 4.4 yards per carry (putrid college average), had 3194 yards rushing, 548 receiving yards, and 44 TDs at UCLA. DWill averaged 6.2 per carry (better career average than DeShaun's best single season in college), had 6026 yards rushing, 723 receiving, and scored 60 TDs for Memphis. Looks pretty close so far...let's look at some scouting reports...

First, playing at UCLA is a heck of a lot tougher competition, than playing at Memphis...Also, you do realize Foster's senior year YPC was 5.1, and he missed almost all of 1998 with a knee injury, unsuccessfully tried to play the 1999 season with a troublesome high ankle sprain, and then was hampered in 2000 by a hand injury... Don't you? Or do you really not know much about Foster at all. Here's a few links to help you see how well Foster was thought of in college.

Foster Dominates

As we reach the midpoint of the 2001 college football season, the cream is beginning to rise to the top. And nowhere is that more evident than in Pasadena, CA, where UCLA's DeShaun Foster has established himself as the nation's best running back.

CNNSI Mock DraftProjected to be the #1 RB taken.

RB Rankings

#2 ranked behind Duckett

Anyway, the list goes on. By the time of the draft Duckett & Green were ranked #1 and #2, depending on who you talked to. Foster was ranked #3 by concensus.

BTW, DeAngelo was also ranked #3 in his class by the time of the draft, but not once was he thought to possibly be the #1 RB prospect.

All this is moot now. But to say Foster wasn't well thought of coming out of college, or that DeAngelo was thought more highly of is ludicrous.... (even if you can dig up and find one report on the entire Internet to support your POV)

 

[tribecalledjeff]

Please don't use DWill and Sanders in the same sentence. The comparison stops at DWill getting caught behind the line.

Ok, I'll just pretend we aren't talking about the all-time NCAA career leader in all-purpose yards, and a 1st round NFL draft pick- a guy who put up 5.0 YPC in his second NFL season despite limited opportunity. For your sake, I'll pretend we are debating guy who doesn't belong in the same sentence as Sanders despite their apparent similarilties in NCAA success, draft profile, running styles, and shortcomings.

 

[Banger]

Please don't use DWill and Sanders in the same sentence. The comparison stops at DWill getting caught behind the line.

Ok, I'll just pretend we aren't talking about the all-time NCAA career leader in all-purpose yards, and a 1st round NFL draft pick- a guy who put up 5.0 YPC in his second NFL season despite limited opportunity. For your sake, I'll pretend we are debating guy who doesn't belong in the same sentence as Sanders despite their apparent similarilties in NCAA success, draft profile, running styles, and shortcomings.

Barry Sanders rookie year 280-1470-14 (5.25 ypc)Williams career (2 years) 265-1218-5 (4.6 ypc)Barry's 1st 2 years - 3536 total yards 30 tds to 1708 - 7 for Williams. They don't look too close to me. Barry will probably have more td's in his first 2 years than Williams will have for his career.

So one guy was given the full load of carries and the other wasn't? That's the only pertinent part of your data. Your comment that Deangelo will not get 9 TDs for the rest of his career ends your debate with me; there's just no point in debating when I see Deangelo as being a potential stud when he's finally given opportunity. Agree to disagree.

I was referring to the 30 td's Barry scored over his first 2 years to Williams 7 (a diff of 23).

 

[Footballhead]

DeAngelo is great in the open field, but he has ZERO vision, doesn't hit holes well, and dances too much in the backfield. In addition to not being very good at other aspects of the game.Just my $0.02

I completely and utterly disagree. DeAngelo has great vision. What he lacks is blocking skills and the line in front of him.Watch where Deshaun lands, might come out to be the steal of the draft this season.

 

[Loan Sharks]

DeAngelo Williams is the real deal, those who don't see it are drunken monkeys.

 

[kevinallen]

For those of you that like DWill and wonder why he isn't the starter, look at his play by play rushes. 54 of his 144 rushes last year (38%) went for negative to 1 yard. That's pathetic. You guys have to ask yourself as a coach would you rather have a guy like L. White that runs for 3, 2, 3, 4, 2, 5, 3, 5 (3.4 ypc) or a guy that runs for -1, 0, 14, 0, 10, -2, 15, 0 (4.5 ypc)?

Guys like that are drive killers and put your team in bad down and distances. The 10 yard runs are great but a coach like Fox (like most) wants to control the clock and drive the ball methodically down the field. There's a tremendous difference between a 3rd and 3 and a 3rd and 9. A guy that runs for -2 on 1st down kills the drive and removes half the plays from the playbook and makes the offense much more one dimensional. That's why DWill is not the starter.

Not sure if this is just a made up group of numbers that you threw together or a random set of plays that you found during the season, but it's not actually that bad and doesnt really help your argument all that well. Yeah, there are negative plays there, but there are 3 separate plays (14, 10, 15) where you have DWill getting a 1st down in one carry. Pretty darn impressive. I agree that negative plays are drive killers, but from this current example, Williams is making up for those poor plays by moving the chains and the drives arent getting killed at all. Isnt that what you want in the long run from any player? You cant really ask for much more, that and not turning the ball over, something DA has done well. And like the "Foster camp" has been fond of saying in the past, Carolina's O-line sucks.

 

[H.K.]

I heard on NFL Radio that the Panthers may look to resign Foster at a much lower salary. I don`t think Foster will be much in demand so he may be back in Carolina next season.

I don't like you...

Cheer up, GB...this was on rotoworld today:The Buccaneers are reportedly targeting free agent DeShaun Foster.

"We've had talks with his representative, yes," GM Bruce Allen confirmed Saturday. The Bucs are trying to make a big splash in free agency, but would likely be better off with Earnest Graham, Michael Bennett, and Ken Darby at running back. The club is still expected to meet with Foster early next week.

Link to their source

 

[travdogg]

I heard on NFL Radio that the Panthers may look to resign Foster at a much lower salary. I don`t think Foster will be much in demand so he may be back in Carolina next season.

I don't like you...

Cheer up, GB...this was on rotoworld today:The Buccaneers are reportedly targeting free agent DeShaun Foster.

"We've had talks with his representative, yes," GM Bruce Allen confirmed Saturday. The Bucs are trying to make a big splash in free agency, but would likely be better off with Earnest Graham, Michael Bennett, and Ken Darby at running back. The club is still expected to meet with Foster early next week.

Link to their source

Foster would be a mistake for Tampa IMO. He's not as fast as Bennett or as powerful as Graham and they still have Caddy. Foster would be useless(at least for his price) to them.Personally I think a good fit for Foster would be in San Diego backing up LT and allowing Sproles to focus on returns.

 

[Couch Potato]

It doesn't sound like re-signing Foster at a cheaper price is in the cards.

From Charlotte Observer today 2/23

http://www.charlotte.com/panthers/story/505632.html

OFFSEASON OF CHANGE

Panthers looking for help in Indy

NFL scouting combine keeps coach, general manager busy

**********************

Breaks don't last long for Carolina Panthers coach John Fox this time of year, especially during the NFL scouting combine.

At 4:30 p.m. Friday, he was off to what he called a quick, "slam it down" dinner with general manager Marty Hurney before an evening full of interviews with draft prospects.

Before his meal, Fox spent a few minutes discussing the Panthers' offseason -- the moves they've made and the ones still to come.

On offense, the line is changing and a new running back is needed now that starter DeShaun Foster has been released.

"We feel like we've got a good, viable guy in DeAngelo (Williams) and we're going to have to find someone else," Fox said. "Obviously, we're going to have a need there."

There has been speculation that the Panthers want to find a big, power back to pair with the more compact Williams, but Fox said that's not necessarily so.

"A lot is made of that and it gets printed in the paper a lot, but there are successful backs that are all kinds of shapes and sizes," Fox said. "The key is finding a good back. We've not had a 1,000-yard rusher since Stephen Davis (in 2003), and that was the last time we made a good run (to the Super Bowl). We need to find a guy who can help us be able to run the ball better."

 

[Liquid Tension]

Please don't use DWill and Sanders in the same sentence. The comparison stops at DWill getting caught behind the line.

:whoosh: Ok, I'll just pretend we aren't talking about the all-time NCAA career leader in all-purpose yards

Name the previous record holders before DWill, and what was thier success in the NFL?? Here, I'll help:1 Ricky Williams, Texas 1995-98 72062 Napoleon McCallum, Navy 1981-85 71723 Darrin Nelson, Stanford 1977-78, 80-81 68854 Kevin Faulk, LSU 1995-98 68335 Ron Dayne, Wisconsin 1996-99 6701A ton of great RBs there, huh?

Sorry, I'm not following your point. I would readily concede that NCAA success does not, by itself, promise NFL success. I never said it did, and I listed other similarities such as draft profile and running style. Do you agree with Banger that Deangelo doesn't belong in the same sentence with Sanders based upon your above information? Do you feel their running styles are so different that they are beyond comparison? I know you're a bright guy, so I'm sure you realize Barry Sanders is the NFL's all time leader in lost yardage. In fact, Barry lost yardage 446 times during his career, for -1114 yards. Those are mind-numbing totals. How exactly did that happen... poor vision? Danced too much? Didn't hit holes right? Be consistent about your misgiving about Deangelo; would you have argued Barry Sanders was better suited for change of pace RB duties?

Just for the record, Sanders lost a lot of yards because his OL was PUTRID! Remember when they allowed Barry to run through holes and all of a sudden he had long runs where guys didn't catch him from behind? From the Emmitt comment, Yes Emmitt was great, but Emmitt also had a great OL in front of him and a solid QB and Irvin to take some pressure off. Impossible to know who really was better, but IMO if Sanders were on the Cowboys there wouldn't be very much discussion about who was the best...it would be Jim Brown and Sanders.

 

[Mark Wimer]

It appears that the minority view is that this is an endorsement of DeAngelo going forward as the feature back, with someone brought in to complement him. Is this simply due to Fox's comments regarding a return to a power running game or concerns over DeAngelo's talent? I have not seen many Panther's games, so I don't have a valid basis to form an opinion. I do remember DeAngelo coming in and being highly regarded out of Memphis and to see so many questions on him seems a little confusing...

DeAngelo is great in the open field, but he has ZERO vision, doesn't hit holes well, and dances too much in the backfield. In addition to not being very good at other aspects of the game.Just my $0.02

I'm always annoyed while watching him waste decent holes and then get hit for a loss...or, alternatively, watching him blow a blocking assignment and let the QB get spammed.