rizzler
Footballguy
You sure are. But your opinion is false. As proven by the numerous "undrafted bums" who have had great to hall of fame careers.
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
Why you hate Arian Foster. (2 Viewers)
- Thread starter rizzler
- Start date
Grahamburn
Footballguy
Thanks, Greg. This was the kind of information I was looking for when I asked.
wiscstlatlmia
Footballguy
LOL ...and on that note ...were done here
rizzler
Footballguy
yup, /thread.When Mr Miyugi is involved, it gets serious.
I actually very much agree with you here. I think Foster is a very good player, but so are many of the players you bring up and a very likely difference between the production of those players and Foster is the situation in Houston allowing Foster to perform to a higher level. I will also confess that as an owner of Arian Foster in multiple dynasty/keeper leagues (including my most long standing and important one in which I am the top team and have the #1 seed), I have a bit of fear about Foster's ability to carry me to the title as he has carried me to the #1 seed. While I still agree with everything I have said in this thread, I also acknowledge that having low round rookie T.J. Yates at QB instead of Matt Schaub and not having Andre Johnson on the field are going to make it significantly more difficult for Foster to continue producing out of this world numbers. So far, the Texans have compensated for their reduced offensive firepower by simply feeding Foster more touches, allowing his production to remain outstanding. But being a dynasty owner, I'm not sure 34 weekly touches is a good thing long term either. I definitely acknowledge that the difference between Matt Forte, Steven Jackson, or MJD is more situation than the players themselves, thus I can see Foster regressing closer to their production levels as his situation begins to become closer to what those 3 are dealing with.
My only interest in this thread and the reason for my posts has been your belief that Tate has performed as good or better, a belief that is completely dispelled by watching the games. However, I can't share the unabashed confidence that others have in Foster's ability to finish out the season in the same form he has so far shown. I think there is an awful lot stacked against him and wouldn't be surprised to see him struggle through some 60-80 total yard, no touchdown games (much to my chagrin) as teams completely load up to slow him down. I also think the Texans will continue to win football games directly because of this because the Panthers and Colts could easily decide that their ONLY chance to win the game is to nullify Arian Foster, thus allowing T.J. Yates to slowly pick them apart in mediocre fashion.
DesmondBishop
Footballguy
It may be, I have been wrong before and will be again, I am man enough to admit it. As far as undrafted players goes, of course there are many that have turned out to be great. I guess looking at it from a different view, do you think Foster would be looked at the same way if he played for an average offense with an average offensive line? This is where I think he would not look like the superstar the Texans make him look like. Is this a more fair thing to say or do you think he would still produce like a top 5 fantasy RB on any team, he is that good?You sure are. But your opinion is false. As proven by the numerous "undrafted bums" who have had great to hall of fame careers.
rizzler
Footballguy
Well, since I watch him weekly, and am under the impression that his talent is in fact elite... then yes, I think he could still put up very good numbers. Would they be less if he wasn't behind HOU's o-line? Maybe. But since I havent seen him behind any other o-line, I dont have the authority to say otherwise.It may be, I have been wrong before and will be again, I am man enough to admit it. As far as undrafted players goes, of course there are many that have turned out to be great. I guess looking at it from a different view, do you think Foster would be looked at the same way if he played for an average offense with an average offensive line? This is where I think he would not look like the superstar the Texans make him look like. Is this a more fair thing to say or do you think he would still produce like a top 5 fantasy RB on any team, he is that good?You sure are. But your opinion is false. As proven by the numerous "undrafted bums" who have had great to hall of fame careers.
Does Rodgers put up his numbers on the Jags?
Does Calvin Johnson put up his numbers on the Dolphins?
Does Gronkowski put up his numbers in Seattle?
See what Im saying?
DesmondBishop
Footballguy
Sure, and agree.Well, since I watch him weekly, and am under the impression that his talent is in fact elite... then yes, I think he could still put up very good numbers. Would they be less if he wasn't behind HOU's o-line? Maybe. But since I havent seen him behind any other o-line, I dont have the authority to say otherwise.It may be, I have been wrong before and will be again, I am man enough to admit it. As far as undrafted players goes, of course there are many that have turned out to be great. I guess looking at it from a different view, do you think Foster would be looked at the same way if he played for an average offense with an average offensive line? This is where I think he would not look like the superstar the Texans make him look like. Is this a more fair thing to say or do you think he would still produce like a top 5 fantasy RB on any team, he is that good?You sure are. But your opinion is false. As proven by the numerous "undrafted bums" who have had great to hall of fame careers.
Does Rodgers put up his numbers on the Jags?
Does Calvin Johnson put up his numbers on the Dolphins?
Does Gronkowski put up his numbers in Seattle?
See what Im saying?
GregR
Footballguy
I wish everyone would reduce the amount of personal comments and just stick to discussion of the topic. One of the things that first drew me to Footballguys was the fact you actually have a lot more discussions here without it devolving into a flame fest than I saw other places.
Desmond, you said there is a reason players go undrafted, and there is. They go undrafted because judgments based on college play suggested they may not be as good of NFL players as others. It's also true those same type of judgments lead to Jamarcus Russell being the #1 overall pick.
Given the chance to judge how good an NFL player someone will be, I hope you'd agree that judging him based on a few years starting in the NFL would generally be better than judging him based on a few years of starting in college. Which is why I think your comment caused the kind of reaction it did.
On Foster, if you put him on a crappy team who can't run block and doesn't have a QB, I think he'll do poorly the same as I think any running back would with very few exceptions (Barry Sanders, Walter Payton maybe). If you put him on a team whose system doesn't play as much to his strengths (vision, cut back ability, run after catch), I think he'll do worse.
Again, I think that is the same for any running back. I think there are people who judge Foster solely based on his mind-boggling stats, and yes they probably over-estimate him. But if you judge him based on his actual attributes as a running back you see when you watch him a lot, I do think he's amongst the top 5 or so in the NFL. He may not be the very best in any single category, though vision and breaking tackles could be argued, but he's very above average in most all categories. The biggest knock I have on him is that sometimes his patience in looking for the hole can cause him to lose an extra yard or two when the defenders are able to get into the backfield. He still does make people miss in the backfield (and sometimes makes them look silly doing it), but when they do get to him he might be another half yard or more back from the line because he doesn't always charge forward as hard as someone like Tate did earlier in the year. I think Tate is showing a little more patience now than he did early on though too.
ETA: So yes, I think he'd do worse in a worse situation. But I think he'd probably still do better than 90% of the other RBs in the league would in an equally bad, equally not-playing-to-his-strengths situation.
Desmond, you said there is a reason players go undrafted, and there is. They go undrafted because judgments based on college play suggested they may not be as good of NFL players as others. It's also true those same type of judgments lead to Jamarcus Russell being the #1 overall pick.
Given the chance to judge how good an NFL player someone will be, I hope you'd agree that judging him based on a few years starting in the NFL would generally be better than judging him based on a few years of starting in college. Which is why I think your comment caused the kind of reaction it did.
On Foster, if you put him on a crappy team who can't run block and doesn't have a QB, I think he'll do poorly the same as I think any running back would with very few exceptions (Barry Sanders, Walter Payton maybe). If you put him on a team whose system doesn't play as much to his strengths (vision, cut back ability, run after catch), I think he'll do worse.
Again, I think that is the same for any running back. I think there are people who judge Foster solely based on his mind-boggling stats, and yes they probably over-estimate him. But if you judge him based on his actual attributes as a running back you see when you watch him a lot, I do think he's amongst the top 5 or so in the NFL. He may not be the very best in any single category, though vision and breaking tackles could be argued, but he's very above average in most all categories. The biggest knock I have on him is that sometimes his patience in looking for the hole can cause him to lose an extra yard or two when the defenders are able to get into the backfield. He still does make people miss in the backfield (and sometimes makes them look silly doing it), but when they do get to him he might be another half yard or more back from the line because he doesn't always charge forward as hard as someone like Tate did earlier in the year. I think Tate is showing a little more patience now than he did early on though too.
ETA: So yes, I think he'd do worse in a worse situation. But I think he'd probably still do better than 90% of the other RBs in the league would in an equally bad, equally not-playing-to-his-strengths situation.
Last edited by a moderator:
DesmondBishop
Footballguy
I agree and I never said anything negative towards anyone, I just stated my opinion.
I thought I was joining the conversation and then read the following posts and almost didn't say anything else because I felt the comments towards me were uncalled for.
Dancing Bear
Footballguy
I sure could not disagree with you more DesmondBishop.My colleagues have posted numerous un-drafted free-agents who break your logic, and have succeeded anyway in a big way. I am going to go the other direction. How many Ryan Leaf, Ron Dayne & Reggie Bush busts do you want us to name to disprove that drafting means success?
Just because they are high college draft picks does not mean they are guaranteed to succeed in the NFL ...
Unfortunately you cannot take a player out of a situation any more than you can put someone else in there.
Imagining that Adrian Peterson was in Houston is inane; just as much as speculating what Foster would do elsewhere. We can only assess them where they are ... in the then and now.
The facts are that Foster works well with his teammates, and he actually does something when given the chance to do it. He does it quite well ... over the past 2 years he has done it better than ALL of his peers.
rizzler
Footballguy
timeshare.
GregR
Footballguy
Thanks for that. Interesting, I'd have thought Tate had more than that with how much I thought he was in for the first half. Though it did look like in the 2nd half it was almost all Foster.
rizzler
Footballguy
Can we expect more of this? Foster is, afterall, very "fresh", for a stud RB of his age...I believe the coaching staff thinks he can handle a full load and thensome.. Sounds good to me!
looks like ruh ro timeshare, replete with gl opps for tate.timeshare.
rizzler
Footballguy
Brutal game for Tate and foster... thought tate did do better IMO.That goalline fumble by Tate was near suicide... That's Foster territory, and will remain so.Bengals Run DEF was faltering the last few weeks, but really owned the HOU o-line tonight... Foster had little to no room to run... CIN were in the backfield all day.Anyways, Yates shouldve been dumping off more often to Foster, as it was clear the run game wasnt as hot as it shouldve been.looks like ruh ro timeshare, replete with gl opps for tate.timeshare.
GregR
Footballguy
Yeah, Tate gets to the line a little quicker so when the defensive line is beating the offensive line he doesn't get caught as deep. Other than the big play by each of them it was a pretty rough day for both. A couple of 7-10 yard runs each but a lot of plays ranging from 2 yards lost to just 2 yards gained.
It was good to see Tate contribute in the passing game. It's the first time he's done it, and didn't have any drops. Kubiak was talking about the O-line not having played as well since the bye, and I don't think they turned it around this week. I did think with Yates throwing deep early, the Bengals didn't stack the line as bad as you might expect, certainly not as much as I would have aimed to if I was them.
Again would like to see the play count if someone with access could post it. It looked like about a 60/40 split.
It was good to see Tate contribute in the passing game. It's the first time he's done it, and didn't have any drops. Kubiak was talking about the O-line not having played as well since the bye, and I don't think they turned it around this week. I did think with Yates throwing deep early, the Bengals didn't stack the line as bad as you might expect, certainly not as much as I would have aimed to if I was them.
Again would like to see the play count if someone with access could post it. It looked like about a 60/40 split.
GregR
Footballguy
I used to subscribe there but when they raised the price to $90 I walked away. I just didn't use it enough to pay that much.
LargeMouthBass
Footballguy
Foster doesn't have a lost fumble today does he?
rizzler
Footballguy
Ya, they rules it a fumble...I'd argue how it wasn't... but my "homerism" wouldnt be given any credit here.He legit did not have possession... but they called it a fumble. and a fumble it stands.
GregR
Footballguy
I was ok with the ruling. Live speed I didn't think he caught it, but slow motion replay, I thought whatever the call was on the field should stand, but if you made me choose I'd call it a catch and fumble. Really really close though.Edit to add: Pereira said he thought the pass was incomplete.
Last edited by a moderator:
rizzler
Footballguy
I'm with Pereira on this one. But can see how it was ruled a fumble and not overturned... It was close.
GregR
Footballguy
That game could have gone so many different ways on plays like that.
Johnathan Joseph doesn't drop that interception on the goal line and it's probably a 100 yard pick 6 which since Cinci got a FG that could have been a 10 point swing.
Tate doesn't fumble inside the five and that could have been a touchdown which instead ended up being a Bengals TD drive, a possible 14 point swing.
Bengal doesn't fumble the ball that Foster fumbled, Bengals would have gotten at least a FG and possibly a TD, instead Houston goes down and gets a FG. Could have been a 6 or 10 point swing.
Scott gets another half a yard and Bengals keep that drive alive with 2:30 left in the game. Or if the center snapped the ball when Barwin jumped offsides, would have happened before the guard on the other end of the line false started and would have kept the drive alive.
Johnathan Joseph doesn't drop that interception on the goal line and it's probably a 100 yard pick 6 which since Cinci got a FG that could have been a 10 point swing.
Tate doesn't fumble inside the five and that could have been a touchdown which instead ended up being a Bengals TD drive, a possible 14 point swing.
Bengal doesn't fumble the ball that Foster fumbled, Bengals would have gotten at least a FG and possibly a TD, instead Houston goes down and gets a FG. Could have been a 6 or 10 point swing.
Scott gets another half a yard and Bengals keep that drive alive with 2:30 left in the game. Or if the center snapped the ball when Barwin jumped offsides, would have happened before the guard on the other end of the line false started and would have kept the drive alive.
LargeMouthBass
Footballguy
Yeah but the Texans didn't lose possession right?
rizzler
Footballguy
The Bengals recovered, then fumbled themselves on about the 1-2yd line...
wiscstlatlmia
Footballguy
Wow, I honestly wasn't gonna bump this again lol... but alright 
ETA: Tate had a miserable fumble, if not for that, he would have gained a lot of momentum today
ETA: Tate had a miserable fumble, if not for that, he would have gained a lot of momentum today
Last edited by a moderator:
Dancing Bear
Footballguy
Foster RUNS all over Ray Lewis and the Ravens Defense.Houston plays Denver in the AFC Conference Game.
Foster RUNS all over Von Miller and the Broncos Defense.
Houston plays Green Bay in the Super Bowl.
Foster RUNS all over Clay Matthews and the Broncos Defense.
Houston wins the Super Bowl!
wiscstlatlmia
Footballguy
I gotta admit I'm wrong at this point. I dont think hes necessarily better than Ray Rice LeSean McCoy or MJD ...but you can certainly make an argument for it. He really proved it to me the las part of the year, just pure domination. I still love Ben Tate as a handcuff, but as long as Foster's healthy, he has the job all to himself.
ETA: He is easily the best in the league at tip toeing the sideline LOL
ETA: He is easily the best in the league at tip toeing the sideline LOL
Last edited by a moderator:
Brown Juice
Footballguy
You know you are doing something right when you have so many haters!
Fumbling problem starting to re-emerge in recent weeks. There's a lot to like, but the fumbling is one of the few negatives that is starting to show itself. If I remember correctly, it was an absolute issue at Tennessee (someone feel free to correct me if I'm wrong), so it's a bit disconcerting to see him put it on the ground so much in the last 4-5 weeks.
Looks like I should be laying some money down on the Giants.
Houston plays Denver in the AFC Conference Game.
Foster RUNS all over Von Miller and the Broncos Defense.
Houston plays Green Bay in the Super Bowl.
Foster RUNS all over Clay Matthews and the Broncos Defense.
Houston wins the Super Bowl!
Sienna2012
Footballguy
I would easily take Foster over MJD. Not even close in my opinion.
GregR
Footballguy
IIRC, there was a big discussion/argument about it, and the final verdict was he didn't really fumble in college more than other backs, but he had a couple of fumbles that stood out because they were in big games, and that became Vol fans perception of him.
Hoss_Cartwright
Footballguy
Most overused phrase on this board.
wiscstlatlmia
Footballguy
.... change the theread name... "why you love Arian Foster"
cstu
Footballguy
And it's not even close.
Neil Beaufort Zod
Footballguy
Looks like I should be laying some money down on the Giants.
Houston plays Denver in the AFC Conference Game.
Foster RUNS all over Von Miller and the Broncos Defense.
Houston plays Green Bay in the Super Bowl.
Foster RUNS all over Clay Matthews and the Broncos Defense.
Houston wins the Super Bowl!
