Benny watch continues.

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Benny watch continues.

    Isn't the issue here really that a few posters have been making the claim that if we had run Benny more last year (and forced Brady to pass less) we would have gone 19-0 rather than 15-4? Others (me included) are a bit skeptical that taking the ball out of Brady's hands and giving it to BJGE would have resulted in 19-0.  In fact, we think the odds are fairly high that such a strategy could just as easily resulted in 9-7.

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

    Re: Benny watch continues.

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Isn't the issue here really that a few posters have been making the claim that if we had run Benny more last year (and forced Brady to pass less) we would have gone 19-0 rather than 15-4? Others (me included) are a bit skeptical that taking the ball out of Brady's hands and giving it to BJGE would have resulted in 19-0.  In fact, we think the odds are fairly high that such a strategy could just as easily resulted in 9-7.

    [/QUOTE]

    I wasn't one of the guys, but I probably know who you are talking about.  My thoughts:

    1. Interesting you mention 9-7.  That happened to be the Giants regular season record last year.

    2. The Pats will not hoist a Lombardi trophy without being able to run the ball well.  That is especially true now.  The list of teams with D's able to make Brady look mediocre is growing.  We need to have an offense that can get first downs when Brady is not performing well.  Yes, we had a good record last year.  However, the Ravens and Giants rendered Brady pretty average.  Being just a little more committed (and successful) to the run might have been the difference between winnning and losing the SB.  If only the Pats could have gotten a first down when they really needed it near the end of the game.

    3. All that said, I'm not willing to say that Benny could have gotten us there.  I liked him.  He's a decent back.  Don't know he would have been that good though.

    So playing the devil's advocate...maybe our record would have been worse but we'd be SB champs.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Benny watch continues.

    Well, yes, but then again right before the infamous Welker drop, we lined up in I formation with an extra tackle and a TE and lost a yard. The real problem there wasn't even Benny, it was the fact that our O-line was getting beat both in the run and the pass.  Against the Giants in both super bowls that's been the real problem.  Their D line eats our O line for lunch.  When that happens you can't run or pass well.  Line play doesn't get the attention, but that's the real reason we lost to the Giants both times.

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

    Re: Benny watch continues.

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Well, yes, but then again right before the infamous Welker drop, we lined up in I formation with an extra tackle and a TE and lost a yard. The real problem there wasn't even Benny, it was the fact that our O-line was getting beat both in the run and the pass.  Against the Giants in both super bowls that's been the real problem.  Their D line eats our O line for lunch.  When that happens you can't run or pass well.  Line play doesn't get the attention, but that's the real reason we lost to the Giants both times.

    [/QUOTE]

    a truer thing has not been stated here. Both Giant superbowls were offensive line debacles (including horrible sacks on the final drive in almost identical situations).

     
  5. This post has been removed.

     
  6. This post has been removed.

     
  7. This post has been removed.

     
  8. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Benny watch continues.

    In response to JintsFan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DelGriffith's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to DelGriffith's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Right, and he was replaceable, but at least Weis used him. That's sort of the point here.  BJGE wasn't a workhorse for this team in 2010?  Maybe  he would have been a SB champ if a certain #12 didn't make a few huge mistakes?

    And you're talking to a Ridley fan as well here.    BB replaces backs all the time.

    [/QUOTE]


    Maybe he wouldn't have even sniffed a SB without #12. Ever think of that?

    [/QUOTE]


    Yeah, I did. Brady said he sucked in the AFC Title game and he was correct. God bless Spikes and Sterling Moore. 

    [/QUOTE]

    without brady u win 8 games a year...and dont bring up cassel that was a one shot deal b/c no one ever saw him play and ur cupcake schedule

    [/QUOTE]


    That 2008 schedule was a marginal QB's dream. The previously 1 -15 Dolphins went 11 -5 against it.

     

    The only other time Cassel did anything was 2010, another joke schedule.

     

    As I predicted with Cassel - he is no more than a pretty good backup.

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

    Re: Benny watch continues.

    Is there another poster here who spends more time patting themselves on the back than you?

     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from glenr. Show glenr's posts

    Re: Benny watch continues.

    In response to JintsFan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to glenr's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Is there another poster here who spends more time patting themselves on the back than you?

    [/QUOTE]


    Yeah your buddy (alter ego?) Queenie is the king of self-love

    [/QUOTE]


    Who the F are you talking about troll?

     

    Funny how Babe's best friends here are the trolls.

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from CablesWyndBairn. Show CablesWyndBairn's posts

    Re: Benny watch continues.

    Not to belabour the point about offensive balance, but the Pats have had two games already this year where they've had more runs than passes.  They did that only 3 times all of last year.  It may be personnel-related or it may be a change in offensive philosophy behind it.  The Bills game showed me that they are determined to stick with the run game, being down 21-7 and not panicking.  We may need to see the whole season  play out to determine if the run/pass balance was more due week-to-week game planning or an overall change in philosophy. 

    I hate looking at pure numbers (attempts) to determine whether they're more committed to the run game, but this team seems to be more determined to be effective running the ball and being more multi-faceted. 

    Time will tell. 

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from tcal2-. Show tcal2-'s posts

    Re: Benny watch continues.

    Ouch, this looks ugly but you can see Benny's the 39th ranked RB in terms of WPA @ 0.09

    I didn't even know there were 39 teams.

     

    Click on the table headers to sort. Stats are explained at the Advanced NFL Stats glossary page. Rank Player Team G WPA EPA WPA/G EPA/P SR(%) Att Yds YPC RushTDs Rec RecYds RecTDs 1 27-R.Rice BLT 4 0.52 6.5 0.13 0.07 43.3 64 317 5.0 3 22 174 0 2 24-M.Lynch SEA 4 0.33 2.0 0.08 0.02 46.1 92 423 4.6 2 7 50 0 3 28-C.Spiller BUF 4 0.30 16.7 0.08 0.32 49.1 41 341 8.3 3 9 119 1 4 44-B.Tate HST 4 0.30 2.4 0.08 0.06 51.3 30 117 3.9 2 9 48 0 5 30-K.Smith DET 2 0.25 0.9 0.13 0.02 38.5 29 115 4.0 1 6 46 1 6 35-A.Brown NYG 3 0.23 6.1 0.08 0.12 44.9 38 198 5.2 3 6 40 0 7 32-Jz.Rodgers ATL 4 0.21 -1.6 0.05 -0.04 39.5 26 75 2.9 0 11 88 1 8 33-M.Turner ATL 4 0.20 4.9 0.05 0.08 35.9 55 257 4.7 2 6 69 1 9 22-M.Forte CHI 3 0.20 4.8 0.07 0.10 35.4 36 163 4.5 1 8 86 0 10 22-R.Bush MIA 4 0.18 6.0 0.05 0.07 41.7 67 369 5.5 2 10 72 0 11 44-J.Battle SD 3 0.17 11.9 0.06 0.32 51.4 32 163 5.1 3 4 42 1 12 22-S.Ridley NE 4 0.13 7.5 0.03 0.09 48.8 74 339 4.6 3 5 51 0 13 28-J.Stewart CAR 2 0.13 4.5 0.07 0.20 52.2 21 91 4.3 0 2 25 1 14 31-D.Brown IND 3 0.12 -4.7 0.04 -0.10 27.7 43 155 3.6 1 1 39 0 15 32-K.Hunter SF 4 0.11 4.2 0.03 0.14 50.0 26 120 4.6 1 3 23 0 16 25-J.Charles KC 4 0.11 4.9 0.03 0.06 42.0 72 415 5.8 2 12 97 1 17 28-A.Peterson MIN 4 0.10 -0.3 0.03 0.00 39.8 79 332 4.2 2 10 64 0 18 33-T.Richardson CLV 4 0.08 -5.8 0.02 -0.07 39.8 64 222 3.5 3 15 122 1 19 39-D.Woodhead NE 4 0.06 1.9 0.02 0.06 37.1 29 72 2.5 1 4 44 1 20 23-P.Thomas NO 4 0.05 2.4 0.01 0.05 37.8 28 152 5.4 0 11 99 0 21 29-M.Bush CHI 4 0.04 0.6 0.01 0.01 40.7 54 180 3.3 3 3 26 0 22 26-D.Richardson SL 4 0.04 0.5 0.01 0.01 40.0 27 135 5.0 0 5 36 0 23 23-A.Foster HST 4 0.01 -7.9 0.00 -0.07 39.3 103 380 3.7 4 9 44 1 24 36-C.Brinkley SD 3 0.00 -5.3 0.00 -0.12 34.9 29 60 2.1 0 9 63 0 25 34-D.Williams CAR 4 0.00 2.1 0.00 0.05 44.7 42 167 4.0 2 4 30 0 26 46-A.Morris WAS 3 -0.02 0.0 -0.01 0.00 32.4 65 298 4.6 3 1 -4 0 27 20-T.Choice BUF 4 -0.02 -2.9 -0.01 -0.07 37.2 34 145 4.3 0 3 9 0 28 23-S.Greene NYJ 4 -0.02 -6.9 -0.01 -0.10 29.6 68 191 2.8 1 2 9 0 29 28-M.Ingram NO 4 -0.04 -2.8 -0.01 -0.08 28.6 32 90 2.8 1 1 -1 0 30 23-W.McGahee DEN 4 -0.05 6.2 -0.01 0.08 46.3 69 325 4.7 3 9 40 0 31 27-J.Dwyer PIT 3 -0.05 -7.3 -0.02 -0.23 34.4 24 70 2.9 0 4 24 0 32 44-A.Bradshaw NYG 3 -0.05 4.1 -0.02 0.10 42.9 35 133 3.8 1 5 53 0 33 24-R.Mathews SD 2 -0.05 -2.4 -0.03 -0.07 58.8 24 105 4.4 0 7 53 0 34 29-D.Murray DAL 4 -0.06 -7.5 -0.02 -0.09 38.1 61 237 3.9 1 16 114 0 35 32-T.Gerhart MIN 4 -0.06 -7.8 -0.02 -0.25 29.0 22 59 2.7 0 6 53 0 36 26-C.Wells ARZ 3 -0.06 -3.4 -0.02 -0.11 30.0 29 76 2.6 0 1 24 0 37 29-B.Powell NYJ 4 -0.06 -2.1 -0.02 -0.06 37.8 26 99 3.8 0 3 40 0 38 33-D.Thomas MIA 3 -0.08 -6.9 -0.03 -0.22 34.4 26 84 3.2 1 3 49 0 39 42-B.Green-Ellis CIN 4 -0.09 -9.6 -0.02 -0.10 33.7 82 286 3.5 2 6 46 0 40 25-M.Leshoure DET 2 -0.11 -9.6  

     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from pezz4pats. Show pezz4pats's posts

    Re: Benny watch continues.

    In response to DelGriffith's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Did you see yesterday's game? No, you didn't.  If we had done that in the SB, NE blows out the Giants.  But, Brady wanted to throw with Woodhead as the lead back.

    Check the data, Pezzy.  You've been exposed again by facts. 

    All we heard all week long is how great the Bills pass rush is. LMAO

    Do you get it yet?

    [/QUOTE]
    What the He11 are you talking about with your psycho self.  Did the Pats have 3 Te's during the SB?  No they did not.  The Pats did what they did sunday because of the 2 & 3 TE sets.

    They are usings the TE's to block for the rushers.  Do you watch any games? 

    Brady didn't want to throw to Woody, you nut job, that is who they put out there and your lover couldn't even get a yard before the Welker drop, at the end of the game when they needed it most. So stop with the BS, it's older than Moses. 

    BJGE is a back up and the 31st ranked D that couldn't even do the only thing they did well all freakin year, lost the SB.  You need to look at the facts, little boy or girl, which ever.

    Please do us all a favor and become cincy fan, they're more your speed.  Loser

    Get your sick azz to a doctor, preferably a psych.

     

Share