Foster vs. Tate

[barrett]

Originally Posted by nunusguy

Everybody knows Tate is a better pure running back than Foster, though he for sure doesn't have Arian's versatility but I'm still OK with Ben being our main back this weekend.
OK I'm not really worried but getting slightly apprehensive about the cumulative effect of all of these guys like Cody, Cushing, & Watt missing virtually all of their preseason game snaps and now going out there Sunday and playing for the first time in this new season.
I dunno, so maybe playing the biggest Vegas long shot for the '13 SB for the season opener this Sunday in Reliant isn't such bad timing after all ?

Where are you getting this from? You are the only one I've ever heard that from.

[TheMatrix31]

Tate a better pure RB than Foster? I don't know about that.

Sick of these injury concerns, man.

[Roy P]

Originally Posted by barrett

Where are you getting this from? You are the only one I've ever heard that from.

I would agree with this assessment. If given the opportunity, I believe Tate could perform better than Foster in terms of ypc. The Texans thought so too, when they drafted Tate in the 2nd round, before Foster became the Man when Tate was injured. After Foster's performance, the safe bet was to keep things status quo with the 'proven' performer. It's a nice problem to have (having two great RBs) especially when that position has a high risk for injury. If Tate improves on his pass protection and can prove to be a threat receiving the ball, I'd imagine his touches would increase and Foster's work load could decrease.

[barrett]

Originally Posted by Roy P

I would agree with this assessment. If given the opportunity, I believe Tate could perform better than Foster in terms of ypc. The Texans thought so too, when they drafted Tate in the 2nd round, before Foster became the Man when Tate was injured. After Foster's performance, the safe bet was to keep things status quo with the 'proven' performer. It's a nice problem to have (having two great RBs) especially when that position has a high risk for injury. If Tate improves on his pass protection and can prove to be a threat receiving the ball, I'd imagine his touches would increase and Foster's work load could decrease.

Are you seriously claiming that the Texans drafting Tate 3 years ago has some relevance on who is better? I think the contract they gave Foster unequivocally proves who they think is better.

Foster is head and shoulders above Tate in almost every possible area of playing RB in the NFL.

As a pure runner he is far better in short yardage and as a big play threat. Then you add in the night and day differences in the passing game. Tate is a very good backup RB and could be a very good starter in the right offense and with the right 2nd back paired with him to cover where he lacks. Foster is likely the best RB in the NFL. Basing it on YPC is like claiming Jacoby Jones is better than Andre Johnson since he had a higher average last year.

[Roy P]

I am saying that Tate would gain more yards than Foster if given the same number of carries. Foster obviously does other things better than Tate which is why he was rewarded with his contract. Playing RB is more than simply running with the ball after taking a hand-off. We shall see how quickly Foster's knee heals, I'm sure he doesn't want to lose his job by giving Tate an extended look.

[barrett]

Originally Posted by Roy P

I am saying that Tate would gain more yards than Foster if given the same number of carries. Foster obviously does other things better than Tate which is why he was rewarded with his contract. Playing RB is more than simply running with the ball after taking a hand-off. We shall see how quickly Foster's knee heals, I'm sure he doesn't want to lose his job by giving Tate an extended look.

I am saying he wouldn't. We aren't talking about the draft and projecting players or 3 year old draft grades. We are talking about actual production for guys who have been in the NFL for multiple years. One guys is among the best in the NFL and the other guy is a great backup.

YPC on limited carries does not translate to starting. If Tate was asked to run in short yardage (something he would have to do to get equal carries) his YPA would immediately go down because there are fewer yards to be gained. Every time Foster gets a 1 yard TD or first down his average drops even though it is a highly successful play. YPA is extremely deceptive for a backup RB who only runs on 1st and 2nd down and only between the 20s (both scenarios that result in higher YPA no matter who the RB is). Notice that Tate's YPA was far higher in games Foster played than when Foster sat.

[Roy P]

Then we have a difference of opinion. I am not making my argument based upon past projections or stats. To be honest, I'd have to look up what their ypc stats are. You make a good point that goal line runs that start at the 3 yard line would decrease Tate's average. What I see on the field is that Tate gets more out of a play. I then project that over the course of a season, he'd gain more yards if he were getting the carries that Foster had, thus making his ypc higher. I think you are assuming that I am utilizing his current ypc & simply multiplying that by more carries to come to my conclusion. In this instance, I'm just using my eyeballs and not crunching numbers. (I know that's not my usual methodology.)