Foster vs. Tate

[HPF Bob]

The big problem with Foster is a lack of elite speed. But Terrell Davis lacked elite speed and he was pretty good. I think Tate can get from point A to point B a little faster than Foster but I think Foster does a better job of getting one or two more yards out of a run when he meets a defender.

I think, in today's NFL, you need two very good backs so I'm happy we have both.

[popanot]

I love Tate, but to say he's better than Foster is just crazy, IMO. Even if we just use the eyeball methodology, I have yet to see Tate shaking and running around defenders for a long TD run where you say, wow, this guy's a stud. And he's had opportunities. Foster has had multiple runs like that. It still amazes me today how people are just waiting for Foster to fail, or at minimal, under-value his talent. Maybe it's the UDFA thing. I don't get it.

[barrett]

Originally Posted by HPF Bob

The big problem with Foster is a lack of elite speed. But Terrell Davis lacked elite speed and he was pretty good. I think Tate can get from point A to point B a little faster than Foster but I think Foster does a better job of getting one or two more yards out of a run when he meets a defender.

I think, in today's NFL, you need two very good backs so I'm happy we have both.

Foster has at least 3 TDs of 70+ yards in 2 seasons as a starter. At the RB position only mcCoy and Chris johnson (from 2010) can compare in terms of game breaking. Not to mention I can never remember him being caught from behind. He has elite RB speed.