Originally Posted by ObsiWan
This was addressed in another thread. I don't buy into that "dropsies" crap. The guys on 610am, this morning, were discussing the fact that Foster had NO passes thrown in his direction in the Bills game and before that was being targeted, on average, once per game
. Their theory is - and I think it has some merit - that with Foster getting 24-25 carries/game AND with Tate basically out of action (and who knows how long before he's back to 100%) they want to limit Foster's total touches each game. How effective do you guys think he'd be come post-season time if we piled 5,6, or 7 catches on top of his 24-25 carries/game??
If Tate recovers soon or if Forsett steps up to be a more effective back, then maybe Foster's carries go down and his catches go back up so that he's getting 15-18 carries/game plus 4-6 catches/game.
Make sense? It does to me.
Edit: Someone with access to ProFootball Focus or some like site can verify the targeting "data" the 610 am guys were spouting this morning.
If the 610 guys said once per game on average, they're full of crap, (well, actually they're full of crap regardless, but that would just be an example of it). The fact that after 8 games he has 12 receptions might be the first clue he's being targeted more than once per game. I've noticed myself that there have been a few passes thrown Foster's way that were catchable, but not caught.
According to ESPN, through yesterday's game, Foster had been targeted 26 times this year (or 3.25 times per game). While it is down from prior years (5.4/game for '10 and '11 combined), it's not exactly 1 per game. More importantly is that of those 26 targets, he has 12 receptions or a completion rate of 46.1%. In 2010 and 2011, his completion rate was 78.6 and 73.6 percent respectively.
2012 Stats: (Foster is #218 after this week's game)