Death to Google Ads! Texans Talk Tip Jar! 🍺😎👍
Thanks for your support!

Are we overusing Foster?

Are we overusing Foster?

  • Yes

    Votes: 47 37.0%

  • No

    Votes: 80 63.0%
  • Total voters
    127
R

Ryan

THIS YEAR
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
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 :-)
 
Trail.Blazr said:
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 :-)
Click to expand...

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

JACKSONVILLE, Fla. (AP) -- Defensive end J.J. Watt 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.''
Click to expand...
 
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.
 
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:
 
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.
 
Rey said:
I don't think Foster is overused but I would like to see Tate get a few more carries.
Click to expand...


Dutchrudder said:
I say yes, but that's only because I think Tate deserves more carries.
Click to expand...

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.
 
ckhouston said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.

Corrosion said:
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.
Click to expand...

What? You don't think Reggie Bush is just as talented???
 
Dutchrudder said:
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.
Click to expand...

Agreed...

100000 times agreed.
 
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?
 
PapaL said:
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?
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.
 
Dutchrudder said:
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???
Click to expand...

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.
 
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
 
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.
 
PapaL said:
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?
Click to expand...


Something sure does sound ludicrous.
 
Dutchrudder said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
fiasco west said:
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.
Click to expand...

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 .
 
Corrosion said:
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 .
Click to expand...
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.
 
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.
 
Corrosion said:
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.
Click to expand...

Turner, McFadden, Forte, Murray, Bush, McCoy, and maybe even Richardson now. Tate is great though.
 
Dutchrudder said:
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???
Click to expand...
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.
 
Corrosion said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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?.....
 
nero THE zero said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
Ryan said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
I found this cool pic of Foster on the NFL.com site, don't know where else to put it:

09000d5d82b80c8a_gallery_600.jpg
 
Dutchrudder said:
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.
Click to expand...
You still are using Schaub to hand off to RB to eat up game and increasing risk of injury.
 
Ryan said:
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.
Click to expand...
Let's not forget that Foster won't be playing in game 16. :cow:
 
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.
 
beerlover said:
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.
Click to expand...
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.
 
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.
 
Mr teX said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
Football Outsiders: 2012 said:
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.
Click to expand...

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.
 
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...
 
HJam72 said:
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...
Click to expand...

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.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top