Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 3.6k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

The Ravens that had a murderer for his entire tenure? 

totally coulda got him at 5.01, noob

God, I forgot how much of a ####-measuring contest the Shark Pool can be.  Thanks for reminding me, guys.  See you in another year.

No one is passing Tate while he is healthy. He is just running too well to justify replacing him.

I am still not 100% that Crowell is locked into the #2RB role either. It's not like Crow has a squeaky clean reputation when it comes to character issues.

You mean the coaches aren't going to send him into the game next week when they otherwise would because they are still mulling over his college indiscretions?

Comeon, man. His college career means nothing anymore. All they care about is that he is showing up to work and producing against NFL competition when it counts.

Until he actually does something that gets him in trouble and makes him ineligible to be on the field, they are perfectly happy to use him up and ride the train as long as they can. They couldn't care less about his past on game day.

To look at it another way, what is the downside to running him until either his wheels come off or until he screws up and gets drummed out of the league? There is none. What downside has there been to the Vikings for relying on Peterson all those years prior to his trouble? Absolutely none. There's only downside to rolling them out onto the field RIGHT AFTER they mess up.

Edited by JamesTheScot
Link to post
Share on other sites

has anyone been able to clarify Crowell's "character issues?"

i feel like this may be a dead issue.

It was dead the minute they signed him...because they knew about them and yet went ahead and signed him. Those issues only matter when they are deciding whether or not to gamble on him with a roster spot. And as a free agent, there was almost no risk. What do they have to lose if he blows it?

The idea that they may limit his use in a game because of character issue concerns is laughable. They can simply throw him away if he messes up when it happens. They can run him into the ground until then. Who is going to punish them because they signed a troubled kid to a small contract and played him while he kept his nose clean? No one. Not the league, not the fan base.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Honestly, the only thing I've seen Crow do better than the other backs is run faster in a straight line. Not saying that doesn't matter, especially in this running scheme, but some of the posts here make it sound like he's better than the other backs in every way.

hahaha

great response
watch all of his carries this year and then you'll understand why your comment was funny.

In other words, you have nothing to actually say?

I've watched every down of Browns football, BTW.

i've only been able to see a couple games, but i like what i've seen from him.

Donovan loves the kid, too.

what is it you don't like about his game?

btw, people made fun of me when i said Richardson didn't look good, so i have an open mind to this sort of take.

Never said there was anything I don't like about his game. I like Tate and West as well.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No one is passing Tate while he is healthy. He is just running too well to justify replacing him.

I am still not 100% that Crowell is locked into the #2RB role either. It's not like Crow has a squeaky clean reputation when it comes to character issues.

Easy now... you've only seen 2 whole games. The 2nd of which he finished with 3.12 ypc.

But Crowell's three fumbles on 10 fewer touches makes him an auto super stud who will supplant the veteran?

Nope, not going to happen. Injury is the only thing that will give Crowell a chance to start this season. Even with an injury I am not yet sold that it will automatically fall on Crowell to start over West.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

No one is passing Tate while he is healthy. He is just running too well to justify replacing him.

I am still not 100% that Crowell is locked into the #2RB role either. It's not like Crow has a squeaky clean reputation when it comes to character issues.

Easy now... you've only seen 2 whole games. The 2nd of which he finished with 3.12 ypc.

But Crowell's three fumbles on 10 fewer touches makes him an auto super stud who will supplant the veteran?

Nope, not going to happen. Injury is the only thing that will give Crowell a chance to start this season. Even with an injury I am not yet sold that it will automatically fall on Crowell to start over West.

Delusional. Crowell is already better than Tate. Tate got the goal line carries this week. That will change---whether due to talent, or injury, Crowell is the guy for the rest of the season!

Link to post
Share on other sites

No one is passing Tate while he is healthy. He is just running too well to justify replacing him.

I am still not 100% that Crowell is locked into the #2RB role either. It's not like Crow has a squeaky clean reputation when it comes to character issues.

You mean the coaches aren't going to send him into the game next week when they otherwise would because they are still mulling over his college indiscretions?

Comeon, man. His college career means nothing anymore. All they care about is that he is showing up to work and producing against NFL competition when it counts.

Until he actually does something that gets him in trouble and makes him ineligible to be on the field, they are perfectly happy to use him up and ride the train as long as they can. They couldn't care less about his past on game day.

To look at it another way, what is the downside to running him until either his wheels come off or until he screws up and gets drummed out of the league? There is none. What downside has there been to the Vikings for relying on Peterson all those years prior to his trouble? Absolutely none. There's only downside to rolling them out onto the field RIGHT AFTER they mess up.

What? Of course they are going to send him into the game. Where did you get anything other than that? The point was that it is possible for Crowell to #### the bed off the field because of character concerns that many in this thread were pointing to not two months ago.

And it doesn't matter because I guarantee they aren't starting him in front of the veteran who is producing. The NFL seldom works that way.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No one is passing Tate while he is healthy. He is just running too well to justify replacing him.

I am still not 100% that Crowell is locked into the #2RB role either. It's not like Crow has a squeaky clean reputation when it comes to character issues.

Easy now... you've only seen 2 whole games. The 2nd of which he finished with 3.12 ypc.

But Crowell's three fumbles on 10 fewer touches makes him an auto super stud who will supplant the veteran?

Nope, not going to happen. Injury is the only thing that will give Crowell a chance to start this season. Even with an injury I am not yet sold that it will automatically fall on Crowell to start over West.

Delusional. Crowell is already better than Tate. Tate got the goal line carries this week. That will change---whether due to talent, or injury, Crowell is the guy for the rest of the season!
:lmao:

TALK about delusional.

Link to post
Share on other sites

So...anybody starting Crowell next week @ Jacksonville? Who would you be starting him over or vise versa?

Wait and see what RB's are active? Game is at 1:00

It's him or Storm. The Crow or the Storm. At least I'm leading the league in cool names since cutting Christine Michael.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No one is passing Tate while he is healthy. He is just running too well to justify replacing him.

I am still not 100% that Crowell is locked into the #2RB role either. It's not like Crow has a squeaky clean reputation when it comes to character issues.

You mean the coaches aren't going to send him into the game next week when they otherwise would because they are still mulling over his college indiscretions?

Comeon, man. His college career means nothing anymore. All they care about is that he is showing up to work and producing against NFL competition when it counts.

Until he actually does something that gets him in trouble and makes him ineligible to be on the field, they are perfectly happy to use him up and ride the train as long as they can. They couldn't care less about his past on game day.

To look at it another way, what is the downside to running him until either his wheels come off or until he screws up and gets drummed out of the league? There is none. What downside has there been to the Vikings for relying on Peterson all those years prior to his trouble? Absolutely none. There's only downside to rolling them out onto the field RIGHT AFTER they mess up.

What? Of course they are going to send him into the game. Where did you get anything other than that? The point was that it is possible for Crowell to #### the bed off the field because of character concerns that many in this thread were pointing to not two months ago.

And it doesn't matter because I guarantee they aren't starting him in front of the veteran who is producing. The NFL seldom works that way.

Tell that to Matt Asiata.

I'm not worrying about Crowell's off the field issues until they become an NFL issue. That said I am not going to count on him as more than a RB3 or RB4 until he's got a 200+ carry season under his belt. Which is going to be a while. I think Tate is going to play decent, not great. People are making it out like he's been nails.

Tate isn't a world beater and his stats last week were propped up by his two touchdowns. One was from the one foot line and anybody could have scored on it. His second TD was a nice little run up the gut. He averaged about 3 yards per carry in the game. Not great. Crowell more than doubled that average.

I think Crowell owners just need to have some patience. Start him on byes and to cover injuries. He's an upside player in that respect. But I wouldn't be comfortable trotting him out every week.

In Dynasty or keeper leagues, I like him a ton. Buy now because he's not likely to be cheaper.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No one is passing Tate while he is healthy. He is just running too well to justify replacing him.

I am still not 100% that Crowell is locked into the #2RB role either. It's not like Crow has a squeaky clean reputation when it comes to character issues.

Easy now... you've only seen 2 whole games. The 2nd of which he finished with 3.12 ypc.

But Crowell's three fumbles on 10 fewer touches makes him an auto super stud who will supplant the veteran?

Nope, not going to happen. Injury is the only thing that will give Crowell a chance to start this season. Even with an injury I am not yet sold that it will automatically fall on Crowell to start over West.

Delusional. Crowell is already better than Tate. Tate got the goal line carries this week. That will change---whether due to talent, or injury, Crowell is the guy for the rest of the season!
:lmao:

TALK about delusional.

This is the conversation to be add.

Will Crowell supplant Tate just by on-field performance? I wouldn't rule out politics, they recruited Tate as a FA. I realize maybe Tate's options weren't as much as he originally was expecting, but that's still a factor.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No one is passing Tate while he is healthy. He is just running too well to justify replacing him.

I am still not 100% that Crowell is locked into the #2RB role either. It's not like Crow has a squeaky clean reputation when it comes to character issues.

You mean the coaches aren't going to send him into the game next week when they otherwise would because they are still mulling over his college indiscretions?

Comeon, man. His college career means nothing anymore. All they care about is that he is showing up to work and producing against NFL competition when it counts.

Until he actually does something that gets him in trouble and makes him ineligible to be on the field, they are perfectly happy to use him up and ride the train as long as they can. They couldn't care less about his past on game day.

To look at it another way, what is the downside to running him until either his wheels come off or until he screws up and gets drummed out of the league? There is none. What downside has there been to the Vikings for relying on Peterson all those years prior to his trouble? Absolutely none. There's only downside to rolling them out onto the field RIGHT AFTER they mess up.

What? Of course they are going to send him into the game. Where did you get anything other than that? The point was that it is possible for Crowell to #### the bed off the field because of character concerns that many in this thread were pointing to not two months ago.

And it doesn't matter because I guarantee they aren't starting him in front of the veteran who is producing. The NFL seldom works that way.

Tell that to Matt Asiata.

I'm not worrying about Crowell's off the field issues until they become an NFL issue. That said I am not going to count on him as more than a RB3 or RB4 until he's got a 200+ carry season under his belt. Which is going to be a while. I think Tate is going to play decent, not great. People are making it out like he's been nails.

Tate isn't a world beater and his stats last week were propped up by his two touchdowns. One was from the one foot line and anybody could have scored on it. His second TD was a nice little run up the gut. He averaged about 3 yards per carry in the game. Not great. Crowell more than doubled that average.

I think Crowell owners just need to have some patience. Start him on byes and to cover injuries. He's an upside player in that respect. But I wouldn't be comfortable trotting him out every week.

In Dynasty or keeper leagues, I like him a ton. Buy now because he's not likely to be cheaper.

Well McKinnon has more touches then Asiata in one game so let's not go crazy with that line of thinking. Also get back to me when Asiata becomes a trusted veteran who is producing. The Vikings did exactly what you should expect after Peterson was suspended, they gave the ball to the veteran and increased the rookie's PT out of necessity. They also proceeded to lose 4 of 5 games and the veteran performed poorly so it should be expected that they start trying to mix things up.

There is nothing remotely comparable to the two situations.

And while Tate "averaged about 3 yards per carry in the game" Crowell averaged putting the ball on the turf 1 time per 3 carries, which one do you think coaches care about more? And Tate still has a 4.5 yard per carry average on the season.

It's Tate's job, he will continue to get the bulk of the carries and until (unless) he gets hurt the best Crowell owners, like myself, can hope for is that he truly does have the hammer-lock on the #2 RB spot that some in here think he does. Personally I am not willing to write West off just yet, particularly in light of a 3 fumble performance by Crowell.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Really? Asiata performed poorly huh?

Here are two stat lines:

53 carries, 243 yards, 1 catch, -3 yards, 2 total touchdowns

64 carries, 226 yards, 13 catches, 129 yards, 4 total touchdowns.

Which guy is performing poorly again? I don't think either is performing poorly. I agree it's Tate's job. But I don't think you'll see a decrease in Crowell's stats either.

Edited by Sabertooth
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Really? Asiata performed poorly huh?

Here are two stat lines:

53 carries, 243 yards, 1 catch, -3 yards, 2 total touchdowns

64 carries, 226 yards, 13 catches, 129 yards, 4 total touchdowns.

Which guy is performing poorly again? I don't think either is performing poorly. I agree it's Tate's job. But I don't think you'll see a decrease in Crowell's stats either.

I think the guy who has more carries for fewer yards is the one who is performing poorly. And do you honestly consider these situations to be comparable in any way? Tate is a second round draft choice hand picked, and paid, by Cleveland to lead their ground game. Asiata is an UDFA forced into the starting role after bizarre circumstances.

At least we agree that it is Tate's job going forward. I am not sure how anyone can be confident that Crowell's role will increase after he put the ball on the ground 3 times. What coach puts up with that?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tate is also a guy who has beaten out by an in drafted rookie FA once before in his career. As far as being hand picked, I agree they chose to sign him to a modest 2 year 6m deal with 2.5m guaranteed. They aren't married to him and with a two year deal probably didn't view him as a long term solution. In fact they appear to have been a bit iffy on him from the start because they used a third round pick on West and then jumped on Crowell quickly.

He isn't some entrenched star. He is a talented 4 year veteran who has missed games every season and never topped 1000 yards because of that. He's decent no doubt.

The Browns actions appear more to be in line with thinking he's a placeholder and veteran locker room presence more so than thinking he's a long term solution. Tate has shown what he is. Crowell has shown glimpses of what he might be. Nothing more nothing less.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tate is also a guy who has beaten out by an in drafted rookie FA once before in his career. As far as being hand picked, I agree they chose to sign him to a modest 2 year 6m deal with 2.5m guaranteed. They aren't married to him and with a two year deal probably didn't view him as a long term solution. In fact they appear to have been a bit iffy on him from the start because they used a third round pick on West and then jumped on Crowell quickly.

He isn't some entrenched star. He is a talented 4 year veteran who has missed games every season and never topped 1000 yards because of that. He's decent no doubt.

The Browns actions appear more to be in line with thinking he's a placeholder and veteran locker room presence more so than thinking he's a long term solution. Tate has shown what he is. Crowell has shown glimpses of what he might be. Nothing more nothing less.

:confused:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Lifetime Browns fan. And Crowell owner.

The fumbles need to be cleaned up. End of story. But that CAN and should be fixed. From what I know, fumbling wasnt an issue for him in college.

This guy runs so smoothly. So powerfully. So viciously.

I like tate... actually really like west too... but if one guy HAS to get the rock, imo, it's gotta be Crowell. just a monster.

but if he cant hold onto the ball, null and void.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tate is also a guy who has beaten out by an in drafted rookie FA once before in his career. As far as being hand picked, I agree they chose to sign him to a modest 2 year 6m deal with 2.5m guaranteed. They aren't married to him and with a two year deal probably didn't view him as a long term solution. In fact they appear to have been a bit iffy on him from the start because they used a third round pick on West and then jumped on Crowell quickly.

He isn't some entrenched star. He is a talented 4 year veteran who has missed games every season and never topped 1000 yards because of that. He's decent no doubt.

The Browns actions appear more to be in line with thinking he's a placeholder and veteran locker room presence more so than thinking he's a long term solution. Tate has shown what he is. Crowell has shown glimpses of what he might be. Nothing more nothing less.

:confused:

He is suggesting that Arian Foster "beat him out" even though Foster had clearly proven himself to be a top flight RB before they drafted Tate. He is technically correct if entirely flawed in the premise.

The Browns are married to Tate this season. That won't change simply by Crow having 5.3 ypc vs. 4.5 for Tate. And, if anything, fumbling 3 times in his last 9 touches puts his #2 RB status on the depth chart in question. There are very few things a coach despises more then putting the ball on the ground. They will gladly take a lower YPC and reliable ball skills over the flashy guy who can't hold onto the ball. This happens far more often then the reverse.

I don't know why people continue to ignore this reality multiple times every single season.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tate is also a guy who has beaten out by an in drafted rookie FA once before in his career. As far as being hand picked, I agree they chose to sign him to a modest 2 year 6m deal with 2.5m guaranteed. They aren't married to him and with a two year deal probably didn't view him as a long term solution. In fact they appear to have been a bit iffy on him from the start because they used a third round pick on West and then jumped on Crowell quickly.

He isn't some entrenched star. He is a talented 4 year veteran who has missed games every season and never topped 1000 yards because of that. He's decent no doubt.

The Browns actions appear more to be in line with thinking he's a placeholder and veteran locker room presence more so than thinking he's a long term solution. Tate has shown what he is. Crowell has shown glimpses of what he might be. Nothing more nothing less.

:confused:

He is suggesting that Arian Foster "beat him out" even though Foster had clearly proven himself to be a top flight RB before they drafted Tate. He is technically correct if entirely flawed in the premise.

The Browns are married to Tate this season. That won't change simply by Crow having 5.3 ypc vs. 4.5 for Tate. And, if anything, fumbling 3 times in his last 9 touches puts his #2 RB status on the depth chart in question. There are very few things a coach despises more then putting the ball on the ground. They will gladly take a lower YPC and reliable ball skills over the flashy guy who can't hold onto the ball. This happens far more often then the reverse.

I don't know why people continue to ignore this reality multiple times every single season.

After 3 "fumbles" Crowell was STILL used in the game.

As mentioned above, if you subscribe... Check out Waldman's Gut Check.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tate is also a guy who has beaten out by an in drafted rookie FA once before in his career. As far as being hand picked, I agree they chose to sign him to a modest 2 year 6m deal with 2.5m guaranteed. They aren't married to him and with a two year deal probably didn't view him as a long term solution. In fact they appear to have been a bit iffy on him from the start because they used a third round pick on West and then jumped on Crowell quickly.

He isn't some entrenched star. He is a talented 4 year veteran who has missed games every season and never topped 1000 yards because of that. He's decent no doubt.

The Browns actions appear more to be in line with thinking he's a placeholder and veteran locker room presence more so than thinking he's a long term solution. Tate has shown what he is. Crowell has shown glimpses of what he might be. Nothing more nothing less.

:confused:

He is suggesting that Arian Foster "beat him out" even though Foster had clearly proven himself to be a top flight RB before they drafted Tate. He is technically correct if entirely flawed in the premise.

The Browns are married to Tate this season. That won't change simply by Crow having 5.3 ypc vs. 4.5 for Tate. And, if anything, fumbling 3 times in his last 9 touches puts his #2 RB status on the depth chart in question. There are very few things a coach despises more then putting the ball on the ground. They will gladly take a lower YPC and reliable ball skills over the flashy guy who can't hold onto the ball. This happens far more often then the reverse.

I don't know why people continue to ignore this reality multiple times every single season.

Nice revisionist history here.

Foster in 2009 played in 6 games with 1 starts. He amassed 54 carries, 257 yards, 3 touchdowns rushing, 8 catches, 93 yards receiving, no touchdowns - so fantasy point-wise he had accumulated about 61 points or 10.2 ppg.

Crowell in 2014 has played in 5 games with no starts. He has amassed 44 carries, 237 yards, 4 touchdowns rushing, 1 catch, 3 yards, no touchdowns - so fatnasy point-wise he has accumulated about 49 points or 9.8 ppg.

Crowell has no starts obviously. But his PPG is darn near exactly the same as when "Foster had clearly proven himself to be a top flight RB before they drafted Tate."

Personally I don't put a lot of weight into a player's first five games. It's certainly not enough to prove you are a top flight runner or not. But let's not act like Tate didn't get his hat handed to him by Foster. He did. And Crowell is very similar to Foster.

Edited by Sabertooth
Link to post
Share on other sites

Tate is also a guy who has beaten out by an in drafted rookie FA once before in his career. As far as being hand picked, I agree they chose to sign him to a modest 2 year 6m deal with 2.5m guaranteed. They aren't married to him and with a two year deal probably didn't view him as a long term solution. In fact they appear to have been a bit iffy on him from the start because they used a third round pick on West and then jumped on Crowell quickly.

He isn't some entrenched star. He is a talented 4 year veteran who has missed games every season and never topped 1000 yards because of that. He's decent no doubt.

The Browns actions appear more to be in line with thinking he's a placeholder and veteran locker room presence more so than thinking he's a long term solution. Tate has shown what he is. Crowell has shown glimpses of what he might be. Nothing more nothing less.

:confused:

He is suggesting that Arian Foster "beat him out" even though Foster had clearly proven himself to be a top flight RB before they drafted Tate. He is technically correct if entirely flawed in the premise.

The Browns are married to Tate this season. That won't change simply by Crow having 5.3 ypc vs. 4.5 for Tate. And, if anything, fumbling 3 times in his last 9 touches puts his #2 RB status on the depth chart in question. There are very few things a coach despises more then putting the ball on the ground. They will gladly take a lower YPC and reliable ball skills over the flashy guy who can't hold onto the ball. This happens far more often then the reverse.

I don't know why people continue to ignore this reality multiple times every single season.

Nice revisionist history here.

Foster in 2009 played in 6 games with 1 starts. He amassed 54 carries, 257 yards, 3 touchdowns rushing, 8 catches, 93 yards receiving, no touchdowns - so fantasy point-wise he had accumulated about 61 points or 10.2 ppg.

Crowell in 2014 has played in 5 games with no starts. He has amassed 44 carries, 237 yards, 4 touchdowns rushing, 1 catch, 3 yards, no touchdowns - so fatnasy point-wise he has accumulated about 49 points or 9.8 ppg.

Crowell has no starts obviously. But his PPG is darn near exactly the same as when "Foster had clearly proven himself to be a top flight RB before they drafted Tate."

Personally I don't put a lot of weight into a player's first five games. It's certainly not enough to prove you are a top flight runner or not. But let's not act like Tate didn't get his hat handed to him by Foster. He did. And Crowell is very similar to Foster.

Might want to check how Foster did in 2010, and not as a rookie in 2009, because Tate was drafted in 2011.

To save you the effort in 2010 Foster ran the ball 327 times for 1,616 yards (4.9 ypa) and 16 TDs with 66 receptions for 604 yards (9.2 ypr) and 2 TDs.

Edited by Chaka
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Tate is also a guy who has beaten out by an in drafted rookie FA once before in his career. As far as being hand picked, I agree they chose to sign him to a modest 2 year 6m deal with 2.5m guaranteed. They aren't married to him and with a two year deal probably didn't view him as a long term solution. In fact they appear to have been a bit iffy on him from the start because they used a third round pick on West and then jumped on Crowell quickly.

He isn't some entrenched star. He is a talented 4 year veteran who has missed games every season and never topped 1000 yards because of that. He's decent no doubt.

The Browns actions appear more to be in line with thinking he's a placeholder and veteran locker room presence more so than thinking he's a long term solution. Tate has shown what he is. Crowell has shown glimpses of what he might be. Nothing more nothing less.

:confused:

He is suggesting that Arian Foster "beat him out" even though Foster had clearly proven himself to be a top flight RB before they drafted Tate. He is technically correct if entirely flawed in the premise.

The Browns are married to Tate this season. That won't change simply by Crow having 5.3 ypc vs. 4.5 for Tate. And, if anything, fumbling 3 times in his last 9 touches puts his #2 RB status on the depth chart in question. There are very few things a coach despises more then putting the ball on the ground. They will gladly take a lower YPC and reliable ball skills over the flashy guy who can't hold onto the ball. This happens far more often then the reverse.

I don't know why people continue to ignore this reality multiple times every single season.

After 3 "fumbles" Crowell was STILL used in the game.

As mentioned above, if you subscribe... Check out Waldman's Gut Check.

Yes he did carry the ball 2 more times with 4:41 in the 4th quarter and a 31-3 lead and no other real options at RB (Tate just had 3 carries in a row prior to Crowell's 2) and please spare me the notion that they had some random untested special teams scrub as an option. So, sure Cle decided to roll the dice but, considering the circumstances, I am not reading too much into that. Are you?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's Tate's job, accept it an move on.

If West is truly a non-factor going forward then Crowell has some value as a flex play with big upside if Tate goes down. But not much more than that.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Might want to check how Foster did in 2010, and not as a rookie in 2009, because Tate was drafted in 2011.

To save you the effort in 2010 Foster ran the ball 327 times for 1,616 yards (4.9 ypa) and 16 TDs with 66 receptions for 604 yards (9.2 ypr) and 2 TDs.

this is wrong. tate was drafted in the 2nd round of 2010 and was in a camp battle with foster to be the lead rb. both players had their vocal supporters in the fantasy community. then tate broke his leg and missed the whole year, foster's adp rose drastically from the mid rounds to as high as the 2nd round.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's Tate's job, accept it an move on.

If West is truly a non-factor going forward then Crowell has some value as a flex play with big upside if Tate goes down. But not much more than that.

Ridiculous statement.

Well... To a point. Maybe another week, maybe two... But if theyre performances continue and crowell doesnt drop the ball, this will be a very different situation

Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't want to quote the Waldman article, but the two pitch fumbles were on the QB. Not all fumbles are created equal

An article can say that, my eyes say different. Were the pitches perfect? No. But I cannot fathom how anyone can absolve a running back for not catching pitches he got his hands on.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Might want to check how Foster did in 2010, and not as a rookie in 2009, because Tate was drafted in 2011.

To save you the effort in 2010 Foster ran the ball 327 times for 1,616 yards (4.9 ypa) and 16 TDs with 66 receptions for 604 yards (9.2 ypr) and 2 TDs.

this is wrong. tate was drafted in the 2nd round of 2010 and was in a camp battle with foster to be the lead rb. both players had their vocal supporters in the fantasy community. then tate broke his leg and missed the whole year, foster's adp rose drastically from the mid rounds to as high as the 2nd round.

So you're saying Tate didn't lose out to an undrafted free agent. That works for me too.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tate is also a guy who has beaten out by an in drafted rookie FA once before in his career. As far as being hand picked, I agree they chose to sign him to a modest 2 year 6m deal with 2.5m guaranteed. They aren't married to him and with a two year deal probably didn't view him as a long term solution. In fact they appear to have been a bit iffy on him from the start because they used a third round pick on West and then jumped on Crowell quickly.

He isn't some entrenched star. He is a talented 4 year veteran who has missed games every season and never topped 1000 yards because of that. He's decent no doubt.

The Browns actions appear more to be in line with thinking he's a placeholder and veteran locker room presence more so than thinking he's a long term solution. Tate has shown what he is. Crowell has shown glimpses of what he might be. Nothing more nothing less.

:confused:

He is suggesting that Arian Foster "beat him out" even though Foster had clearly proven himself to be a top flight RB before they drafted Tate. He is technically correct if entirely flawed in the premise.

The Browns are married to Tate this season. That won't change simply by Crow having 5.3 ypc vs. 4.5 for Tate. And, if anything, fumbling 3 times in his last 9 touches puts his #2 RB status on the depth chart in question. There are very few things a coach despises more then putting the ball on the ground. They will gladly take a lower YPC and reliable ball skills over the flashy guy who can't hold onto the ball. This happens far more often then the reverse.

I don't know why people continue to ignore this reality multiple times every single season.

Nice revisionist history here.

Foster in 2009 played in 6 games with 1 starts. He amassed 54 carries, 257 yards, 3 touchdowns rushing, 8 catches, 93 yards receiving, no touchdowns - so fantasy point-wise he had accumulated about 61 points or 10.2 ppg.

Crowell in 2014 has played in 5 games with no starts. He has amassed 44 carries, 237 yards, 4 touchdowns rushing, 1 catch, 3 yards, no touchdowns - so fatnasy point-wise he has accumulated about 49 points or 9.8 ppg.

Crowell has no starts obviously. But his PPG is darn near exactly the same as when "Foster had clearly proven himself to be a top flight RB before they drafted Tate."

Personally I don't put a lot of weight into a player's first five games. It's certainly not enough to prove you are a top flight runner or not. But let's not act like Tate didn't get his hat handed to him by Foster. He did. And Crowell is very similar to Foster.

I'm not sure that's entirely accurate (or fair). I could be wrong on this, but Arian Foster played sparingly as you noted in 2009. He and rookie 2nd round pick Ben Tate were in a battle for the starting job in training camp 2010 when Tate was placed on IR with an ankle injury on or about August 16, 2010. Tate sat out the 2010 season and Foster went on to lead the league in rushing.

That's not really getting your hat handed to you. In the interests of full disclosure, it does sound like Foster had the lead in the competition, but it was by no means over with two preseason games to go nor did it sound like Foster had a vice grip on the starting job.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's Tate's job, accept it an move on.

If West is truly a non-factor going forward then Crowell has some value as a flex play with big upside if Tate goes down. But not much more than that.

Ridiculous statement.

Well... To a point. Maybe another week, maybe two... But if theyre performances continue and crowell doesnt drop the ball, this will be a very different situation

How often does a scenario like you are describing actually happen in the NFL?

Where a trusted veteran RB is playing well and loses his job outright to a hot rookie (and I will ignore the whole dropping the ball once every three touches thing for the sake of this argument)?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's Tate's job, accept it an move on.

If West is truly a non-factor going forward then Crowell has some value as a flex play with big upside if Tate goes down. But not much more than that.

Ridiculous statement.

Well... To a point. Maybe another week, maybe two... But if theyre performances continue and crowell doesnt drop the ball, this will be a very different situation

Why would this be a different situation?

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's Tate's job, accept it an move on.

If West is truly a non-factor going forward then Crowell has some value as a flex play with big upside if Tate goes down. But not much more than that.

Ridiculous statement.

Well... To a point. Maybe another week, maybe two... But if theyre performances continue and crowell doesnt drop the ball, this will be a very different situation

Why would this be a different situation?

Because Crowell owners hope it will be.

As a Crowell owner myself I would love to see it happen but I don't see any way Crowell seizes the starting job this year as long as Ben Tate is healthy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Might want to check how Foster did in 2010, and not as a rookie in 2009, because Tate was drafted in 2011.

To save you the effort in 2010 Foster ran the ball 327 times for 1,616 yards (4.9 ypa) and 16 TDs with 66 receptions for 604 yards (9.2 ypr) and 2 TDs.

this is wrong. tate was drafted in the 2nd round of 2010 and was in a camp battle with foster to be the lead rb. both players had their vocal supporters in the fantasy community. then tate broke his leg and missed the whole year, foster's adp rose drastically from the mid rounds to as high as the 2nd round.

So you're saying Tate didn't lose out to an undrafted free agent. That works for me too.

iirc, foster had a slight lead on the job and a slightly higher adp but there were plenty of tate supporters who felt he would emerge with the job. most indications were that foster was ahead, but many ppl clung to their relative draft status and expected tate to eventually win out. theres a long thread on this board somewhere that has the blow by blow account.

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's Tate's job, accept it an move on.

If West is truly a non-factor going forward then Crowell has some value as a flex play with big upside if Tate goes down. But not much more than that.

Ridiculous statement.

Well... To a point. Maybe another week, maybe two... But if theyre performances continue and crowell doesnt drop the ball, this will be a very different situation

Why would this be a different situation?

Because Crowell owners hope it will be.

As a Crowell owner myself I would love to see it happen but I don't see any way Crowell seizes the starting job this year as long as Ben Tate is healthy.

I am also a Crowell owner.

Tate's been back 2 games. He's touched the ball 48 times to Crowell's 17. Tate has out-touched his backups (combined) 23 to 13 in week 5 and 25 to 11 in week 6. If anything, Tate's taking more of the pie as the weeks go on. Obviously, two weeks does not a relevant sample size make, but Crowell took over West's touches in Week 6, not Tate's.

The only conclusion I would be somewhat comfortable drawing from the distributions is that Crowell is now the #2 back and Tate is still the #1 back. There is no evidence whatsoever that the Browns are moving toward an even distribution of carries or moving toward Crowell and away from Tate. If anything, it's they are feeding Tate more.

Edited by GDogg
Link to post
Share on other sites

It's Tate's job, accept it an move on.

If West is truly a non-factor going forward then Crowell has some value as a flex play with big upside if Tate goes down. But not much more than that.

Ridiculous statement.

Well... To a point. Maybe another week, maybe two... But if theyre performances continue and crowell doesnt drop the ball, this will be a very different situation

How often does a scenario like you are describing actually happen in the NFL?

Where a trusted veteran RB is playing well and loses his job outright to a hot rookie (and I will ignore the whole dropping the ball once every three touches thing for the sake of this argument)?

well, chester taylor was coming off a 1200 yard rushing season and was averaging over 5 yards a carry when adrian peterson took over.

thats all i can think off.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The real question is how will the loss of Mack impact the Browns running game in general?

After looking at the rest of the season schedule, it may end up a wash.

Things can, and will, change, but Cleveland has the sixth easiest RB schedule remaining. The only games that aren't plus matchups are Week 11 against Houston and Week 13 against Buffalo.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Tate is also a guy who has beaten out by an in drafted rookie FA once before in his career. As far as being hand picked, I agree they chose to sign him to a modest 2 year 6m deal with 2.5m guaranteed. They aren't married to him and with a two year deal probably didn't view him as a long term solution. In fact they appear to have been a bit iffy on him from the start because they used a third round pick on West and then jumped on Crowell quickly.

He isn't some entrenched star. He is a talented 4 year veteran who has missed games every season and never topped 1000 yards because of that. He's decent no doubt.

The Browns actions appear more to be in line with thinking he's a placeholder and veteran locker room presence more so than thinking he's a long term solution. Tate has shown what he is. Crowell has shown glimpses of what he might be. Nothing more nothing less.

:confused:

He is suggesting that Arian Foster "beat him out" even though Foster had clearly proven himself to be a top flight RB before they drafted Tate. He is technically correct if entirely flawed in the premise.

The Browns are married to Tate this season. That won't change simply by Crow having 5.3 ypc vs. 4.5 for Tate. And, if anything, fumbling 3 times in his last 9 touches puts his #2 RB status on the depth chart in question. There are very few things a coach despises more then putting the ball on the ground. They will gladly take a lower YPC and reliable ball skills over the flashy guy who can't hold onto the ball. This happens far more often then the reverse.

I don't know why people continue to ignore this reality multiple times every single season.

Nice revisionist history here.

Foster in 2009 played in 6 games with 1 starts. He amassed 54 carries, 257 yards, 3 touchdowns rushing, 8 catches, 93 yards receiving, no touchdowns - so fantasy point-wise he had accumulated about 61 points or 10.2 ppg.

Crowell in 2014 has played in 5 games with no starts. He has amassed 44 carries, 237 yards, 4 touchdowns rushing, 1 catch, 3 yards, no touchdowns - so fatnasy point-wise he has accumulated about 49 points or 9.8 ppg.

Crowell has no starts obviously. But his PPG is darn near exactly the same as when "Foster had clearly proven himself to be a top flight RB before they drafted Tate."

Personally I don't put a lot of weight into a player's first five games. It's certainly not enough to prove you are a top flight runner or not. But let's not act like Tate didn't get his hat handed to him by Foster. He did. And Crowell is very similar to Foster.

Might want to check how Foster did in 2010, and not as a rookie in 2009, because Tate was drafted in 2011.

To save you the effort in 2010 Foster ran the ball 327 times for 1,616 yards (4.9 ypa) and 16 TDs with 66 receptions for 604 yards (9.2 ypr) and 2 TDs.

Oof.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...