Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.
I'd say unless we are talking about a true freak of nature, every ten years type of back, which Elliott isn't, you're right. Especially in a situation like Dallas's, Howard at a tenth of the cost could have done the same thing Elliott did. This isn't some big secret in the Nfl though, but Jerry Jones isn't the brightest bulb
I wonder what part of 1600 yfs, 7 100 yard rush games in 13.5 games and 5.2 ypc isn't already studly?
The Elliott pick wasn't about being an all-world back (I'd argue he is but that's a different thread), it was about the virtual certainty he'd be, at a minimum, very good.
Oddly enough, Howard is 1 of the 7 out of 60 who managed a RB1 finish on a team with less than 5 wins.
How many times did Barry Sanders do it? Probably the best RB ever that was consistently on bad teams.
Go back even further and O.J. did a lot with some pretty crummy Bills teams.
I'm sure but the point is they're outliers.
I understand the risk he has with that ADP but I don't see too many better options at the RB position around there. He's still their main option in the running game. They should be a better team than last year. He still has a great chance to finish as a RB1.
His talent is undeniable and the OL, specifically the interior is great. I suppose if he's just as efficient and effective as he was last year he has a very good chance to finish as a RB1 regardless as to how bad CHI is. My real fear is that he faces stacked boxes all season as he only saw 8-man fronts 6.4% of the time last year. I don't even understand how that happened to be honest and it's sure to rise significantly.
If they can get some decent QB play out of Glennon or Trubisky then someone is going to put up good numbers. I really hope that Trubisky is as good as he performed last night.
Define "great".
Since he's the main back and should get a lot of carries he should finish in the top 12. There aren't that many 3 down backs and I think he's one.
Ultimately it's a guessing game. What we do know is that there is almost always a 50% turnover in the top 12 RBs. So you just decide which ones you think will hold and which will fall and have the courage to act accordingly during your draft. And that last part is never quite as easy as it sounds.
But he's not a 3 down back. He's a below average receiver out of the backfield. Actually he was terrible in that department last year with seven drops.
Yeah but on top of his team sucking, Miller personally sucked last year. Howard has already shown more than Miller has in any season.
He's not going to be coming off the field on 3rd down often. I honestly expect him to see around the same number of targets this year and for him to catch a larger percentage of them. He's been working on his pass-catching during the off-season and had lasik surgery to help correct an apparent problem with his vision.
I have no shares of Howard yet this year, but to base anything on last night's game is just odd. Three carries against one of the best defenses in the NFL is a pretty small sample size.DropKick said:
Also Lamar Miller never has had a rushing season as good as Howard with many more opportunities and better offenses. Howard will be a stud if healthy, absolutely a RB1. If he was drafted in the first round last year he would have come out of the gate starting instead of basically missing the first three games, and ended up with about 1600 rushing yards most likely.SameSongNDance said:
But he really was a liability in the passing game.SameSongNDance said:
Whoa, whoa, whoa... He sticks to one back? What about all the people that keep talking about how Fox loves using RBBC? Which one is it? I can't can't get a bearing on what is actually true or not based on people's opinions on this board anymore.
Did you see how bad the Bears were last year and Howard still produced? Worst season in Bears history. Still led league in ypc and would've led it in rushing if Fox had any sense and started him from the beginning. That doesn't sound like a player to avoid to me.
Maybe he improved in this facet of his game but his catch rate was 58%, worst among RBs according to FBGs target sorter. His seven drops were tied for 3rd worst in the NFL and he did that on only 50 targets which by far the worst drop % in the league at 14%.SameSongNDance said:
Jeremy Langford has a worse catch percentage than Howard did in his rookie season at 52.4% I am not sure how many total drops Langford had but I know he dropped one in their home game vs. the Vikings that if he had caught it, the Bears likely would have won that game instead of losing it.
Then I guess it's a good thing they got that whole quarterback thing figured out then.
I don't recall Goff looking as good in any pro game as trubisky looked the other day
Sure but everyone also said goff was going to take some time to develop. Then when he looks terrible (along with the rest of the team all year) everyone goes "he sucks." Trubisky was written off before he was even drafted, even though most thought he'd be the 1st qb off. Maybe they will bust or be mediocre, but it's baffles me how the NFL can value players one way and the fantasy community dismisses it but loves guys like Watson, Kizer, and maholmes. I mean, didn't goff break Arods records at cal? I'll give him a pass for last year and that team/staff. Mcvey and co will be better, and I think goff will look at least ok. Anyway, it's the Howard thread, but trubisky and Glennon should be an upgrade.
IIRC Goff never really took snaps from under center much in college, I recall reading stuff like this about him early on last year as well, that he was adjusting to that and the play book.
Which one?
To be honest, I don't know if the situation has changed since all of these OL ranking articles were written but..
PFF OL rankings
