PDA

View Full Version : Are we overusing Foster?


Ryan
09-17-2012, 02:00 PM
Foster is on pace right now for well over 400 carries. He's under contract for 5 seasons, we need to protect our investment. If he gets those kind of carries for the rest of the year, we may not get anywhere close to 5 good years out of him. Plus, I think Tate demands more carries because i think he's running better right now. I know Foster will get it going and i think the best way to do that is to give him less carries. I think a 20/15 split for Foster/Tate needs to happen if we want to get the most out of this running game.

I do suspect his carries will go down naturally as we will be facing better competition over the next 5-6 weeks but I think it could be a concern moving forward.

Corrosion
09-17-2012, 02:16 PM
Nope .... He's your horse , ride him hard and groom him well before you put him up.


He also seems to get better as the number of carries / touches goes up.


I dont think Ive ever seen him take a real hard shot from a defender , he discussed that very point last year explainging how he avoids those big hits. I'll see if I can find the article.

He probably endures more forceful impacts picking up blitzes than he does getting tackled.

Rey
09-17-2012, 02:35 PM
I don't think Foster is overused but I would like to see Tate get a few more carries.

Double Barrel
09-17-2012, 02:36 PM
You play every game for this season. Let next season and beyond take care of itself.

I do like having a two-headed running attack, though. Tate can be pretty dangerous out there, especially in traffic. He was running yesterday like his life depended on it.

Trail.Blazr
09-17-2012, 02:37 PM
While he's getting a higher number of carries per game, I don't think we're over using him. He's getting breathers, while subbing in Tate frequently enough. What's driving the number of carries is a combination of having a good lead and winning Time of Possession. Houston is killing their opponents in TOP so far this season. That stat I blame on our Defense :-)

ObsiWan
09-17-2012, 02:44 PM
While he's getting a higher number of carries per game, I don't think we're over using him. He's getting breathers, while subbing in Tate frequently enough. What's driving the number of carries is a combination of having a good lead and winning Time of Possession. Houston is killing their opponents in TOP so far this season. That stat I blame on our Defense :-)

Hey... J.J.Watt sez he's good with the offense monopolizing the ball.


JACKSONVILLE, Fla. (AP) -- Defensive end J.J. Watt (http://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/24798) settled into a nice little routine Sunday in Jacksonville.

Three plays and a leisurely stroll to the sideline.

He did it early and often, but it never became mundane.

''They have really, really nice benches,'' Watt said. ''They have shade and they have cooling, so it was awesome that our offense held the ball for so long 'cause we were relaxing over there.''

Dutchrudder
09-17-2012, 02:54 PM
I say yes, but that's only because I think Tate deserves more carries. This should be a two-headed attack, but Arian gets more like 70% of the carries. So far it's Arian 54, Tate 17 and Forsett 6. That's not the way to keep Arian fresh and ready to make big plays. Plus, the more Foster is out there, the higher the risk of injury to our 40 million dollar runningback. I would much rather see Tate get about 40-50% of the carries.

Luv_ya_blue
09-17-2012, 02:54 PM
Yes.
I would like to see more balance w/Tate.
Especially in a season where he needs to make big plays before free agency. JMO, but he ran yesterday like he was playing for a big contract. Use Tate more often...

:jogger:

ChampionTexan
09-17-2012, 03:23 PM
Two very related things factor into this and make me say no.

First, we're leading the NFL in time of possession by almost 2 minutes per game (essentially we're at 39 minutes/gm and second place is 37 minutes). This means we're going to run lots more plays than almost anybody else.

Which leads to the second point that we've run 151 plays from scrimmage second only to Philly who's run 163. However, the difference is that of the teams in the top five in plays run (New Orleans, New England, and KC round out the list), we're the only one who runs the ball in excess of 50% of the time. In fact if you include sacks as passing plays, none of the other 4 teams ran the ball more than 44% of the time, while we've run it 55%. Part of this may be that we've been comfortably ahead in both of our games by halftime, while the only comfortable lead any of the other 4 teams has seen was New England against the Titans in game one. More offensive plays from scrimmage for a team that runs as high a percentage of the time as any in the NFL translates to lots of carries for Mr. Foster.

To the original question - I said no, because while we should generally be successful in winning time of possesion battles, and therefore we'll run more plays, it won't always be to the degree the first two games have seen. At some point, we'll be playing closer games, and maybe even playing from behind, at which time the 55% run number will no doubt drop as will Arian's carries. I don't want to see him get over 400 carries this year, but I also don't think I will.

Corrosion
09-17-2012, 03:59 PM
I don't think Foster is overused but I would like to see Tate get a few more carries.


I say yes, but that's only because I think Tate deserves more carries.

I dont believe there are more than 5 other backs besides Foster that would start in front ot Tate in the NFL .... Dude is a beast.


MJD
Peterson
Frank Gore
Skittles
Ray Rice


Thats all I got .... Might be a couple others but Tate belongs in the conversation with the top RB's in the league.

Dutchrudder
09-17-2012, 04:12 PM
We paid him the money because he is our best option. Not saying I wouldnt like to see Tate get a few more, but Foster is the man ... give him the rock.

He's on pace for 432 carries and targeted for 80 passes on the year. That's too much for any runningback, regardless of how much they are paid. 70% of the carries is a lot when you have a guy like Tate right behind him, and 5 years left on Arian's deal. I'm all for getting our use out of him during his contract, but let's get the the carries down to about 50-60%, and not put him out there when the team is up by 17 points in the 4th quarter. Same goes for Andre too. Just let Forsett and Tate pound the ball, either one of those guys are just as good at running out the clock.

I dont believe there are more than 5 other backs besides Foster that would start in front ot Tate in the NFL .... Dude is a beast.


MJD
Peterson
Frank Gore
Skittles
Ray Rice


Thats all I got .... Might be a couple others but Tate belongs in the conversation with the top RB's in the league.

What? You don't think Reggie Bush is just as talented???

Rey
09-17-2012, 04:15 PM
He's on pace for 432 carries and targeted for 80 passes on the year. That's too much for any runningback, regardless of how much they are paid. 70% of the carries is a lot when you have a guy like Tate right behind him, and 5 years left on Arian's deal. I'm all for getting our use out of him during his contract, but let's get the the carries down to about 50-60%, and not put him out there when the team is up by 17 points in the 4th quarter. Same goes for Andre too. Just let Forsett and Tate pound the ball, either one of those guys are just as good at running out the clock.

Agreed...

100000 times agreed.

PapaL
09-17-2012, 04:17 PM
Schaub is in 100% of the plays and takes 100% of the snaps, should we take him out and give Yates some snaps? He is injury prone and just recently signed a fat new contract.

Sounds ludicrous right?

Dutchrudder
09-17-2012, 04:22 PM
Schaub is in 100% of the plays and takes 100% of the snaps, should we take him out and give Yates some snaps? He is injury prone and just recently signed a fat new contract.

Sounds ludicrous right?

If the strategy was to run Schaub into linebackers and tackles in an effort to use up the clock, then yes I would prefer his backup do it instead.

Schaub's a smart guy, and he has control of the ball as the QB. He takes the snap, hands off or drops back and determines where to throw. If there's nothing open he can throw it away and avoid hits, Arian can't avoid a tackle in the case of running out the clock. You're just wasting Arian by having him take garbage carries in a game that is all but over. There's a good reason why they call the end of 3 score games "garbage time," it's for backup players to get some reps and take the hits, not multi-million dollar players who have already proven themselves.

The Pencil Neck
09-17-2012, 04:25 PM
I voted "Yes" because in the past 10-15 years, when backs get too many touches, they have a tendency to break down and not be very good after that -- CJ2ypc, Larry Johnson, Shaun Alexander, Ahman Green, etc.

So I'd prefer that Arian get around 300 carries and Ben get about 100-200 carries to evenly distribute the load and to prolong both of their careers.

Although... it's interesting that Arian's "idol" is Eric Dickerson. Dickerson was a HOSS. He had over 370 carries 4 times in his career and just kept on delivering. Granted, he only had about 6 good seasons before he was used up but still.

Corrosion
09-17-2012, 04:34 PM
He's on pace for 432 carries and targeted for 80 passes on the year.


What? You don't think Reggie Bush is just as talented???

Damn , thats a hell of a lot of carries .... I really didnt realize he had that many thus far , but I think the last game somewhat skews the stats some. Not often you are going to rush the ball 40+ times.

Tho I know Gary wouldnt mind 17 repeat performances .....



Reggie Bush .... You know , I didnt want him coming out , I wanted VY , thank GOD that didnt happen.

He's become a pretty good back .... But I believe Tate is a better running back , even if Bush is more versatile.


Tate ... punishes defenders and is shifty enough ... how bout that spin move yesterday that got a couple extra yards , kept him in bounds and the clock running - Heads up play there.

Norg
09-17-2012, 04:45 PM
no but i do think we are overusing Schaub he really didnt need to play half of the 4th qtr esp if all we did was run da ball

Scooter
09-17-2012, 05:10 PM
it looks that way because of how the first two games played out. we were also using the lead to work on problem areas in our run game so more carries were part of the plan. on pace for 400 carries goes out the window when he gets 12 carries in a closer pass happy game or one where he fumbles early and tate gets the rock all day. that being said, i'm in agreement with others that tate should get more work to ensure that both are fresh at the end.

Rey
09-17-2012, 05:14 PM
Schaub is in 100% of the plays and takes 100% of the snaps, should we take him out and give Yates some snaps? He is injury prone and just recently signed a fat new contract.

Sounds ludicrous right?


Something sure does sound ludicrous.

PapaL
09-17-2012, 05:48 PM
If the strategy was to run Schaub into linebackers and tackles in an effort to use up the clock, then yes I would prefer his backup do it instead.

Schaub's a smart guy, and he has control of the ball as the QB. He takes the snap, hands off or drops back and determines where to throw. If there's nothing open he can throw it away and avoid hits, Arian can't avoid a tackle in the case of running out the clock. You're just wasting Arian by having him take garbage carries in a game that is all but over. There's a good reason why they call the end of 3 score games "garbage time," it's for backup players to get some reps and take the hits, not multi-million dollar players who have already proven themselves.

How many times does a QB get their foot stepped on by their C or G? Schaub with that plate in his recently healed foot is just as likely as Arian (who is running behind pads, his OL, and can take knee) to get hurt. Same garbage time. One with a history.

Let's be honest here, how many people actually think Foster ends up w 400 carries? I sure don't.

Corrosion
09-17-2012, 05:54 PM
Something sure does sound ludicrous.

Its PapaL .... We all know he's crazy.

fiasco west
09-17-2012, 05:55 PM
Honestly I'm starting to think Tate is just as good as Foster. I'd like to see them split carries 50/50. What Tate did on fewer carries last week IMO means he should see more carries.

I know it's not all about just running the ball though. Foster is a very good receiver, much better than Tate so that probably is why he gets more carries.

But yeah....Tate is something else. He runs with a lot more power.

Vinny
09-17-2012, 06:06 PM
1st of all, we've only played chumps, so Foster's carries (extrapolating them forward) are out of kilter. We won't be ahead by 20 points and playing the Beevis and Butthead of quarterbacks going forward (anyone else notice that Gabbert kinda looks like a cross between Butthead and Kirk Douglas?). Answering the thread question directly is simple....yesterday told me that we will be using Tate plenty. I thought he (Kubiak) rotated him in early and often.

Corrosion
09-17-2012, 06:06 PM
Honestly I'm starting to think Tate is just as good as Foster. I'd like to see them split carries 50/50. What Tate did on fewer carries last week IMO means he should see more carries.

I know it's not all about just running the ball though. Foster is a very good receiver, much better than Tate so that probably is why he gets more carries.

But yeah....Tate is something else. He runs with a lot more power.

Thats the difference between the two - Foster is the complete package as a RB. Not only is he elite carrying the ball , he's a fantastic blocker in the passing game and .... despite a few drops during preseason and games 1-2 , he's been a very reliable reciever who can break a big one at any time.


Tate is nowhere near Foster in blitz pickups and while a decent recieving option , he's no Foster in the open field.


They are very different backs ....

Make no mistake about it , Im not knocking Tate , hell Ive said he's as good as all but the top tier in the league but Foster is the crème de la crème .

Vinny
09-17-2012, 06:13 PM
Make no mistake about it , Im not knocking Tate , hell Ive said he's as good as all but the top tier in the league but Foster is the crème de la crème .
I agree, Foster is clearly the back I'd take if everything was equal and I had to give one up. Foster's vision and body control is elite stuff. He flows like water. Tate is electric...a great runner in his own right.

Rey
09-17-2012, 08:15 PM
Regardless of the total number, I'd like to see Tate get more carries.

Texn4life
09-17-2012, 08:19 PM
I think Tate's role will increase as the season goes along. If he runs like he did Sunday his play will demand that he get more carries. I also think we'll start to see Forsett in some packages sprinkled in as well. I like what he brings as a receiver out of the backfield.

GuerillaBlack
09-17-2012, 08:32 PM
I dont believe there are more than 5 other backs besides Foster that would start in front ot Tate in the NFL .... Dude is a beast.


MJD
Peterson
Frank Gore
Skittles
Ray Rice


Thats all I got .... Might be a couple others but Tate belongs in the conversation with the top RB's in the league.

Turner, McFadden, Forte, Murray, Bush, McCoy, and maybe even Richardson now. Tate is great though.

nero THE zero
09-17-2012, 09:07 PM
He's on pace for 432 carries and targeted for 80 passes on the year. That's too much for any runningback, regardless of how much they are paid. 70% of the carries is a lot when you have a guy like Tate right behind him, and 5 years left on Arian's deal. I'm all for getting our use out of him during his contract, but let's get the the carries down to about 50-60%, and not put him out there when the team is up by 17 points in the 4th quarter. Same goes for Andre too. Just let Forsett and Tate pound the ball, either one of those guys are just as good at running out the clock.



What? You don't think Reggie Bush is just as talented???
And Clay Matthews is on pace for 48 sacks. What he's on pace for after 2 games is wholly irrelevant.

We haven't played a good team and have played two games with large, early leads. He's not going to be carrying it 28 times when we are playing New England and Green Bay and Detroit. He'll be carrying is 15, 17 times and his carries will level out to around 300, his career average.

NitroGSXR
09-17-2012, 09:17 PM
I dont believe there are more than 5 other backs besides Foster that would start in front ot Tate in the NFL .... Dude is a beast.


MJD
Peterson
Frank Gore
Skittles
Ray Rice


Thats all I got .... Might be a couple others but Tate belongs in the conversation with the top RB's in the league.

I'm not disagreeing with you or anything. Just that people don't really think that way.

I'm trying to find it but it is either nfl.com or espn.com where they had the week two position rankings. Foster's unanimously #1 of course. Tate's sitting low at 35. I found that surprising but at the same time... I like it. Keep him on the down low.

As for overusing Foster... I would hope they don't overuse Tate. Foster's built to run but Tate's the bruiser. Brusiers tend to wear out a little faster.

rush2112mn
09-17-2012, 09:50 PM
So we need to put a carry count on him and he only carries it so many times for the whole season and then shut him down for the season like the Washington Nationals have done with that pitcher they have?.....

Dutchrudder
09-18-2012, 01:04 PM
And Clay Matthews is on pace for 48 sacks. What he's on pace for after 2 games is wholly irrelevant.

We haven't played a good team and have played two games with large, early leads. He's not going to be carrying it 28 times when we are playing New England and Green Bay and Detroit. He'll be carrying is 15, 17 times and his carries will level out to around 300, his career average.

Whoopty doo, why would any coach in their right mind send their #1 RB out there against a losing, frustrated, crappy team in the 4th quarter? They are looking to strip the ball, they are looking to lay out the player because that's the only way they get back in the game. It's not just a factor of the number of carries, but it's about giving him carries that matter, and not exposing him to potential injury during irrelevant garbage time. It's called "garbage time" for a good reason. Tate and Forsett are perfectly capable of carrying the ball during that time, but an injury to them doesn't impact the team anywhere near as much as Foster would.

badboy
09-18-2012, 01:08 PM
Foster is on pace right now for well over 400 carries. He's under contract for 5 seasons, we need to protect our investment. If he gets those kind of carries for the rest of the year, we may not get anywhere close to 5 good years out of him. Plus, I think Tate demands more carries because i think he's running better right now. I know Foster will get it going and i think the best way to do that is to give him less carries. I think a 20/15 split for Foster/Tate needs to happen if we want to get the most out of this running game.

I do suspect his carries will go down naturally as we will be facing better competition over the next 5-6 weeks but I think it could be a concern moving forward.You don't buy a work truck and worry about "down the road". You hope it lasts forever but know that ain't likely. You use it until the job is done and then mop up if needed with other tools.

Dutchrudder
09-18-2012, 01:08 PM
I found this cool pic of Foster on the NFL.com site, don't know where else to put it:

http://i465.photobucket.com/albums/rr14/themishkin/Sports/09000d5d82b80c8a_gallery_600.jpg

badboy
09-18-2012, 01:14 PM
If the strategy was to run Schaub into linebackers and tackles in an effort to use up the clock, then yes I would prefer his backup do it instead.

Schaub's a smart guy, and he has control of the ball as the QB. He takes the snap, hands off or drops back and determines where to throw. If there's nothing open he can throw it away and avoid hits, Arian can't avoid a tackle in the case of running out the clock. You're just wasting Arian by having him take garbage carries in a game that is all but over. There's a good reason why they call the end of 3 score games "garbage time," it's for backup players to get some reps and take the hits, not multi-million dollar players who have already proven themselves.You still are using Schaub to hand off to RB to eat up game and increasing risk of injury.

Dutchrudder
09-18-2012, 01:16 PM
You still are using Schaub to hand off to RB to eat up game and increasing risk of injury.

Can you name a single QB who has been injured during a handoff play?

badboy
09-18-2012, 01:19 PM
I found this cool pic of Foster on the NFL.com site, don't know where else to put it:

http://i465.photobucket.com/albums/rr14/themishkin/Sports/09000d5d82b80c8a_gallery_600.jpgIIRC, that's the play where his foot slips and down he goes.

76Texan
09-18-2012, 01:26 PM
Foster is on pace right now for well over 400 carries. He's under contract for 5 seasons, we need to protect our investment. If he gets those kind of carries for the rest of the year, we may not get anywhere close to 5 good years out of him. Plus, I think Tate demands more carries because i think he's running better right now. I know Foster will get it going and i think the best way to do that is to give him less carries. I think a 20/15 split for Foster/Tate needs to happen if we want to get the most out of this running game.

I do suspect his carries will go down naturally as we will be facing better competition over the next 5-6 weeks but I think it could be a concern moving forward.
Let's not forget that Foster won't be playing in game 16. :cow:

beerlover
09-18-2012, 01:36 PM
Like fine tuning a race car you want to give him as much work as he can handle but he is not a machine so he should be used judiciously so he is fresh when it counts. Should save his carries for meaningful reps when game is in doubt, not to pad meaningless stat line.

badboy
09-18-2012, 01:57 PM
Like fine tuning a race car you want to give him as much work as he can handle but he is not a machine so he should be used judiciously so he is fresh when it counts. Should save his carries for meaningful reps when game is in doubt, not to pad meaningless stat line.Yep, as I said when job is done (game is in hand) you pull him. You have to give him some plays off to breathe or just as change of pace when Forsett comes in.

Mr teX
09-18-2012, 02:11 PM
With Tate spelling him at least 10-15 reps a game, i say no. you know how it is with rbs..once they hit 30, it's pretty much over. He just signed a new deal & we should get all we can out of him before he does hit the big 3-0.

The Pencil Neck
09-18-2012, 03:09 PM
With Tate spelling him at least 10-15 reps a game, i say no. you know how it is with rbs..once they hit 30, it's pretty much over. He just signed a new deal & we should get all we can out of him before he does hit the big 3-0.

But that's just it. It's not just about age, it's also about carries. Over the past decade or so, some (not all) running backs that have over about 375 carries in a season have problems the next season and some are finished.

In 2005, it was Shaun Alexander. Chris Johnson only got up to 358 carries in 2009, but his average has been steadily dropping since then. Larry Johnson got 416 carries in 2006, and he was broken down by the time they met the Colts in the playoffs -- a team he should have run over but he was out of gas. Edgerrin James got 387 carries in 2000 and broke the next year. He did come back. Terrell Davis got 392 carries in 1998 and that was pretty much the end of his career. Jamaal Anderson got 410 carries in 1998 and that was it for him.

PapaL
09-19-2012, 04:32 PM
Its PapaL .... We all know he's crazy.

:fight:
Touché!
Must spread rep blah blah blah

NBT
09-19-2012, 04:45 PM
Number of carries will take care of itself. I am just grateful we have the two best running backs in the NFL. Enjoy it while it lasts.

TimeKiller
09-20-2012, 08:45 AM
I think so but I saw a graphic, I think it was like "Keys to the game" or something that said the Texans want to get 30 run plays in. If it's Foster 20, Tate 10, scraps to Forsett, I'm all about it. Foster getting 30 carries a game? Probably means we're torching a defense and winning handily, so in this instance I'd like to see Tate and Forsett picking up more slack than that. Arian is a horse and can handle 30 reps but there's no reason to make him do that in a blowout (or to expect he'll be running 30 more carries next weekend).

I'm kind of in the middle.

noxiousdog
09-20-2012, 09:06 AM
A running back with 370 or more carries during the regular season will usually suffer either a major injury or a loss of effectiveness the following year, unless he is named Eric Dickerson. ... On average, running backs with 300 to 369 carries and no postseason appearance will see their total rushing yardage decline by 15 percent the following year and their yards per carry decline by two percent. The average running back with 370 or more regular-season carries, or 390 including the postseason, will see their rushing yardage decline by 35 percent, and their yards per carry decline by eight percent.

That being said, I think it's more a circumstance of the first two weeks and if we continue to have such run heavy performances, he won't be playing much at all at the end of the year.

SteveSlaton20
09-20-2012, 07:13 PM
I don't think Foster is overused but I would like to see Tate get a few more carries.

this. i would like to see tate more on 3rd downs.

CloakNNNdagger
09-29-2012, 07:35 AM
Alan Burge brings up the question once again.

Texans need to watch Foster's workload (http://www.examiner.com/article/texans-need-to-watch-foster-s-workload)

HJam72
09-29-2012, 10:11 AM
Was looking for my original post in this thread, but apparently I didn't post. I believe I did vote no, but I have to change my opinion at this point. Obviously, he is going week to week without showing that it's hurting him any, but I see what this does to RBs over the course of a year. Foster does a great job of avoiding tough hits, but I don't want to wear him out just hoping that that will save him. We get into the postseason and then we do whatever it takes to win. I don't care, hand him the ball 55 times in a game (I know that's very unlikely)--whatever works, if it's necessary--but that's in the playoffs.

Interesting to know, from the link the Doc posted, that Earl Campbell never reached 400 carries...

drs23
09-29-2012, 11:26 AM
Was looking for my original post in this thread, but apparently I didn't post. I believe I did vote no, but I have to change my opinion at this point. Obviously, he is going week to week without showing that it's hurting him any, but I see what this does to RBs over the course of a year. Foster does a great job of avoiding tough hits, but I don't want to wear him out just hoping that that will save him. We get into the postseason and then we do whatever it takes to win. I don't care, hand him the ball 55 times in a game (I know that's very unlikely)--whatever works, if it's necessary--but that's in the playoffs.

Interesting to know, from the link the Doc posted, that Earl Campbell never reached 400 carries...

True but you know it was because of their totally different running styles. Earl the Road Grader as opposed to Arian the Glide -N- Slide guy. Like you said, no one ever seems to get a clean shot at him. He's just there and gone.

rolyat93
09-29-2012, 06:17 PM
This is what happens when you get big leads, you run the ball. It really sucks that we're winning so much, it's really tearing me up.

Lucky
09-29-2012, 06:47 PM
Foster is averaging 29 touches per game. That's OK for a 3 game stretch. Not OK over the course of the season. Tate needs to get more carries.

CloakNNNdagger
09-29-2012, 06:50 PM
Foster is averaging 29 touches per game. That's OK for a 3 game stretch. Not OK over the course of the season. Tate needs to get more carries.

Especially since Foster is already having problems with knee swelling.

The Pencil Neck
09-29-2012, 07:18 PM
Foster is averaging 29 touches per game. That's OK for a 3 game stretch. Not OK over the course of the season. Tate needs to get more carries.

I'd like Forsett to see the ball a few times, too.

EVOLVIST
09-30-2012, 02:36 AM
1st of all, we've only played chumps, so Foster's carries (extrapolating them forward) are out of kilter. We won't be ahead by 20 points and playing the Beevis and Butthead of quarterbacks going forward (anyone else notice that Gabbert kinda looks like a cross between Butthead and Kirk Douglas?). Answering the thread question directly is simple....yesterday told me that we will be using Tate plenty. I thought he (Kubiak) rotated him in early and often.

But see, "early and often" is what I believe to be the problem. Tate doesn't need those carries early in the game - or through three quarters. You don't maximize Foster's carries that way and he doesn't get into the proper rhythm...thus his yards per carry (his effectiveness) is down - even going up against "chumps."

Now, against Denver, the Texans set up the run with the pass, which I advocated going into the game, since everyone's going to key on Foster. It worked well for them
That being the case - and if they keep that trend - then Foster's carries for the rest of the season should look like they did in Denver. The difference is, Tate shouldn't really come in unless Foster is gassed from a big run. Otherwise, let's see more of Tate primarily as the guy who runs out the clock in the 4th quarter, maximizing his particular skill set as the guy who picks up those tough yards that helps win games.

There is no reason Foster should be getting chipped hard for those 2 and 3 yards a carry with 8 men in the box to close out the game. Those too many carries for Foster come way at the end of the game where he has no room to glide

Wolf6151
09-30-2012, 04:18 AM
I don't know that we're overusing Foster so much as we are under utilizing Tate. The NFL season is a long one and I'd really like to have Foster rested and ready by the time the playoffs come around. I'd also like for the Texans to be showcasing Tate for a possible trade at the end of the season. Tate is a weapon that we need to use.

Lucky
09-30-2012, 08:08 AM
Tate is a weapon that we need to use.
That fumble against the Broncos didn't help. But, I just don't understand Kubiak's kneejerk reaction of burying a guy on the bench after a fumble. It's not like Tate wouldn't be more cognizant about ball security after the fumble. How often do runners fumble twice in a game? Tate has to be sent out regardless. Because if your plan is to run the ball 35-40 carries/game (which is great), you've got to spread the touches around.

A time to chill
09-30-2012, 09:33 AM
That fumble against the Broncos didn't help. But, I just don't understand Kubiak's kneejerk reaction of burying a guy on the bench after a fumble. It's not like Tate wouldn't be more cognizant about ball security after the fumble. How often do runners fumble twice in a game? Tate has to be sent out regardless. Because if your plan is to run the ball 35-40 carries/game (which is great), you've got to spread the touches around.

I don't disagree with Kubiak benching Tate after that fumble. He's sending a message that turnovers will not be tolerated.

Today I expect both Tate and Foster to have a monster game against the Titan's weak run defense, so much so that I'm starting Tate as a flex option in my fantasy league. I think the Texans are going to do to the Titans what they did against the Jaguars...drain clock on offense through the run game. I don't think there will be any long bombs from Schaub to Johnson this week.

Rey
09-30-2012, 09:42 AM
That fumble against the Broncos didn't help. But, I just don't understand Kubiak's kneejerk reaction of burying a guy on the bench after a fumble. It's not like Tate wouldn't be more cognizant about ball security after the fumble. How often do runners fumble twice in a game? Tate has to be sent out regardless. Because if your plan is to run the ball 35-40 carries/game (which is great), you've got to spread the touches around.

It's not just about that game.

Tate has not been the most secure ball carrier and if he's going to get late carries in a game he needs to have it ingrained in his head that ball security is the most important thing.

If we're in a one score game in the play offs ( or superbowl) and Tate fumbles, that could cost us the game.

If you throw Tate back in there he's not fully feeling the magnitude if his mistake. If he knows that if he fumbles and will be put back in
regardless he's not as dialed in to ball protection.

With him sitting on that sideline afterward and seeing Denver make that comeback I'm pretty sure we won't be seeing any late game fumbles from him for a while unless a defender just makes a phenomenal play.

I can almost guarantee kubiak and/or Harris went to tate after the game and explained that they will need him for the rest of the season but fumbling the ball like that just won't be tolerated.

hradhak
09-30-2012, 09:53 AM
I would love to see Tate get more carries. I think Tate needs to figure out how to protect the ball down the stretch and the only way to do that is get him more reps, but punish him if starts fumbling. I think the answer is sit him and bring in Forsett in. All our RBs need reps in this system, and in games where we have a big lead, let the other RBs get reps. It's a long season, and we need everyone healthy.

GuerillaBlack
09-30-2012, 02:36 PM
Yes he is being overused. Should have been all Tate on that last drive.

HJam72
09-30-2012, 03:02 PM
Foster still got about 5 too many carries today. Tate wasn't getting the job done (5 for 11 yds.), but Forsett could have been given a shot.

noxiousdog
09-30-2012, 04:39 PM
24 carries today. Still too high, imo.

Ryan
10-01-2012, 01:47 PM
I think most of you would probably like to reconsider your "no" votes by now. No reason for him to be in there late in the game like that.

Dread-Head
10-01-2012, 01:50 PM
Kubiak better have some serious pass offense ready for the post season if we are, because I can promise you that if we're strictly a run team defensive lines will be studying game film and will be VERY prepared for the Texans in the playoffs.

I don't want to see this man used like Earl Campbell was.

Dutchrudder
10-01-2012, 01:56 PM
Well, he's on pace for 412 carries now, a bit lower than the 432 from before, but still too high. We really need to utilize the backup RBs more. Hell, I wouldn't mind seeing Holliday get a run around the edge.

sometexansfan
10-01-2012, 10:35 PM
http://profootballtalk.nbcsports.com/2012/10/01/gary-kubiak-arian-foster-can-handle-400-or-more-carries/

:kubepalm:

Lady.Gaga.3000
10-02-2012, 01:56 AM
http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap1000000068436/article/will-houston-texans-send-arian-foster-to-400-club?module=HP11_headline_stack

Only five players have reached the 400 Club. Unless your name is Eric Dickerson or perhaps Eddie George, you're never the same after it. Larry Johnson is still looking for his burst under the couch cushions.

Scooter
10-02-2012, 03:18 AM
i am starting to worry a little. he's already over 100 carries and even close to this pace will start to wear down when we need him most - postseason.

CloakNNNdagger
10-02-2012, 07:58 AM
A MUST READ: Effect of Running Back Carries
on Future Production (http://www.footballdocs.com/running_back_carries.html) on this very subject that I just fortuitously came across, published today. It covers, in in-depth detail, the very subject we have been debating here.

In fantasy football, it's often difficult to predict which fantasy players will have a significant drop-off in production from one year to the next. This can yield devastating consequences for your team during your fantasy football draft, as you pay a premium price for a player just to have them crush your team with a very substandard season that did not warrant their high draft status. In this article, we will analyze yet another factor that can contribute to a disappointing fantasy season: The effect of Running Back Carries ( Running Back Attempts ).

Running backs are one of the crucial positions in most fantasy football leagues. While running backs can provide a consistently high source of fantasy points week in and week out and are in high demand on fantasy draft day, they are also prone to suffering a significant decrease in production after carrying the ball too many times in the preceding season. A running back's body is a machine, and, like all machines, they can only perform their function so many times before they must be replaced by a newer version (or sent in for repair). With that in mind, there are two measures (absolute and relative) to evaluate the wear and tear of running backs:

1. The absolute measure of the number of carries (attempts) a running back has had in the previous season (Table 1).
2. The relative measure in the increase in the number of carries from season to season (Table 2).

Both of these measures are indicators for a potential drop-off in production from one season to the next, and we have compiled two tables to help illustrate these points. Table 1 lists every NFL player that has experienced a workload of 370 carries or more in a season (through 2011) followed by their performance in the subsequent season.


Yes, this is a fantasy site. But it has an unbelievably detailed breakdown (with easy-to-review table presentation) of what has happened to all the top high-carry NFL RBs following their work horse exposures..........and, with very isolated exception, it's not very good news at all. If it teaches you anything, it is that the human body has it's limitations.

steelbtexan
10-02-2012, 08:26 AM
They paid Foster, now they're using Foster. As it should be. Tate will be getting 10-15 carries a game as usual as the season wears on. No need to fret.

TexanSam
10-02-2012, 09:56 AM
They paid Foster, now they're using Foster. As it should be. Tate will be getting 10-15 carries a game as usual as the season wears on. No need to fret.

And at this rate, we'll be paying him for four extra years of bad productivity after this season if he goes over 400 carries this year. Maybe he won't wear down if he does carry the load that much, but history suggests otherwise.

I'd rather not have another Shaun Alexander situation.

Ryan
10-02-2012, 10:01 AM
Plus it's not like Foster is on a pace for a 2000 yard season either, he hasn't even scratched the 4 ypc surface.

TexansFanatic
10-02-2012, 10:52 AM
Plus it's not like Foster is on a pace for a 2000 yard season either, he hasn't even scratched the 4 ypc surface.

He still gets hit every with every carry. Doesn't matter if he's gained one yard or ten, he's taken some punishment.

EDIT: Never mind. I think I see your point now.

Yankee_In_TX
10-02-2012, 12:52 PM
Carries by game:

1. 26
2. 28
3. 25
4. 24


Just FYI

disaacks3
10-02-2012, 01:04 PM
In the Long term? - YES, we are overusing him.

In the Short term? - No, not until I see Arian get fully on-track for one game. I want to see 150+ w/ a 40+ yarder i there before I think our running game looks "normal" again. Once that happens, 50/50 it all you want. Until it does, keep feeding him (steak pun inferred).

The Pencil Neck
10-02-2012, 01:16 PM
We all knew that the line was going to be a work in progress this season. And THIS is what we get for that. If our line opens up the holes, Foster will get through them. But even if we run to the left, the right side has to take care of business. Right now, we don't have the Elephants On Parade* working like Gibbs always talked about. The whole line and the wide receivers have to do their jobs and right now, we've got some issues.

So Foster's ypc is going down. Kubes still feels more comfortable with him running the ball than Tate (especially after that fumble that let Denver back in the game.)

Foster's going to get a lot of touches until either Tate steps up or Foster breaks.

HOU-TEX
10-02-2012, 01:27 PM
We've had 20+ point leads in these first 4 games. I reckon any RB would have an extensive amount of carries if their team was up 20 in every game. Will this happen every week? I highly doubt it.

Right now, this is no issue to me

NitroGSXR
10-02-2012, 01:46 PM
And at this rate, we'll be paying him for four extra years of bad productivity after this season if he goes over 400 carries this year. Maybe he won't wear down if he does carry the load that much, but history suggests otherwise.

I'd rather not have another Shaun Alexander situation.

4 years? Let's just focus on going to New Orleans right now. Arian's our first class ticket plane ride there. Like steelbtexan said, we're paying him.

HJam72
10-02-2012, 03:04 PM
4 years? Let's just focus on going to New Orleans right now. Arian's our first class ticket plane ride there. Like steelbtexan said, we're paying him.

Problem is we could get close and he could be gassed. I know we have Tate, but we may need every advantage. We could even get there (New Orleans) and suddenly he's gassed. Or, this could turn out to be not our year like we think. Maybe it's next year, but, uh-oh, Foster's done...

Besides, you don't take a talent like Foster and just burn him out. I could go with the argument that this is only happening as long as we have 20 point leads, but it has to stop--scratch that; slow down--at some point or there's likely going to be unforeseen knee issues.

Thorn
10-02-2012, 04:43 PM
You know something, I have no idea if we are actually using up Arian to fast or not. I'm not a coach, and I'm not in the locker room or on the field with them. I'll leave it up to Kubiak. It's all a fan can do.

Well, besides *****. And we do that a lot around here. :lol:

OK, edit to say the asteriks are for typing in the noun for a female dog.

CloakNNNdagger
10-03-2012, 09:05 AM
A MUST READ: Effect of Running Back Carries
on Future Production (http://www.footballdocs.com/running_back_carries.html) on this very subject that I just fortuitously came across, published today. It covers, in in-depth detail, the very subject we have been debating here.



Yes, this is a fantasy site. But it has an unbelievably detailed breakdown (with easy-to-review table presentation) of what has happened to all the top high-carry NFL RBs following their work horse exposures..........and, with very isolated exception, it's not very good news at all. If it teaches you anything, it is that the human body has it's limitations.



Some more numbers including additional players that didn't quite reach the 390 carries, but were pretty high up there. The pattern is still disturbing.

http://walterfootball.com/fantasy2009mostcarries.php

HJam72
10-03-2012, 09:08 AM
Some more numbers including additional players that didn't quite reach the 390 carries, but were pretty high up there. The pattern is still disturbing.

http://walterfootball.com/fantasy2009mostcarries.php

I think Kubiak needs to see that. He seems to think that how Foster feels "right now" is all that matters and "he's fine."

noxiousdog
10-03-2012, 09:13 AM
We've had 20+ point leads in these first 4 games. I reckon any RB would have an extensive amount of carries if their team was up 20 in every game. Will this happen every week? I highly doubt it.

Right now, this is no issue to me

But that's what I don't understand. You have Tate and Forsett. Why does Arian have to have so many carries when you're already up?

TexansBlood
10-03-2012, 09:15 AM
That's alot of carries for him and we been "blowing out" teams, Ben Tate should be getting more carriers in the 2nd half and Foster should be resting. It will take a toll on his body in the future.

Dread-Head
10-03-2012, 09:20 AM
:fight:
Touché!
Must spread rep blah blah blah

You're not CRAZY! You don't pay your dues, you don't show up at the meetings, you don't do your community service hours. You've been downgraded. You're no longer "crazy" your just a little "nuts" now.

steelbtexan
10-03-2012, 05:21 PM
And at this rate, we'll be paying him for four extra years of bad productivity after this season if he goes over 400 carries this year. Maybe he won't wear down if he does carry the load that much, but history suggests otherwise.

I'd rather not have another Shaun Alexander situation.

The Texans have a 3 yr window to win a SB. If giving Foster the ball 350-400 times a yr during this period helps win a SB. Then count me in the give him the d**n ball crowd.

Earl was productive for 6 yrs with a heavy workload and a much more violent running style. Emmitt had a similar running style as Foster (They very rarely take direct hits) and was a workhorse for 10 yrs or better.

amazing80
10-03-2012, 05:35 PM
the chron says Ben Tate is nursing a toe injury, I assume this is why the splits are so wacky and why Tate has been ineffective....hopefully he gets better soon (Foster can keep this pace up until the bye but then he needs to be able to take it easy until playoff time) so Tate has a few weeks to heal up

CloakNNNdagger
10-03-2012, 07:34 PM
The Texans have a 3 yr window to win a SB. If giving Foster the ball 350-400 times a yr during this period helps win a SB. Then count me in the give him the d**n ball crowd.

Earl was productive for 6 yrs with a heavy workload and a much more violent running style. Emmitt had a similar running style as Foster (They very rarely take direct hits) and was a workhorse for 10 yrs or better.

When your knees are already swelling from the beginning of the season and your knee remains an issue as demonstrated by the injury reports, you don't necessarily need to take direct hits to get worse......just gross numbers of REPETITION which alone can lead to "overuse knee syndromes" leading to damage of muscle, tendon, cartilage, bone, ligament, or any combination thereof. And this is not to even mention the not uncommon dreaded "compensation" injury. And if not rested overuse syndromes can result in conditions requiring surgery. When we're dealing with all these one year high carry numbers historically, we need to keep in mind that these account for regular season numbers only. Most of the high carry RBs may have never reached the postseason with their teams in those specific years of record high carries despite their numbers, let alone ever reached the Super Bowl..........reaching the Super Bowl would require substantial additional numbers and additional wear and tear.........substantial numbers that will need to be added to Foster's season carries should we be fortunate enough to make the Super Bowl. So many people here are saying Hell with next year, damn the torpedoes full speed ahead, we're only concerned with making the Super Bowl THIS YEAR. You may want to stop and think of the not so unreal possibility of Foster not making it through to the postseason let alone to the Super Bowl, if the present course remains unchanged. But I guess there's always next year.

Fico
10-03-2012, 10:07 PM
Carries are not the causation for production decline although they correlate strongly. The type and the amount of hits taken is the actual cause of the wear and tear that causes the steep decline.

Look at those backs that carried the ball in that volume, almost all of them are backs that were bangers. None of them were gliders that avoided hits like Foster does.

I also think extrapolating his carries after 4 games for a full season is a pointless task. Lets take a look at his carry numbers again at the halfway mark. More importantly lets keep in mind that Foster's running style negates some of the correlation between carries and decline in production.

steelbtexan
10-04-2012, 08:45 AM
When your knees are already swelling from the beginning of the season and your knee remains an issue as demonstrated by the injury reports, you don't necessarily need to take direct hits to get worse......just repetition which can lead to "overuse knee syndromes" leading to damage of muscle, tendon, cartilage, bone, ligament, or any combination thereof. And this is not to even mention the not uncommon dreaded "compensation" injury. And if not rested overuse syndromes can to conditions requiring surgery. When we're dealing with all these one year high carry numbers historically, we need to keep in mind that these account for regular season numbers only. Most of the high carry RBs may have never reached the postseason with their teams in those specific years of record high carries despite their numbers, let alone ever reached the Super Bowl..........reaching the Super Bowl would require substantial additional numbers and additional wear and tear.........substantial numbers that will need to be added to Foster's season carries should we be fortunate enough to make the Super Bowl. So many people here are saying Hell with next year, damn the torpedoes full speed ahead, we're only concerned with making the Super Bowl THIS YEAR. You may want to stop and think of the not so unreal possibility of Foster not making it through to the postseason let alone to the Super Bowl, if the present course remains unchanged. But I guess there's always next year.

I forgot about the knee problems. That is somewhat of a gamechanger for me. They should atleast monitor Fosters carries more closely. Do you think Gary will take this into consideration? I dont.

With that said I belive that this yr is the best chance the Texans have to make the SB, so you've got to ride your horse. If Foster goes down, then Tate will have to step up. Tate is a luxury that the Texans probably will not have next yr. He's the reason I would ride Foster hard this yr.

Plus to achieve greatness sometimes you have to accept the risk and move forward. I'm not worried about Fosters workload at this point because as the season wears on his carries should get reduced at some point without Gary having to make a conscious effort to do so.

CloakNNNdagger
10-04-2012, 09:39 AM
I forgot about the knee problems. That is somewhat of a gamechanger for me. They should atleast monitor Fosters carries more closely. Do you think Gary will take this into consideration? I dont.

With that said I belive that this yr is the best chance the Texans have to make the SB, so you've got to ride your horse. If Foster goes down, then Tate will have to step up. Tate is a luxury that the Texans probably will not have next yr. He's the reason I would ride Foster hard this yr.

Plus to achieve greatness sometimes you have to accept the risk and move forward. I'm not worried about Fosters workload at this point because as the season wears on his carries should get reduced at some point without Gary having to make a conscious effort to do so.

That luxury can disappear very quickly. Tate's "toe issue" has me very concerned. Why the Texans have been reluctant to characterize his injury further has me very concerned, until I hear otherwise, that he may be dealing with TURF TOE.

noxiousdog
10-04-2012, 11:31 AM
Earl was productive for 6 yrs with a heavy workload and a much more violent running style. Emmitt had a similar running style as Foster (They very rarely take direct hits) and was a workhorse for 10 yrs or better.

Emmitt broke 370 twice. The second time his ypc were 4.7. After that, they never were better than 4.2.

Regardless, these things can't be based on individuals. It's only a guess of what might happen and probability isn't on Foster's side with that many carries.

I don't have any problem with doing it out of necessity. I just don't understand the reasoning when Tate was running well in the first two games and Forsett is available as well. We're only talking about taking 5 plays per game away.

CloakNNNdagger
10-04-2012, 03:50 PM
Tate did not practice today. No sightings reported. Hopefully, he's not in a boot.

CloakNNNdagger
10-04-2012, 05:11 PM
Not the best news.

Houston Texans Houston Texans ‏@HoustonTexans

Kubiak on RB Ben Tate (toe): "If he looks fine (Saturday), then we'll be back to our normal deal...We'll see where Ben's at on Saturday." 3hrs

CloakNNNdagger
10-04-2012, 09:06 PM
(on RB Ben Tate’s status ) “I think so. I think if we asked Ben (Tate) to do something today he would’ve done it. I would say the same thing tomorrow but we are going to hold him. We are going to get (RB) Justin (Forsett) ready to go. Then I think what we do Saturday is we let (RB) Ben (Tate) go and if he looks fine, then we’re back to our normal deal. I think the key is that Justin gets the reps because Ben is ready to play. He knows what he’s doing. That’s kind of the way we practiced today. We’ll see where Ben is at on Saturday.”link (http://www.houstontexans.com/news/article-2/Quotes-Thursday-practice/ed3d689e-7f37-4f49-a892-41dd18e4582f)

drunkcookie
10-05-2012, 09:11 AM
It has only been four games, a quarter of the season, so I can't say that I'm "concerned", but for sure paying attention... Now if it were at the halfway mark and Foster was pacing 400+ that would have me concerned for sure...


I looked up Foster's carries from last year and picked a four-game stretch somewhere in the middle of the season. I then averaged his carries per game for those four games. If you were to apply that average to 16 games, Foster would have been pacing for 368 carries.. of course he finished with 278, almost 100 less than that four-game average would suggest if applied to 16 games... So i guess my point is his carries can be trimmed, whether intentionally or by the design of this system and team that had him carry it only 278 times last season...

HJam72
10-05-2012, 09:22 AM
I don't really think Foster will get 400 carries, but what worries me is that Kubiak seems to think that would be perfectly fine....and I don't.

CloakNNNdagger
10-05-2012, 06:41 PM
delete

DocBar
10-05-2012, 07:03 PM
Bludgeon opponents for 3 quarters with our starters the treat the 4th quarter like preseason game 4. That should make everyone happy.

Dutchrudder
10-05-2012, 07:05 PM
It has only been four games, a quarter of the season, so I can't say that I'm "concerned", but for sure paying attention... Now if it were at the halfway mark and Foster was pacing 400+ that would have me concerned for sure...


I looked up Foster's carries from last year and picked a four-game stretch somewhere in the middle of the season. I then averaged his carries per game for those four games. If you were to apply that average to 16 games, Foster would have been pacing for 368 carries.. of course he finished with 278, almost 100 less than that four-game average would suggest if applied to 16 games... So i guess my point is his carries can be trimmed, whether intentionally or by the design of this system and team that had him carry it only 278 times last season...

He had 278 last year because he only played 13 games. His average that year was 21 carries a game, good for 342 over a 16 game season. He's being used about 17% more on average this year over 2011's average.

b0ng
10-06-2012, 12:26 AM
If Tate can't go then I wouldn't mind seeing more Forsett.

Ryan
10-08-2012, 10:59 PM
Games like this are where i can justify Foster getting 30+ carries. He looked back to his old self today too. Still would like to get Tate back ASAP.

CloakNNNdagger
10-11-2012, 07:50 PM
Per Nick Scurfield:

RB Arian Foster

1st in rushing attempts (132)
2nd in rushing yards (532)
1st in rushing touchdowns (5)
3rd in yards from scrimmage (592)
1st in scrimmage touchdowns (6)

Arian is 2nd in rushing yards with 532 with 132 attempts. First in rushing yards is J. Charles (KC) with 562 with only 102 attempts.


Football Outsiders (http://www.footballoutsiders.com/stats/rb) has just updated their 2012 RB stats. It's interesting to review these parameters for comparison.

CloakNNNdagger
10-12-2012, 06:21 PM
Kubiak (http://www.houstontexans.com/news/article-2/Quotes-Friday-practice/d7c147d7-ecdf-4867-83f7-8d538bb0fe35)

(on RB Arian Foster’s workload) “I don’t have those numbers in front of me. I don’t worry about that. I think those things work themselves out. I think if (RB) Arian (Foster) doesn’t miss a month of football last year, he probably carries it 400 times last year. We are the number one possession team in football so somebody back there dotting our I’s is going to carry the ball. I don’t get too consumed with that. If I felt like Arian was wearing down or something, I’d be the first one to take him out of there or whatever. Heck, I got him arguing that he wants more so that’s a good problem for a football team to have.”


WHAAAAT????????Last year, in 13 games, Foster carried the ball 278 times. If this is extrapolated to include the 3 missed games, he would have carried the ball for a total of only 331 times.

TheIronDuke
11-21-2012, 09:12 AM
Thought it would be a good time to re-visit this thread. Initially I voted no in the poll but I'd like to change my vote. Forsett looked good in his limited carries against JAX and I'm wondering why Kubes is so intent on force-feeding the ball to Foster instead of playing the hot hand. Gotta wonder what long-term effects his workload this season is going to cause going forward.

HOU-TEX
11-21-2012, 09:18 AM
Yes, but like every player on the team...that's what he's paid to do.

I know it's cliche'-ish, but that's how I feel.

With that said, I really want Tate to get his ass on the field. I know hammys are finicky, but dang.

Mr teX
11-21-2012, 09:42 AM
Thought it would be a good time to re-visit this thread. Initially I voted no in the poll but I'd like to change my vote. Forsett looked good in his limited carries against JAX and I'm wondering why Kubes is so intent on force-feeding the ball to Foster instead of playing the hot hand. Gotta wonder what long-term effects his workload this season is going to cause going forward.

Surely you don't believe that Gary's not aware of Arian's touches this year do you? I think what gary's point in all of this is that he's going to run his offense the way it needs to be ran so as to make sure that it's as effective as possible....no matter what. & right now that calls for Arian to carry the ball as much as he has thus far in the season.

I do think we are overusing him this year, but it's a bit misleading imo b/c i don't think we'd be doing it if Tate was healthy. you can't just give tate's carries to Forsett to offset b/c they don't pose the same threat. Forsett's a scat-back with little power...Tate's more of a bruiser than can wear down defenses....oh & he has break away speed too.

having said all this, I think Gary's not really worried too much about it b/c there's still time to curtail Arian's carries................................... if the team handles its business & wraps everything up by week 14-15 or so...& Tate gets healthy towards the end of the season. Then he and Forsett can handle the last few games of the season.

TheIronDuke
11-21-2012, 09:51 AM
Surely you don't believe that Gary's not aware of Arian's touches this year do you? I think what gary's point in all of this is that he's going to run his offense the way it needs to be ran so as to make sure that it's as effective as possible....no matter what. & right now that calls for Arian to carry the ball as much as he has thus far in the season.

I do think we are overusing him this year, but it's a bit misleading imo b/c i don't think we'd be doing it if Tate was healthy. you can't just give tate's carries to Forsett to offset b/c they don't pose the same threat. Forsett's a scat-back with little power...Tate's more of a bruiser than can wear down defenses....oh & he has break away speed too.

having said all this, I think Gary's not really worried too much about it b/c there's still time to curtail Arian's carries................................... if the team handles its business & wraps everything up by week 14-15 or so...& Tate gets healthy towards the end of the season. Then he and Forsett can handle the last few games of the season.

I am sure Kubes knows that he's been giving Arian the rock quite a bit this season. And I agree that if Tate could ever get healthy, which looks unlikely, that he'd be getting a lot of carries too. I think Forsett is a similar-ish back to Foster so why not use him when Foster's not as effective to at least lighten the wear and tear on him? Like the Chicago game where he was getting stuffed over and over in the 2nd half, would've preferred that was Forsett than our feature back.

I hope that someday Tate can get his ass out of the training room and onto the field. Doesn't look likely because the dude is constantly injured. In the mean time I'd LOVE to see what Grimes and do as well and really hope we can keep Arian below the 400 rushing attempts, but that's not looking good. Especially if we make it as far in the playoffs as we all hope.

The Pencil Neck
11-21-2012, 10:12 AM
Kubes trusts Arian so much that he gives Arian the option to sub himself in or out depending on how he (Arian) feels. At this point, I think the high number of snaps for Arian is because Arian wants to be in the game.

Personally, I think they need to police his snaps a lot more and keep him on the sidelines some but... back in the day Eric Dickerson had several 350+ carry seasons (including a 400+ carry season) and didn't break down like modern backs seem to. Hopefully Arian is a throwback.

TheIronDuke
11-21-2012, 10:17 AM
Kubes trusts Arian so much that he gives Arian the option to sub himself in or out depending on how he (Arian) feels. At this point, I think the high number of snaps for Arian is because Arian wants to be in the game.

Personally, I think they need to police his snaps a lot more and keep him on the sidelines some but... back in the day Eric Dickerson had several 350+ carry seasons (including a 400+ carry season) and didn't break down like modern backs seem to. Hopefully Arian is a throwback.

That is my concern is the 400+ carry threshhold. No modern back has ever had a 400 carry season without repercussions. It wouldn't bother me too much if we didn't just sign him to a fat extension but it's like buying a Viper and using it as a daily driver.

This article scares the bejeezus out of me! http://www.footballdocs.com/running_back_carries.html

EllisUnit
11-21-2012, 05:37 PM
im not worried about fosters production declining. He is on his way to his 3rd straight 1,000 yard season, but the guy is a glider he does a good job at making defenders miss. He isnt out there going Earl Campbell on people running them over on his way to the endzone.

Ryan
11-21-2012, 05:44 PM
im not worried about fosters production declining. He is on his way to his 3rd straight 1,000 yard season, but the guy is a glider he does a good job at making defenders miss. He isnt out there going Earl Campbell on people running them over on his way to the endzone.


The thing is, i see him simply running into more piles this year than i have in year's past. Definitely not breaking tackles like he used to either.

EllisUnit
11-21-2012, 05:59 PM
The thing is, i see him simply running into more piles this year than i have in year's past. Definitely not breaking tackles like he used to either.

agree with that part, he used to be a breaking tackle machine, now he goes down if a defender "thinks" about touching him. ALTHOUGH lately i have seen him break more tackles than earlier in the season.

drs23
11-21-2012, 06:37 PM
agree with that part, he used to be a breaking tackle machine, now he goes down if a defender "thinks" about touching him. ALTHOUGH lately i have seen him break more tackles than earlier in the season.

EU and others. It's clearly obvious. He's "saving himself" for the Prom. When we get there, look out sauerkraut!

powda
11-21-2012, 10:50 PM
Gotta wonder what long-term effects his workload this season is going to cause going forward.

See Larry johnson.

Its a travesty tate hasnt gotten more carries when healthy. He's not going to be here next year and I think we all know it. Burn up his tread a little more and extend the career of your superstar. When the game isnt remotely close why is foster still in there?

As for foster running into piles...

Theres 2 new faces on the ol and the fairer assessment would be: the offensive line is not creating gaps like they have in the past, theres more penetration by defenders, AND foster is not breaking tackles at the level he did last year.

Wolf
12-22-2012, 11:35 AM
He is sitting at 325 (36 more carries than Peterson)

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?seasonType=REG&d-447263-n=1&d-447263-o=2&d-447263-p=1&d-447263-s=RUSHING_ATTEMPTS&tabSeq=0&season=2012&akmobile=ios-tablet&Submit=Go&experience=&archive=false&conference=null&statisticCategory=RUSHING&qualified=false

I didn't realize Morris was having that good of a season over there in Washington

amazing80
12-22-2012, 09:03 PM
He is sitting at 325 (36 more carries than Peterson)

http://www.nfl.com/stats/categorystats?seasonType=REG&d-447263-n=1&d-447263-o=2&d-447263-p=1&d-447263-s=RUSHING_ATTEMPTS&tabSeq=0&season=2012&akmobile=ios-tablet&Submit=Go&experience=&archive=false&conference=null&statisticCategory=RUSHING&qualified=false

I didn't realize Morris was having that good of a season over there in Washington

Yikes, thats a lot of carries