Via Lance Z: RB Ryan Mathews

[barrett]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wlZOF...eature=related

Very impressive. Great vision for a ZBS.

[LonerATO]

Originally Posted by barrett

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wlZOF...eature=related

Very impressive. Great vision for a ZBS.

I think the knock people had on him was the amount of carriers he had compared to the other top runningbacks. I like the Mathews and think he could be there for the Texans in the 2nd rd.

[nero THE zero]

He'd fit right in. Anyone see him fumble at the goaline for the would-be game winning TD in his bowl game?

[barrett]

damn, this fan base is so traumatized.

[nero THE zero]

Originally Posted by barrett

damn, this fan base is so traumatized.

haha

I'm just joking. Matthews is my second favorite RB in this class. I watched that bowl game specifically to watch him. I just found the end of the game fitting and decided then he was destined to be a Texan. :p

[stingray]

I think he's going to the Chargers in the first round. No way he falls to the texans in the second now after today.

[BigTimeTexanFan]

Depending on how the first round shakes out I would be okay with him at our spot (20).

[Lucky]

The difference between Mathews and the other big backs with good 40 times is that his speed actually shows up on the field. Of Mathews 19 TDs, 7 were from 50+ yards. He didn't play in the SEC, but Mathews did average 140 yards rushing in 2 road games versus Big 10 competition. You can only play the teams on your schedule.

What concerns me about drafting a RB high is whether Kubiak puts him on the field. Can the Texans coaching staff get him ready for opening day? Or will he ride the pine, ala Arian Foster, until Kubiak has no recourse put to put him on the field? I'm still scratching my head over why Foster can't see the field due to not being able to pickup the blitz, but Duane Brown is the day one starter protecting Matt Schaub's blindside.

[barrett]

Perhaps because as an undrafted free agent player, both scouts and coaches alike saw some things in Foster that needed to be worked out before he was put in the games whereas Brown, a first round LT was more game ready by week one.

Much like Mathews rated to be a first or second round RB is more likely to be game ready by week one as opposed to say... some undrafted free agent RB that we pick up after the draft who might need some grooming.

I don't see how that is a case of a coach's unwillingness to put a young running back in early games which is I believe, what you're getting at.

[Lucky]

Originally Posted by barrett

Perhaps because as an undrafted free agent player, both scouts and coaches alike saw some things in Foster that needed to be worked out before he was put in the games...

So Foster, who played 45 games at a SEC school, needed rookie camp, mini camp, OTAs, training camp, and 3 months into the season before being ready to play, in Kubiak's eyes. But a true junior at a Mountain West school will be seen fit to go from the opening week?

[beerlover]

In regards to Mathews would watch out for San Diego, meaning if the Texans want him "he's their guy" they target him @ 20.

[IDEXAN]

Is Matthews really than much different than Arian Foster ? Maybe a little quicker, but basically the same kind of back.

[nero THE zero]

Originally Posted by Lucky

So Foster, who played 45 games at a SEC school, needed rookie camp, mini camp, OTAs, training camp, and 3 months into the season before being ready to play, in Kubiak's eyes. But a true junior at a Mountain West school will be seen fit to go from the opening week?

Kubiak called Cushing "a starter the minute he stepped off the bus." I don't get where there's even any interpretation that Kubiak might be suffering from any kind of JVG syndrome. If you are suggesting that this is something exclusive to RB, Wali Lundy started game 1 for us in 2006.

[infantrycak]

I share Lucky's concerns although I think if they took Mathews in the 1st they would get him on the field sooner rather than later. Looking at film though I love Mathews over Dwyer, Gerhart, Blount, etc. He really looks like the perfect compliment to this system. I'd take him at 20 in a heartbeat.

[playa465]

Originally Posted by Lucky

So Foster, who played 45 games at a SEC school, needed rookie camp, mini camp, OTAs, training camp, and 3 months into the season before being ready to play, in Kubiak's eyes. But a true junior at a Mountain West school will be seen fit to go from the opening week?

I think Foster started out good in Kubiak eyes but got into the dog house after the hammy injury in camp...and wasn't Foster actually released and brought back? Sounds like Foster got re-focused which is a good thing.

[WolverineFan]

Originally Posted by IDEXAN

Is Matthews really than much different than Arian Foster ? Maybe a little quicker, but basically the same kind of back.

Are you basing this solely of of their measurements? Because that's the only similar thing between them.

Mathews has better break away speed, better quickness, better vision, he runs harder, he catches better, and he will probably be drafted in the 1st round (as opposed to Foster who was an UFA). There are a lot of differences between them.

Are they the same back? No, because no two backs are the same. Do they have a similar running style? Yes, but Mathews is better than Foster at pretty much everything.

[IDEXAN]

Originally Posted by WolverineFan

Mathews has better break away speed, better quickness, better vision, he runs harder, he catches better, and he will probably be drafted in the 1st round (as opposed to Foster who was an UFA). There are a lot of differences between them.

Oh Kubiak/Smith won't use the first round pick on a back, any back. Sure
Matthews is better than Foster, but really not by that much and look at the value: one is a first-rounder and the other is an UFA. And if you saw Foster play at the end of last year, you know he was very impressive. Besides they can get a guys as big and fast as Matthews in the 3rd round if they want -
Auburns Ben Tate at 220 knocked out a 4.43 yesterday.

[steelbtexan]

Originally Posted by Lucky

So Foster, who played 45 games at a SEC school, needed rookie camp, mini camp, OTAs, training camp, and 3 months into the season before being ready to play, in Kubiak's eyes. But a true junior at a Mountain West school will be seen fit to go from the opening week?

LOL

If it takes a RB coach basically a full season to get a 4 yr starter from a SEC school ready to play. There's something wrong with the RB coach. Chick Harris you're fired.

Imagine if they drafted a rookie QB. It would take 5 yrs for him to get ready to play in Kubes eyes. If how Kubes handling of young RB's is any indication.

My god this organization moves at glacial speed.

Love Mathews would take him at 20 in a heartbeat if no OL or CB's were of value at that pick. He's alot like Foster but has break away speed.

[WolverineFan]

Originally Posted by IDEXAN

Oh Kubiak/Smith won't use the first round pick on a back, any back. Sure
Matthews is better than Foster, but really not by that much and look at the value: one is a first-rounder and the other is an UFA. And if you saw Foster play at the end of last year, you know he was very impressive. Besides they can get a guys as big and fast as Matthews in the 3rd round if they want -
Auburns Ben Tate at 220 knocked out a 4.43 yesterday.

Just because they are as big or as fast doesn't mean they are as good a RB. Mathews and Tate have very similar measurables, but Mathews is a 1st round pick and Tate is a 3rd round pick. What is the difference I wonder.

This is what I hate about the combine. To me, Mathews is the best back in the draft and will be a franchise back in the NFL, but because a guy his size puts up similar numbers in the 40 & bench then we can afford to pass him up for the "value" pick later on.

Now I like Tate and if we went CB in the 1st or something then he is the guy I would want at RB in the 3rd, but he is not Mathews. With Tate, we would have a beastly RB to pair up with Slaton and Foster. With Mathews, we would have a beastly franchise RB that would get help from Slaton and Foster. With Tate, we would be a running back by committee again. With Mathews, that problem is solved.

[threetoedpete]

Originally Posted by WolverineFan

Are you basing this solely of of their measurements? Because that's the only similar thing between them.

Mathews has better break away speed, better quickness, better vision, he runs harder, he catches better, and he will probably be drafted in the 1st round (as opposed to Foster who was an UFA). There are a lot of differences between them.

Are they the same back? No, because no two backs are the same. Do they have a similar running style? Yes, but Mathews is better than Foster at pretty much everything.

The other thing is: Foster's success last year didn't come to fruition until the o-line ran across two teams who were either dinged up or holding players back for their play off run. Just the transference of that success to next season is a bit of a push. Also transferring a draft candidates success based on college production and the combine is a bit of a push. I watched the A&M Fresno state game a couple of years ago. I must say i was pretty impressed with both Running backs. IIRC both backs had a good day for Fresno St. Any back they take, just about, is going to have to be trained to one cut and go. And to catch and pass block. It's a big curve for all of them no matter how talented. That is why it takes the wide outs so long to come on line. Even one as gifted as Andre Johnson or Cuz' Calvin. I don't subscribe to the we draft this back we'll have "X" amount of success with "X" running back. Better value waiting...but what ever. I can see why everyone is in love with Spiller. Just saying my say.