Steven Jackson to ATL (1 Viewer)

[BroncoFreak_2K3]

dude runs HARD....very physicalonce caught 90 passes in a season....when he does catch....there could be a ton of open space with Gonzo-Julio-Roddy demanding a ton of attentionI could see him gaining some big chunks of yardage in the passing game and some of those going for TD'she should get all of the goaline work.....and red zone work as well because of his ability to catch...there times when Turner was really fed the ball depending on game situations....Jackson could have some monster gamesI'm not one to question age/etc...I think he will be rejuvinated...has always been a pro....he WILL bring it every week

I totally agree. I'm targetting him in all my drafts

 

[Winning IS Everything]

Not much difference in stats for Jackson.

I think doubling his tds is a lock, barring big injury.

He should have more TDs than last year by Week 6..... LOL

 

[ghostguy123]

Likely more hype than substance. The Falcons have Roddy, Gonzo, and Julio. The league is a passing league. I don't think the Falcons think they will be a better team running SJAX 20-30 times a game. They had a great record last year doing what they do and they were on the record saying they wanted to save the RB's legs for when it mattered. He will be better than Turner but he's not going to be through the roof in real value.

Personally, I think if SJAX wanted a ring, he should have maybe signed with Green Bay or Pitt. I just don't think the Falcons have what it takes.

They run enough. And no way they expect 20-30 carries a game. He should get around 250 and a LOT more catches than Turner. I don't think 16-17 carries a game is unrealistic at all. It's probably the best place he could have landed. Maybe not the most touches of anywhere he coulda gone, but more quality touches and easily more TDs. If anything I might call it an ever so slight hit to Ryan's numbers

I say that only because SJAX was on record as saying he wanted to go soemwhere to win a SB and where he could be a bell cow back. I don't think he met either of those.

Everyone is entitled to an opinion, I jsut happen to completely disagree with yours.Atlanta is a strong candidate for a 1st round bye and home field advantage. He will be their bellcow. 250 carries and 50 catches sounds like a bellcow to me in this day and age of football. PLus 12-15 TDs.

So, team with great shot at the best record, and 300 touches. What is the problem exactly??

Sjax was on record saying he wanted to go somewhere where he would carry the ball 20-25 times a game. That's not happening in Atlanta. To be fair, probably wasnt happening in Green Bay either but I think Rodgers would throw more to him out of the backfield than Ryan will. The screen is a big part of the packers offense. In regards to winning a SB, I think the packers are in an easier division, have a proven SB wining team, coach, qb, and have a clear true home field advantage in the playoffs.

Just my opinion but I think it's pretty clear that the packers are a team that have said we will run more if you give us somebody that can run while the falcons have clearly shifted to a pass first team. Just seems like sjax didn't clearly meet either of the two things he said he wanted and I think people who are drooling and dreaming, thinking he will be this guy they feed all day AND He will get every goal line look are kind of unrealistic. A team that wants to win the Super Bowl and plays games against the saints and bucs and panthers, etc aren't going to be running their 30 year old RB into the ground in September. I expect they will look very much like Denver. Very good, not studly for the RB.

20-25 carries a game is 320-400 carries for the year. How many RBs in the NFL are going to get that, maybe 2 or 3??

The Falcons didn't "clearly" shift to a pass 1st team. A more accurate statement would be that they passed more because Turner sucked, and Rodgers had a pretty bad YPC.

You are simply splitting hairs when you talk about who jackson has a better chance to win a super bowl with. Both teams are on the top of the conference.

250 carries is about 16 carries a game. I can also see 40-50 catches pretty easily. Unlike Turner, jackson can actually get some fantasy point on those Ryan throws.

No one is talking about jackson being some "stud". At least I hope not. But it wouldnt surprise me one bit to see a healthy Sjax finish top 10 for Rb scoring.

So back to the original point, Jackson wanted to be the lead back on a team with a great chance to win a super bowl. Check, and check. There is no disputing that.

And for fantasy purposes and as someone who traded for Sjax a week or so ago, of all the teams he could have gone to I preferred Atlanta.

The number of carries is just what SJAX says he wants and was looking for. I'm not saying it's realistic any more than you are. Just reporting what was said. Yeah, they clearly DID shift to a passing game. Everyone knows that. They dumped their OC last year and literally announced it. Roddy White talked about. The FF community hyped Julio Jones and Matt Ryan beyond belief as part of the reaction. Those things DID happen and the Falcons did carry that out. I think it is clear that people realize the falcons are nto the same offensive mindset as they were 2-3 years ago when Turner ran so much.

I think Green Bay is a better opportunity becaise of what I listed: They have done it, they have an easier division to win, have perhaps the best QB in the league, have a great weather HFA.

He probably will catch that many balls in Atlanta. In GB, that would have been a given; likely his floor. the Packers throw a LOT of screens. He could have caught 60 there, easily.

Whenever a RB is a top 10 RB, that is pretty universally acceptad as a stud RB. Top 10 means he is an every week starter and you have an advantage over a good part of your league if you have a top 10. That's a stud.

On your last comment, I'd say that is the most telling. You're building your case based on your investment/attachment to the player (and that's to be expected). I have no dog in the fight...not a SJAX owner, not a Falcon or Packers fan, doesn't matter to me. All in all, I'm just saying temper the expectations and, in real life, I think he would have satisfied his own stated goals better had he went to Green Bay.

I do not like Sjax because I own him, I own him because I like him .........so I went and got him hoping he would land somewhere good. There is a difference.

Also, even the crappy Turner had 200+ carries last year. He would have got more if he didnt suck so bad. I peg Jackson at 250 carries and around 40-50 catches. Double digit TDs. This is all based on playing 16 games of course.

And yes, I think he is an every week starter in leagues that need to start two RBs, unless you have really nice RBs obviously.

 

[ghostguy123]

dude runs HARD....very physicalonce caught 90 passes in a season....when he does catch....there could be a ton of open space with Gonzo-Julio-Roddy demanding a ton of attentionI could see him gaining some big chunks of yardage in the passing game and some of those going for TD'she should get all of the goaline work.....and red zone work as well because of his ability to catch...there times when Turner was really fed the ball depending on game situations....Jackson could have some monster gamesI'm not one to question age/etc...I think he will be rejuvinated...has always been a pro....he WILL bring it every week

I totally agree. I'm targetting him in all my drafts

I am not targeting him anywhere now actually. I went after him last week when I was willing to pay what it cost to get him. I pretty much gave a 2013 1st for him (although I think the pick is from a team who will miss the playoffs). I took a chance there, and it paid off a bit. At least I think it did anyway. I am cool running with Sjax as my #3 RB for the year, or maybe I trade him along with some excess WRs for a better, younger, more stable RB, who knows. In one league I am contemplating offering pick 3 for him. Generally I wouldn't do that, but I have a very young team, I have pick 2, and I have four 2014 1sts, plus I should compete even without Sjax. Not to mention to me pick 3 this year is like pick 7 most other years.

 

[FF Ninja]

I didn't read the whole thread, so maybe someone has mentioned this...

To me this situation is very much like the Corey Dillon to New England scenario. No quite perfect, as Dillon "only" had 1865 carries to SJax's 2397, but he did have 3 years in a row of lackluster performance (avg of 4.00 ypc over that span). But Dillon was 30 in his first season in NE.

I think it is silly to say SJax isn't a scorer. He's been on a team that rarely sniffs the red zone. I'll be shocked if he scores less than 10 TDs this year. If his ADP allows, I'll wait on him, but I wouldn't be opposed to taking him in the 1st round of redrafts. I'm glad he didn't see his usual 375+ touches the last two years. Makes it a bit more likely that he'll have enough in the tank for 1-2 more years of lighter use (250 carries instead of 320).

I think someone posted his last 5 years of YFS which is pretty misleading.

t/g yfs avg24.5 119 4.825.0 116 4.623.5 102 4.320.1 99 4.918.4 85 4.6
So as you can see, the decreasing YFS is meaningless. He's been pretty consistent the last 5 year with what he does per touch. So as long as he doesn't fall off the cliff then he should be pretty awesome if he simply keeps it up and gets some more scoring opps.

 

[ghostguy123]

I didn't read the whole thread, so maybe someone has mentioned this...To me this situation is very much like the Corey Dillon to New England scenario. No quite perfect, as Dillon "only" had 1865 carries to SJax's 2397, but he did have 3 years in a row of lackluster performance (avg of 4.00 ypc over that span). But Dillon was 30 in his first season in NE.I think it is silly to say SJax isn't a scorer. He's been on a team that rarely sniffs the red zone. I'll be shocked if he scores less than 10 TDs this year. If his ADP allows, I'll wait on him, but I wouldn't be opposed to taking him in the 1st round of redrafts. I'm glad he didn't see his usual 375+ touches the last two years. Makes it a bit more likely that he'll have enough in the tank for 1-2 more years of lighter use (250 carries instead of 320).I think someone posted his last 5 years of YFS which is pretty misleading.

t/g  yfs avg24.5 119 4.825.0 116 4.623.5 102 4.320.1  99 4.918.4  85 4.6

So as you can see, the decreasing YFS is meaningless. He's been pretty consistent the last 5 year with what he does per touch. So as long as he doesn't fall off the cliff then he should be pretty awesome if he simply keeps it up and gets some more scoring opps.

Those numbers are only significant if you think his touches are going to continue to go down. I sure dont, and you dont sound like you think they will either.If anything they will go up because the Falcons great offense is so much better than the Rams and they will be on the field more and run more plays.

 

[Q-Bert]

In the last four seasons Steven Jackson (25%) and Michael Turner (26%) have scored basically the same percentage of their teams total offensive touchdowns. ATL has just scored about double the number of TDs as STL. I think assuming health (always a big risk with any NFL player) it is pretty safe to put Jackson down for the same 10-12 TDs that Turner has been scoring.

 

[-jb-]

Pretty amazed to see that Turner has caught more passes per game than Jackson in his career. We all know that Turner isn't a very good receiver, and Jackson is quite good. Would have thought the numbers would reflect the same:

Turner - 3.94/game

Jackson - 3.44/game

ETA NEVER MIND DO NOT READ THIS I CANNOT DISCERN COLUMNS NO I AM NOT DRUNK WELL MAYBE A LITTLE

 

[Carter_Can_Fly]

Pretty amazed to see that Turner has caught more passes per game than Jackson in his career. We all know that Turner isn't a very good receiver, and Jackson is quite good. Would have thought the numbers would reflect the same:Turner - 3.94/gameJackson - 3.44/game

What?

 

[lbouchard]

Pretty amazed to see that Turner has caught more passes per game than Jackson in his career. We all know that Turner isn't a very good receiver, and Jackson is quite good. Would have thought the numbers would reflect the same:Turner - 3.94/gameJackson - 3.44/game

Where are you getting your stats? Turner has like 70 career REC.

 

[-jb-]

Pretty amazed to see that Turner has caught more passes per game than Jackson in his career. We all know that Turner isn't a very good receiver, and Jackson is quite good. Would have thought the numbers would reflect the same:Turner - 3.94/gameJackson - 3.44/game

What?

read wrong column

 

[ghostguy123]

12 team PPR dynasty

So I offered the guy pick 3...........for Jackson and pick 24 (he has Peterson and Forte)

I was turned down and told he has no counter.

Again I must state, this is not a trade I would normally EVER do, but I have a good young team and also pick 2, plus four 2014 1sts so I was willing to give up some longtemn value for Jackson.

 

[ConnSKINS26]

12 team PPR dynastySo I offered the guy pick 3...........for Jackson and pick 24 (he has Peterson and Forte)I was turned down and told he has no counter.Again I must state, this is not a trade I would normally EVER do, but I have a good young team and also pick 2, plus four 2014 1sts so I was willing to give up some longtemn value for Jackson.

And I'm sure that's a trade he would almost always take, but he's probably trying to win a championship and there isn't a definite potential RB1 that should be there at the 1.03. It's understandable, and probably doesn't speak to SJax's hype so much as it speaks to that guy's mindset.

 

[ghostguy123]

12 team PPR dynastySo I offered the guy pick 3...........for Jackson and pick 24 (he has Peterson and Forte)I was turned down and told he has no counter.Again I must state, this is not a trade I would normally EVER do, but I have a good young team and also pick 2, plus four 2014 1sts so I was willing to give up some longtemn value for Jackson.

And I'm sure that's a trade he would almost always take, but he's probably trying to win a championship and there isn't a definite potential RB1 that should be there at the 1.03. It's understandable, and probably doesn't speak to SJax's hype so much as it speaks to that guy's mindset.

According to what pretty much everyone has been saying on here, his value is around a mid-late 1st. I mean, are the ONLY teams trading Jackson the teams with no chance to win this year?I have a feeling all the people on here saying he is worth a mid-late 1st this year woudl NEVER trade Jackson for that if they had a team that can compete.And yes, the guy who turned down the offer has a good team and can certainly compete.

 

[Nero]

Best place for Jackson to land, IMO. 1200 total yards and 10 TDs could be floor level here.

His floor is Mathews from last year. People are really looking at best possible scenario here. You know how many guys his age with his mileage who have had 1200 yards and 10 TDs regardless of how good the team was? I'd be surprised if it isn't zero.

It's not zero: Riggins, Payton, Emmit, Dillon, Thomas Jones, Tiki, Priest, CMart, Dorsett all did it(1200 rushing yards). Some multiple times. Tiki and Priest are the only two with less than 2000 carries prior to doing it. Put me down in the camp that believes Jackson will join that list.

 

[ghostguy123]

Best place for Jackson to land, IMO. 1200 total yards and 10 TDs could be floor level here.

His floor is Mathews from last year. People are really looking at best possible scenario here. You know how many guys his age with his mileage who have had 1200 yards and 10 TDs regardless of how good the team was? I'd be surprised if it isn't zero.

It's not zero: Riggins, Payton, Emmit, Dillon, Thomas Jones, Tiki, Priest, CMart, Dorsett all did it(1200 rushing yards). Some multiple times. Tiki and Priest are the only two with less than 2000 carries prior to doing it. Put me down in the camp that believes Jackson will join that list.

Barring injury or some sort of incredible drop in his physical abilities, I call it a lock

 

[DeaLerZ]

most of us have been waiting Jackson's whole career for him to land in a place like ATL to see what this guy can do on an explosive offense because we all knew he had the talent.. he finally gets there...

I believe you got to target him in drafts if you are one of those people who has been hoping, if not for the fact that you think he is going to put up good numbers... but just for the "excitement" factor of watching this guy on a new team who happens to be one of the best offenses in the NFL to see what he can do

 

[cstu]

Best place for Jackson to land, IMO. 1200 total yards and 10 TDs could be floor level here.

His floor is Mathews from last year. People are really looking at best possible scenario here. You know how many guys his age with his mileage who have had 1200 yards and 10 TDs regardless of how good the team was? I'd be surprised if it isn't zero.

It's not zero: Riggins, Payton, Emmit, Dillon, Thomas Jones, Tiki, Priest, CMart, Dorsett all did it(1200 rushing yards). Some multiple times. Tiki and Priest are the only two with less than 2000 carries prior to doing it. Put me down in the camp that believes Jackson will join that list.

Barring injury or some sort of incredible drop in his physical abilities, I call it a lock

I don't see SJax getting a 300+ carry work load like those guys. I looked up the numbers for 30-32 yo RB's with <300 carries and 20+ catches. There have been 13 guys with over 1000 yards and only 5 with over 1200:Warrick Dunn, Thomas Jones, Ricky Watters, James Brooks and Garrison Hearst.

 

[ConnSKINS26]

Best place for Jackson to land, IMO. 1200 total yards and 10 TDs could be floor level here.

His floor is Mathews from last year. People are really looking at best possible scenario here. You know how many guys his age with his mileage who have had 1200 yards and 10 TDs regardless of how good the team was? I'd be surprised if it isn't zero.

It's not zero: Riggins, Payton, Emmit, Dillon, Thomas Jones, Tiki, Priest, CMart, Dorsett all did it(1200 rushing yards). Some multiple times. Tiki and Priest are the only two with less than 2000 carries prior to doing it. Put me down in the camp that believes Jackson will join that list.

Barring injury or some sort of incredible drop in his physical abilities, I call it a lock

I don't see SJax getting a 300+ carry work load like those guys. I looked up the numbers for 30-32 yo RB's with <300 carries and 20+ catches. There have been 13 guys with over 1000 yards and only 5 with over 1200:Warrick Dunn, Thomas Jones, Ricky Watters, James Brooks and Garrison Hearst.

From 2008-2011, a 4 year period, Turner received 300+ carries or was on pace to before injury. In 2012 obviously Turner sucked and the Falcons focused more on the pass with Ryan/Gonzo/White/Julio.And Turner STILL was given 222 carries.You don't seem them giving around 300 to a much better player that they just paid for?

 

[cstu]

Best place for Jackson to land, IMO. 1200 total yards and 10 TDs could be floor level here.

His floor is Mathews from last year. People are really looking at best possible scenario here. You know how many guys his age with his mileage who have had 1200 yards and 10 TDs regardless of how good the team was? I'd be surprised if it isn't zero.

It's not zero: Riggins, Payton, Emmit, Dillon, Thomas Jones, Tiki, Priest, CMart, Dorsett all did it(1200 rushing yards). Some multiple times. Tiki and Priest are the only two with less than 2000 carries prior to doing it. Put me down in the camp that believes Jackson will join that list.

Barring injury or some sort of incredible drop in his physical abilities, I call it a lock

I don't see SJax getting a 300+ carry work load like those guys. I looked up the numbers for 30-32 yo RB's with <300 carries and 20+ catches. There have been 13 guys with over 1000 yards and only 5 with over 1200:Warrick Dunn, Thomas Jones, Ricky Watters, James Brooks and Garrison Hearst.

From 2008-2011, a 4 year period, Turner received 300+ carries or was on pace to before injury. In 2012 obviously Turner sucked and the Falcons focused more on the pass with Ryan/Gonzo/White/Julio.And Turner STILL was given 222 carries.You don't seem them giving around 300 to a much better player that they just paid for?

I would think that they wouldn't want to run their new 30 yo RB into the ground when they are focused on the Super Bowl. He certainly could hit 300 but I think they'd be smart to limit his touches to less than 20 a game.

 

[zed2283]

I just traded 2.2 and 2.7 (12-team standard scoring dynasty) for SJax. I've got Turner and Quizz (anticipating dropping Turner) and the other team has A.Foster and S.Ridley as starters.

 

[citsalp]

If I am a Falcon fan (I am not), I like this signing, but there does have to be a little concern about SJax's age. Physical runners like him often hit that wall out of nowhere, so while Jackson could be a beast in '13 for Atlanta, I wouldn't be surprised if he hit that wall either. He does have a lot of wear and tear on his body.

Agree all around here.I'm a bit surprised ATL went the 30 year old RB route. Jackson showed he can still play last year, but if I'm ATL I take a RB no later than the middle rounds.

I think Atlanta still drafts a RB in the 4th, I think it's a great move for both Jackson and the Falcons. No way there were going to put a rookie RB to protect Ryan on blitz p/u.

 

[Nero]

Best place for Jackson to land, IMO. 1200 total yards and 10 TDs could be floor level here.

His floor is Mathews from last year. People are really looking at best possible scenario here. You know how many guys his age with his mileage who have had 1200 yards and 10 TDs regardless of how good the team was? I'd be surprised if it isn't zero.

It's not zero: Riggins, Payton, Emmit, Dillon, Thomas Jones, Tiki, Priest, CMart, Dorsett all did it(1200 rushing yards). Some multiple times. Tiki and Priest are the only two with less than 2000 carries prior to doing it. Put me down in the camp that believes Jackson will join that list.

Barring injury or some sort of incredible drop in his physical abilities, I call it a lock

I don't see SJax getting a 300+ carry work load like those guys. I looked up the numbers for 30-32 yo RB's with <300 carries and 20+ catches. There have been 13 guys with over 1000 yards and only 5 with over 1200:Warrick Dunn, Thomas Jones, Ricky Watters, James Brooks and Garrison Hearst.

I don't expect 300 carries either, but I expect him to be very effective with the 250 or so he'll get. His biggest value will be in the passing game where I think he is a lock for at least 50.

 

[Kenny Powers]

I didn't read the whole thread, so maybe someone has mentioned this...To me this situation is very much like the Corey Dillon to New England scenario. No quite perfect, as Dillon "only" had 1865 carries to SJax's 2397, but he did have 3 years in a row of lackluster performance (avg of 4.00 ypc over that span). But Dillon was 30 in his first season in NE.I think it is silly to say SJax isn't a scorer. He's been on a team that rarely sniffs the red zone. I'll be shocked if he scores less than 10 TDs this year. If his ADP allows, I'll wait on him, but I wouldn't be opposed to taking him in the 1st round of redrafts. I'm glad he didn't see his usual 375+ touches the last two years. Makes it a bit more likely that he'll have enough in the tank for 1-2 more years of lighter use (250 carries instead of 320).I think someone posted his last 5 years of YFS which is pretty misleading.

t/g  yfs avg24.5 119 4.825.0 116 4.623.5 102 4.320.1  99 4.918.4  85 4.6

So as you can see, the decreasing YFS is meaningless. He's been pretty consistent the last 5 year with what he does per touch. So as long as he doesn't fall off the cliff then he should be pretty awesome if he simply keeps it up and gets some more scoring opps.

The Dillon comparison is a good one considering the type of team/offense he left and went to as well.

 

[Quibbler]

One thing to think about is downside. He was a marginal starter/nice bench guy in an offense that never got to the red zone last year. Barring a serious injury he'll fall into better numbers this year just by the bump in TDs. So even if he doesn't do as well as you hope, he'll still probably be a player you can use in your starting lineup most weeks. Given where you'll have to take him, I'd rather spend the pick on a safe-ish player than a high-risk guy like CJ2K or McFadden

 

[cstu]

Best place for Jackson to land, IMO. 1200 total yards and 10 TDs could be floor level here.

His floor is Mathews from last year. People are really looking at best possible scenario here. You know how many guys his age with his mileage who have had 1200 yards and 10 TDs regardless of how good the team was? I'd be surprised if it isn't zero.

It's not zero: Riggins, Payton, Emmit, Dillon, Thomas Jones, Tiki, Priest, CMart, Dorsett all did it(1200 rushing yards). Some multiple times. Tiki and Priest are the only two with less than 2000 carries prior to doing it. Put me down in the camp that believes Jackson will join that list.

Barring injury or some sort of incredible drop in his physical abilities, I call it a lock

I don't see SJax getting a 300+ carry work load like those guys. I looked up the numbers for 30-32 yo RB's with <300 carries and 20+ catches. There have been 13 guys with over 1000 yards and only 5 with over 1200:Warrick Dunn, Thomas Jones, Ricky Watters, James Brooks and Garrison Hearst.

I don't expect 300 carries either, but I expect him to be very effective with the 250 or so he'll get. His biggest value will be in the passing game where I think he is a lock for at least 50.

I think Rodgers will continue to be used a lot so I expect SJax to get between 40-50.250/1100/10 and 45/350 is still a damn good year and puts him in the top 10.

 

[ghostguy123]

I think he has potential for a big year and to score top 5 for RBs. It isn't gonna happen, but if healthy it is possible, especially if he does get a dozen TDs.

I realistically expect him to be the lead back (duh) and again if healthy, I can see close to 300 total touches and 10 TDs.

I think if healthy, his floor is higher than most guys. In PPR leagues I think a bad season for him would be 200 points, which is still top 20 for RBs I believe.

So even if he does have SOME regression, he should still meet and exceed what he did on the Rams last year pretty much by default.

If he plays the same, he will score 40-50 more just based on more touches, more quality touches, and more TDs.

As I mentioned before, I offered pick 3 to a team that has Sjax as his 3rd RB in a 12 team PPR dynasty, and he turned me down.

I would also bet that in startup drafts this year, he goes pretty well ahead of the 3rd rookie taken in those drafts.

 

[mad sweeney]

Not much difference in stats for Jackson.

Agreed, his streak of zero 100yd games against Seattle will continue.

 

[Rick James]

Best place for Jackson to land, IMO. 1200 total yards and 10 TDs could be floor level here.

His floor is Mathews from last year. People are really looking at best possible scenario here. You know how many guys his age with his mileage who have had 1200 yards and 10 TDs regardless of how good the team was? I'd be surprised if it isn't zero.

It's not zero: Riggins, Payton, Emmit, Dillon, Thomas Jones, Tiki, Priest, CMart, Dorsett all did it(1200 rushing yards). Some multiple times. Tiki and Priest are the only two with less than 2000 carries prior to doing it. Put me down in the camp that believes Jackson will join that list.

Barring injury or some sort of incredible drop in his physical abilities, I call it a lock

I don't see SJax getting a 300+ carry work load like those guys. I looked up the numbers for 30-32 yo RB's with <300 carries and 20+ catches. There have been 13 guys with over 1000 yards and only 5 with over 1200:Warrick Dunn, Thomas Jones, Ricky Watters, James Brooks and Garrison Hearst.

I don't expect 300 carries either, but I expect him to be very effective with the 250 or so he'll get. His biggest value will be in the passing game where I think he is a lock for at least 50.

I think Rodgers will continue to be used a lot so I expect SJax to get between 40-50.250/1100/10 and 45/350 is still a damn good year and puts him in the top 10.

If I'm a SJAX owner I'm not worried about Rodgers at all. He's nothing special really.

 

[ConnSKINS26]

Not much difference in stats for Jackson.

Agreed, his streak of zero 100yd games against Seattle will continue.

Everything isn't about the Seahawks.

 

[mad sweeney]

Not much difference in stats for Jackson.

Agreed, his streak of zero 100yd games against Seattle will continue.

Everything isn't about the Seahawks.

Ture, but Jackson's inability to top 100yds against them is. Lighten up Francis, I made a joke about a longtime division rival. That's all.

 

[citsalp]

Not much difference in stats for Jackson.

Agreed, his streak of zero 100yd games against Seattle will continue.

Falcons' ground game pounds SeahawksATLANTA — With all of the attention focused on Seattle’s Marshawn Lynch, Atlanta’s running back duo of Michael Turner and Jacquizz Rodgers had something to prove.

ERIC D. WILLIAMS; STAFF WRITER

Published: Jan. 14, 2013 at 12:05 a.m. PST

0 Comments

Atlanta Falcons running back Michael Turner (33) bursts through the Seattle defense in the game’s opening drive. Turner rushed 14 times for 98 yards for an average of 7.0 yards per rush. Atlanta averaged 87 yards per game in the regular season, ranking 29th in the league. Against Seattle the Falcons amassed 167 yards. (CURTIS COMPTON/ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION/MCT)

ATLANTA — With all of the attention focused on Seattle’s Marshawn Lynch, Atlanta’s running back duo of Michael Turner and Jacquizz Rodgers had something to prove.

And facing a Seattle defense that, heading into the contest, was yielding just 103.1 yards a contest, the Falcons showed they can still pound the rock.

Turner rumbled for 98 yards on 14 carries, and the cat-quick Rodgers added another 64 yards on 10 carries.

The Falcons finished with 167 rushing yards, the most Seattle’s defense had given up since a Nov. 25 ame in Miami during the regular season.

Atlanta came into the game averaging just 87 yards rushing per contest during the regular season, 29th in the league. The Falcons finished with four runs of 15 yards or more.

“They are a tough and physical unit for sure,” Rodgers said. “However, we wanted to use their aggressive style of defense against them. Because they play eight men in the box, we thought we could gash them for big plays.”

The Seahawks did a much better job against the run in the second half, giving up just 34 yards.

“We just started doing what we do,” Seattle linebacker Bobby Wagner said. “We made plays in the backfield, picks — all that stuff. We should have done that sooner. Then we wouldn’t have been in that predicament.”

While Atlanta’s running game thrived, Lynch and Seattle’s running game struggled.

Lynch finished with 46 yards on 16 carries for a pedestrian 2.9-yards per carry average. The Cal product had been nursing a foot injury all week, and did not appear to be 100 percent healthy.

Lynch also lost a fumble for the second consecutive week. He was stripped of the ball by Atlanta linebacker Sean Weatherspoon, and defensive tackle Jonathan Babineaux recovered.

The turnover led to a drive that ended in a 1-yard touchdown catch by Falcons tight end Tony Gonzalez.

Lynch was held to his lowest output since the Miami game (also 46 rushing yards).

The Seahawks finished with 123 rushing yards as a team, and quarterback Russell Wilson led Seattle in rushing with 60 yards on seven carries.

“The number one must going into the week was to stop Marshawn Lynch,” Atlanta coach Mike Smith said. “The guys up front won the line of scrimmage in the run game.”

History of gashing defeats

Atlanta’s Michael Turner and Jacquizz Rodgers weren’t the first to run wild against Seattle in the postseason. The Seahawks are 0-7 all-time when giving up more than 150 yards rushing in a playoff:

Read more here: http://www.thenewstribune.com/2013/01/14/2434750/falcons-ground-game-pounds-seahawks.html#storylink=cpy

 

[cstu]

Best place for Jackson to land, IMO. 1200 total yards and 10 TDs could be floor level here.

His floor is Mathews from last year. People are really looking at best possible scenario here. You know how many guys his age with his mileage who have had 1200 yards and 10 TDs regardless of how good the team was? I'd be surprised if it isn't zero.

It's not zero: Riggins, Payton, Emmit, Dillon, Thomas Jones, Tiki, Priest, CMart, Dorsett all did it(1200 rushing yards). Some multiple times. Tiki and Priest are the only two with less than 2000 carries prior to doing it. Put me down in the camp that believes Jackson will join that list.

Barring injury or some sort of incredible drop in his physical abilities, I call it a lock

I don't see SJax getting a 300+ carry work load like those guys. I looked up the numbers for 30-32 yo RB's with <300 carries and 20+ catches. There have been 13 guys with over 1000 yards and only 5 with over 1200:Warrick Dunn, Thomas Jones, Ricky Watters, James Brooks and Garrison Hearst.

I don't expect 300 carries either, but I expect him to be very effective with the 250 or so he'll get. His biggest value will be in the passing game where I think he is a lock for at least 50.

I think Rodgers will continue to be used a lot so I expect SJax to get between 40-50.250/1100/10 and 45/350 is still a damn good year and puts him in the top 10.

If I'm a SJAX owner I'm not worried about Rodgers at all. He's nothing special really.

53 catches on 58 targets is nothing special? If he were to get the same targets as Sproles that would have been 93 catches.

 

[ghostguy123]

Not sure, but for a 3rd down back is catching 53 of 58 dumpoffs really good or something??

Just asking, cause I seriously have never looked at a stat like that for 3rd down backs.

I think Quiz is decent, but I don't think he threatens Jackson's workload.

In fact, I think if Quiz got hurt and never played this year, Jackson would get the same workload as if Quiz was healthy. Jackson isn't going to get a bunch of extra carries and get beaten to the ground, no matter what happens with their RBs behind him. I think he is pretty set up for a predetrmined workload.

 

[cstu]

Not sure, but for a 3rd down back is catching 53 of 58 dumpoffs really good or something??

Just asking, cause I seriously have never looked at a stat like that for 3rd down backs.

I think Quiz is decent, but I don't think he threatens Jackson's workload.

In fact, I think if Quiz got hurt and never played this year, Jackson would get the same workload as if Quiz was healthy. Jackson isn't going to get a bunch of extra carries and get beaten to the ground, no matter what happens with their RBs behind him. I think he is pretty set up for a predetrmined workload.

I believe so:Sproles - 6.43 yards per target

Rodgers - 6.81 yards per target

 

[ghostguy123]

Not sure, but for a 3rd down back is catching 53 of 58 dumpoffs really good or something??Just asking, cause I seriously have never looked at a stat like that for 3rd down backs. I think Quiz is decent, but I don't think he threatens Jackson's workload.In fact, I think if Quiz got hurt and never played this year, Jackson would get the same workload as if Quiz was healthy. Jackson isn't going to get a bunch of extra carries and get beaten to the ground, no matter what happens with their RBs behind him. I think he is pretty set up for a predetrmined workload.

I believe so:Sproles - 6.43 yards per targetRodgers - 6.81 yards per target

Right, but Sproles is getting catches on 1st down. Quiz on 3rd and long where a D giving up 8 yards doesnt matter.

 

[cstu]

Not sure, but for a 3rd down back is catching 53 of 58 dumpoffs really good or something??Just asking, cause I seriously have never looked at a stat like that for 3rd down backs. I think Quiz is decent, but I don't think he threatens Jackson's workload.In fact, I think if Quiz got hurt and never played this year, Jackson would get the same workload as if Quiz was healthy. Jackson isn't going to get a bunch of extra carries and get beaten to the ground, no matter what happens with their RBs behind him. I think he is pretty set up for a predetrmined workload.

I believe so:Sproles - 6.43 yards per targetRodgers - 6.81 yards per target

Right, but Sproles is getting catches on 1st down. Quiz on 3rd and long where a D giving up 8 yards doesnt matter.

Sproles - 58 of 78 targets (6.74 YPT) on 1st and 2nd down, 21 1st downs (27% of targets).Rodgers - 38 of 43 targets (6.56 YPT) on 1st and 2nd down, 11 1st downs (26% of targets).

 

[mad sweeney]

Not much difference in stats for Jackson.

Agreed, his streak of zero 100yd games against Seattle will continue.

Falcons' ground game pounds SeahawksATLANTA — With all of the attention focused on Seattle’s Marshawn Lynch, Atlanta’s running back duo of Michael Turner and Jacquizz Rodgers had something to prove.

ERIC D. WILLIAMS; STAFF WRITER

Published: Jan. 14, 2013 at 12:05 a.m. PST

0 Comments

Atlanta Falcons running back Michael Turner (33) bursts through the Seattle defense in the game’s opening drive. Turner rushed 14 times for 98 yards for an average of 7.0 yards per rush. Atlanta averaged 87 yards per game in the regular season, ranking 29th in the league. Against Seattle the Falcons amassed 167 yards. (CURTIS COMPTON/ATLANTA JOURNAL-CONSTITUTION/MCT)

ATLANTA — With all of the attention focused on Seattle’s Marshawn Lynch, Atlanta’s running back duo of Michael Turner and Jacquizz Rodgers had something to prove.

And facing a Seattle defense that, heading into the contest, was yielding just 103.1 yards a contest, the Falcons showed they can still pound the rock.

Turner rumbled for 98 yards on 14 carries, and the cat-quick Rodgers added another 64 yards on 10 carries.

The Falcons finished with 167 rushing yards, the most Seattle’s defense had given up since a Nov. 25 ame in Miami during the regular season.

Atlanta came into the game averaging just 87 yards rushing per contest during the regular season, 29th in the league. The Falcons finished with four runs of 15 yards or more.

“They are a tough and physical unit for sure,” Rodgers said. “However, we wanted to use their aggressive style of defense against them. Because they play eight men in the box, we thought we could gash them for big plays.”

The Seahawks did a much better job against the run in the second half, giving up just 34 yards.

“We just started doing what we do,” Seattle linebacker Bobby Wagner said. “We made plays in the backfield, picks — all that stuff. We should have done that sooner. Then we wouldn’t have been in that predicament.”

While Atlanta’s running game thrived, Lynch and Seattle’s running game struggled.

Lynch finished with 46 yards on 16 carries for a pedestrian 2.9-yards per carry average. The Cal product had been nursing a foot injury all week, and did not appear to be 100 percent healthy.

Lynch also lost a fumble for the second consecutive week. He was stripped of the ball by Atlanta linebacker Sean Weatherspoon, and defensive tackle Jonathan Babineaux recovered.

The turnover led to a drive that ended in a 1-yard touchdown catch by Falcons tight end Tony Gonzalez.

Lynch was held to his lowest output since the Miami game (also 46 rushing yards).

The Seahawks finished with 123 rushing yards as a team, and quarterback Russell Wilson led Seattle in rushing with 60 yards on seven carries.

“The number one must going into the week was to stop Marshawn Lynch,” Atlanta coach Mike Smith said. “The guys up front won the line of scrimmage in the run game.”

History of gashing defeats

Atlanta’s Michael Turner and Jacquizz Rodgers weren’t the first to run wild against Seattle in the postseason. The Seahawks are 0-7 all-time when giving up more than 150 yards rushing in a playoff:

Read more here: http://www.thenewstribune.com/2013/01/14/2434750/falcons-ground-game-pounds-seahawks.html#storylink=cpy

Cool story. Maybe Jackson can combine with someone else for over 100yds when they play this year. Otherwise, not sure why you'd post a story about RBs failing top 100 yds in response to my saying the new RB has failed to top 100 vs Seattle ever. Kinda backs up my point rather than whatever point you think you're making.

 

[Nero]

Quizz ain't getting 53 catches with Jackdon on the team. Half if his receptions are going to go to Jackson.

 

[ghostguy123]

Quizz ain't getting 53 catches with Jackdon on the team. Half if his receptions are going to go to Jackson.

I would agree Jackson will cut down on Quizz's receptions.Turner would have if he had any ability in the passing game.

 

[ghostguy123]

Not sure, but for a 3rd down back is catching 53 of 58 dumpoffs really good or something??Just asking, cause I seriously have never looked at a stat like that for 3rd down backs. I think Quiz is decent, but I don't think he threatens Jackson's workload.In fact, I think if Quiz got hurt and never played this year, Jackson would get the same workload as if Quiz was healthy. Jackson isn't going to get a bunch of extra carries and get beaten to the ground, no matter what happens with their RBs behind him. I think he is pretty set up for a predetrmined workload.

I believe so:Sproles - 6.43 yards per targetRodgers - 6.81 yards per target

Right, but Sproles is getting catches on 1st down. Quiz on 3rd and long where a D giving up 8 yards doesnt matter.

Sproles - 58 of 78 targets (6.74 YPT) on 1st and 2nd down, 21 1st downs (27% of targets).Rodgers - 38 of 43 targets (6.56 YPT) on 1st and 2nd down, 11 1st downs (26% of targets).

I am not even sure what we are discussing here anymore, lol.I guess when the other guy said Quiz is "nothing special", I think he meant that he isn't special enough to take work away from Jackson.Jackson is going to get as much work as they feel he is capable of getting while still staying strong

 

[FF Ninja]

Not sure, but for a 3rd down back is catching 53 of 58 dumpoffs really good or something??

Just asking, cause I seriously have never looked at a stat like that for 3rd down backs.

I think Quiz is decent, but I don't think he threatens Jackson's workload.

In fact, I think if Quiz got hurt and never played this year, Jackson would get the same workload as if Quiz was healthy. Jackson isn't going to get a bunch of extra carries and get beaten to the ground, no matter what happens with their RBs behind him. I think he is pretty set up for a predetrmined workload.

I believe so:Sproles - 6.43 yards per target

Rodgers - 6.81 yards per target

Here's are better stats:

Sproles - 5.1 ypc, 8.9 ypr

Rodgers - 3.9 ypc, 7.6 ypr

Sure, Rodgers is good at catching dump offs, but that's where it ends. Quiz = JAG. Sproles = special talent.

Now let's get back to talking about how Jackson is going to be a redraft beast.

 

[Rick James]

Thinking about this some more, I can't help but believe Atlanta's offense will be even better this year. With Turner as the #1 RB, they generally had to change personnel in order to pass. Rodgers in for pass, Tuner for the run. Now, Jackson can stay on the field in either run or pass formation, giving Atlanta a huge advantage.

Plus he should have an easier time running the ball, considering Julio, Roddy, and Gonzalez on the outside. Either bring the safety up to stop the run and leave Julio 1-on-1, or leave the safety back and run against 7. Win-win, imo.

This could be electric, honestly.

 

[cstu]

Not sure, but for a 3rd down back is catching 53 of 58 dumpoffs really good or something??

Just asking, cause I seriously have never looked at a stat like that for 3rd down backs.

I think Quiz is decent, but I don't think he threatens Jackson's workload.

In fact, I think if Quiz got hurt and never played this year, Jackson would get the same workload as if Quiz was healthy. Jackson isn't going to get a bunch of extra carries and get beaten to the ground, no matter what happens with their RBs behind him. I think he is pretty set up for a predetrmined workload.

I believe so:Sproles - 6.43 yards per target

Rodgers - 6.81 yards per target

Here's are better stats:

Sproles - 5.1 ypc, 8.9 ypr

Rodgers - 3.9 ypc, 7.6 ypr

Sure, Rodgers is good at catching dump offs, but that's where it ends. Quiz = JAG. Sproles = special talent.

Now let's get back to talking about how Jackson is going to be a redraft beast.

As a Chargers fan who was watching him when no one else in the country gave a damn about him, I disagree. Sproles is better now than Rodgers but Sproles was doing nothing at Rodgers' age. I bet almost none of you watched him when he was 23, the same age Rodgers is this year. I believe the best is ahead of him.

 

[FF Ninja]

As a Chargers fan who was watching him when no one else in the country gave a damn about him, I disagree. Sproles is better now than Rodgers but Sproles was doing nothing at Rodgers' age. I bet almost none of you watched him when he was 23, the same age Rodgers is this year. I believe the best is ahead of him.

Not true. As a Big 12 guy, I was watching him at K State and was always impressed wit him, so I followed him in the NFL. I was really surprised he didn't have more of an impact early on than he did, but needless to say I wasn't the least bit surprised when he emerged once given a chance.I also watched a few games with Rodgers at Oregon State, but not enough to really get a feel for him. So far, I just haven't been the least bit impressed with him at the NFL level. Everyone wants to think he's the next Sproles since he's short, but he's just slow. Slow and small is a bad combo in the NFL. So long as Jackson is healthy, Rodgers will only serve to keep him fresh. If the staff deems SJax can handle the full load, Rodgers is unnecessary. He may have good hands, but so does Jackson. Beyond catching dump offs, what does he have to fall back on?

 

[unckeyherb]

SJax, playing on a year-in-year-out terrible team and ALWAYS being the one player the defense schemed for has averaged 45 receptions and 1,495 YFS (if you don't include his first season where he only started 3 games, those numbers jump to 49/1,575).

His worst year as a starter was 2007, where he only played 12 games, finishing with 38 receptions and 1,273 YFS (thats a 106 yfs/game) and his best season was the year before where he had 90 rec and 2,334 YFS! That's just under 6 rec and 146 yards per game. These are incidentally the last year's that they had a productive Holt/Bruce WR duo. I'd argue that Roddy and Julio are just as frightening if not more so for defenders.

Even last year in a decreased role he was able to grab 38 receptions and get 1,363 YFS.

His biggest hindrance to top tier RB1 numbers has always been TDs (only scoring double digit TDs in '05 and '06).

Turner's rushing TD's since moving to ATL and becoming a starter have been 17, 10, 12, 11, 10. He also added 1 rec TD last year. That's just over 12 per year on average. Turner has also averaged 1,307 YFS with ATL. As has been pointed out he's never been a pass catcher-contributing only 59 catches in his tenure with the Falcons-an average of just under 12 per season. It should come as no surprise that his rushing average in Atlanta almost fully comprises his YFS numbers at 1,216 per year.

Its worth noting that this is only 34 yards more than Sjax's rushing average of 1,183.

My point with all of this is that Steven Jackson, over a longer period of time, as the only offensive component on his team still rushed 1 for 1 with Turner. His pass catching abilities are still rivaled by very few in the league and now that he is on a team with a winning culture and a potent offense to keep defenses honest as well as provide him with many more opportunities score, I see top 5 RB numbers this year.

Early projections: 272/1,196/12, 50/425/2...296.1 FFP's in PPR leagues. That puts him somewhere in the neighborhood of Marshawn Lynch/Arian Foster last year.

Yes I am serious.

 

[Nucker101]

Not sure, but for a 3rd down back is catching 53 of 58 dumpoffs really good or something??

Just asking, cause I seriously have never looked at a stat like that for 3rd down backs.

I think Quiz is decent, but I don't think he threatens Jackson's workload.

In fact, I think if Quiz got hurt and never played this year, Jackson would get the same workload as if Quiz was healthy. Jackson isn't going to get a bunch of extra carries and get beaten to the ground, no matter what happens with their RBs behind him. I think he is pretty set up for a predetrmined workload.

I believe so:Sproles - 6.43 yards per target

Rodgers - 6.81 yards per target

Here's are better stats:

Sproles - 5.1 ypc, 8.9 ypr

Rodgers - 3.9 ypc, 7.6 ypr

Sure, Rodgers is good at catching dump offs, but that's where it ends. Quiz = JAG. Sproles = special talent.

Now let's get back to talking about how Jackson is going to be a redraft beast.

As a Chargers fan who was watching him when no one else in the country gave a damn about him, I disagree. Sproles is better now than Rodgers but Sproles was doing nothing at Rodgers' age. I bet almost none of you watched him when he was 23, the same age Rodgers is this year. I believe the best is ahead of him.

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but don't Sproles' measurables show that he's a much faster and quicker back than Rodgers is? I have yet to see a consistent burst from Rodgers that I have from other small backs, when a guy like Sproles ha the ball he looks like a threat to take it all the way. I see Rodgers as a small back, with good power for his size but definitely below average speed for what his size/role/expectations.

 

[cstu]

Not sure, but for a 3rd down back is catching 53 of 58 dumpoffs really good or something??

Just asking, cause I seriously have never looked at a stat like that for 3rd down backs.

I think Quiz is decent, but I don't think he threatens Jackson's workload.

In fact, I think if Quiz got hurt and never played this year, Jackson would get the same workload as if Quiz was healthy. Jackson isn't going to get a bunch of extra carries and get beaten to the ground, no matter what happens with their RBs behind him. I think he is pretty set up for a predetrmined workload.

I believe so:Sproles - 6.43 yards per target

Rodgers - 6.81 yards per target

Here's are better stats:

Sproles - 5.1 ypc, 8.9 ypr

Rodgers - 3.9 ypc, 7.6 ypr

Sure, Rodgers is good at catching dump offs, but that's where it ends. Quiz = JAG. Sproles = special talent.

Now let's get back to talking about how Jackson is going to be a redraft beast.

As a Chargers fan who was watching him when no one else in the country gave a damn about him, I disagree. Sproles is better now than Rodgers but Sproles was doing nothing at Rodgers' age. I bet almost none of you watched him when he was 23, the same age Rodgers is this year. I believe the best is ahead of him.

Correct me if I'm wrong here, but don't Sproles' measurables show that he's a much faster and quicker back than Rodgers is? I have yet to see a consistent burst from Rodgers that I have from other small backs, when a guy like Sproles ha the ball he looks like a threat to take it all the way. I see Rodgers as a small back, with good power for his size but definitely below average speed for what his size/role/expectations.

Sproles ran a 4.47 at 187 lbs. at the combine. Rodgers ran a 4.47 at his Pro Day weighing 196. His 20 yard split (4.58 combine, 4.61 pro day) were both better than Sproles' 2.62. Sproles had a SS and 3 cone (3.96 and 6.96) than Rodgers (4.26 and 7.33).Much of what you say about Rodgers were what people were saying about Sproles, who was waiver wire fodder going into 2008.

 

[cstu]

As a Chargers fan who was watching him when no one else in the country gave a damn about him, I disagree. Sproles is better now than Rodgers but Sproles was doing nothing at Rodgers' age. I bet almost none of you watched him when he was 23, the same age Rodgers is this year. I believe the best is ahead of him.

Not true. As a Big 12 guy, I was watching him at K State and was always impressed wit him, so I followed him in the NFL. I was really surprised he didn't have more of an impact early on than he did, but needless to say I wasn't the least bit surprised when he emerged once given a chance.I also watched a few games with Rodgers at Oregon State, but not enough to really get a feel for him. So far, I just haven't been the least bit impressed with him at the NFL level. Everyone wants to think he's the next Sproles since he's short, but he's just slow. Slow and small is a bad combo in the NFL. So long as Jackson is healthy, Rodgers will only serve to keep him fresh. If the staff deems SJax can handle the full load, Rodgers is unnecessary. He may have good hands, but so does Jackson. Beyond catching dump offs, what does he have to fall back on?

He hardly a burner, but he's not slow...and most importantly he

 

[FF Ninja]

He hardly a burner, but he's not slow...and most importantly he

No, no, no, no. Do NOT compare combine numbers and pro day numbers. I highly advise you read up on the difference. Pro day numbers pretty much mean jack ####. If you want to compare numbers, compare combine numbers. It is no accident you used his pro day numbers instead of his combine numbers. Dude ran a 4.64 40 at the combine. That might fly if you are a big power back, but at 5'6" 196 lbs, that is S-L-O-W.