Bedards positional ratings against the Colts. Did he watch the same game I did?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Quagmire3. Show Quagmire3's posts

    Bedards positional ratings against the Colts. Did he watch the same game I did?

    The position I take a little bit of issue with is his rating the RB's 4 out of 5. Bedard states "Thanks to some really nice work by the offensive line, the running backs didn’t have a high degree of difficulty and got what was blocked." Huh? The stats say we rushed 25 times for 115 yards, but take out the Edelman end around and that stat reads 24 for 68 yards (2.84 avg). Go one step further and take out the late 11 yard rush by Ridley and 13 yard rush by Vereen and the stats read 22 rushes for 44 yards. I know you can fit stats to fit any argument but throughout the game (mainly qtrs 1-3) it seemed like every time we tried to run, Ridley got stuffed and either lost a yard or two or had no gain. I know this is more an indictment on the OL (4.5 out of 5 from Bedard) but just dont see what Bedard saw. Before you beat me up, I still love the OL and all our backs, and am thrilled with all aspects of the game Sunday, just didnt see our RB's or OL (in the running game) playing as well as Bedard saw I guess.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from DanishPastry. Show DanishPastry's posts

    Re: Bedards positional ratings against the Colts. Did he watch the same game I did?

    I agree with you, Quagmire. I think with Mankins and Conolly out, the run blocking suffered somewhat. So it was a tough day at the office for Ridley and Vereen.

    I'm hoping to see either one or both starting guards back on thursday, and a subsequent return to form for the running game.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from ATJ. Show ATJ's posts

    Re: Bedards positional ratings against the Colts. Did he watch the same game I did?

    Thought the pass blocking was first rate, run blocking not so much.  

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from JimfromFlorida. Show JimfromFlorida's posts

    Re: Bedards positional ratings against the Colts. Did he watch the same game I did?

    I will bet in every game if you take out 3 of the longest rushes you end up with similar numbers in most games.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from Mike-J-D. Show Mike-J-D's posts

    Re: Bedards positional ratings against the Colts. Did he watch the same game I did?

    Take away all of their rushes and they would have rushed for 0 yards.  So maybe it was the worst game ever.

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from soups. Show soups's posts

    Re: Bedards positional ratings against the Colts. Did he watch the same game I did?

    The funniest part was the halftime rant by Marino, who said the Colts would come back and upset the Pats at Gillette.

    Ten minutes later the spread was 21.

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from themightypatriots. Show themightypatriots's posts

    Re: Bedards positional ratings against the Colts. Did he watch the same game I did?

    Bedard is a troll

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from TripleOG. Show TripleOG's posts

    Re: Bedards positional ratings against the Colts. Did he watch the same game I did?

    In response to Quagmire3's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    The position I take a little bit of issue with is his rating the RB's 4 out of 5. Bedard states "Thanks to some really nice work by the offensive line, the running backs didn’t have a high degree of difficulty and got what was blocked." Huh? The stats say we rushed 25 times for 115 yards, but take out the Edelman end around and that stat reads 24 for 68 yards (2.84 avg). Go one step further and take out the late 11 yard rush by Ridley and 13 yard rush by Vereen and the stats read 22 rushes for 44 yards. I know you can fit stats to fit any argument but throughout the game (mainly qtrs 1-3) it seemed like every time we tried to run, Ridley got stuffed and either lost a yard or two or had no gain. I know this is more an indictment on the OL (4.5 out of 5 from Bedard) but just dont see what Bedard saw. Before you beat me up, I still love the OL and all our backs, and am thrilled with all aspects of the game Sunday, just didnt see our RB's or OL (in the running game) playing as well as Bedard saw I guess.

    [/QUOTE]


    Also the Colts gameplanned to stop the run so give credit where its due. This is why Brady chewed them out. Some teams will choose one over the other but as long as you take advantage, whats the big deal??

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from anonymis. Show anonymis's posts

    Re: Bedards positional ratings against the Colts. Did he watch the same game I did?

    In response to DanishPastry's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I agree with you, Quagmire. I think with Mankins and Conolly out, the run blocking suffered somewhat. So it was a tough day at the office for Ridley and Vereen.

    I'm hoping to see either one or both starting guards back on thursday, and a subsequent return to form for the running game.

    [/QUOTE]

    yeah, but we still have OL like Solder and Vollmer, the TE corp to help with blocking. I'm not convinced Mankins and Connolly are a huge part of blocking for RB corp.  It was sort of an off day for the RBs.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from TripleOG. Show TripleOG's posts

    Re: Bedards positional ratings against the Colts. Did he watch the same game I did?

    In response to anonymis's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DanishPastry's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I agree with you, Quagmire. I think with Mankins and Conolly out, the run blocking suffered somewhat. So it was a tough day at the office for Ridley and Vereen.

    I'm hoping to see either one or both starting guards back on thursday, and a subsequent return to form for the running game.

    [/QUOTE]

    yeah, but we still have OL like Solder and Vollmer, the TE corp to help with blocking. I'm not convinced Mankins and Connolly are a huge part of blocking for RB corp.  It was sort of an off day for the RBs.

    [/QUOTE]


    last time Logan was out, we had one of our best day running so I concur. This was more of one of those rare times when a team chose to take away the run as opposed to Brady and lets hope that continues because that bodes well. I know our 2 SB losses were directly correlated to the Giants focusing only on # 12 because of our lack of running game. So maybe the production this year will take some pressure off of # 12

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share