Brandon Bolden

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

    Brandon Bolden

    Call me crazy, but I think this guy makes the team. To me he has the quickness we need for a guy that weighs 220 pounds. I wasn't all that impressed watching Blount lumbering along on a broken play against preseason tackling - if the guy can do that during the regular season, fine, but I just can't picture that. Bolden - while getting nowhere near the yardage - looked quicker, lower and more powerful to me.

    This is a big week for Bolden, if he turns in a favorable week of practice against Tampa and then follows it up in the game, I think Blount will be out. A couple of things on Blount...his face looks so fat that it barely fits in his helmet, he can't catch, he runs upright and for a guy that big he doesn't run with power. I can't see Belichick falling for a power back that tries to run like a scat back.

    I could be wrong (maybe they think Bolden is too much like Ridley, or his suspension last year still weighs heavily in many different ways), but I just can't picture a upright Blount running into the teeth of a defense when it matters and having it turn out ok. You can also add in the fact that Blount does have a little history and Belichick may be looking to rid the team of guys like that.

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

    Re: Brandon Bolden

    I sorta agree. I wasn't as high on Blount after the game as everyone else.

    He certainly did some good things, but his success seemed a bit flukey. His overall running style wasn't terribly impressive. We'll see. 

    _________________

    Let's go Pats!

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

    Re: Brandon Bolden

    I can't make a call yet.  It's a good competition.

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

    Re: Brandon Bolden

    In response to dreighver's comment:

    I sorta agree. I wasn't as high on Blount after the game as everyone else.

    He certainly did some good things, but his success seemed a bit flukey. His overall running style wasn't terribly impressive. We'll see. 

    _________________

    Let's go Pats!



    When he made that run across the grain, the first thing I thought was...who is this rookie doing something like this? Then I was like, well it worked, but I became less impressed as the guy was lumbering down the field.

    I need to see more from the both of them, but I'm leaning towards a guy that is big, but quicker.

     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from tenace4life. Show tenace4life's posts

    Re: Brandon Bolden

    Blount does have a 1,000 yard season . . . he is a pretty darn good runner!  I see Bolden making the team because he does have more speed, can play special teams (although he did make a major blunder in the 1st pre-season game) and he can catch the ball out in the flat. I think they keep 5 running backs . . . I'd certainly keep 5 before I'd keep Tebow as the 53rd guy!

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from digger0862. Show digger0862's posts

    Re: Brandon Bolden

    The Blount play was fun to watch but in the regular season that play gets blown up for a loss and then Blount gets yelled at.

    Injuries will probably sort out the running back situation.

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

    Re: Brandon Bolden

    Not sure you can have 5 rbs and 3qbs..

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

    Re: Brandon Bolden

    In response to mthurl's comment:

    Call me crazy, but I think this guy makes the team. To me he has the quickness we need for a guy that weighs 220 pounds. I wasn't all that impressed watching Blount lumbering along on a broken play against preseason tackling - if the guy can do that during the regular season, fine, but I just can't picture that. Bolden - while getting nowhere near the yardage - looked quicker, lower and more powerful to me.

    This is a big week for Bolden, if he turns in a favorable week of practice against Tampa and then follows it up in the game, I think Blount will be out. A couple of things on Blount...his face looks so fat that it barely fits in his helmet, he can't catch, he runs upright and for a guy that big he doesn't run with power. I can't see Belichick falling for a power back that tries to run like a scat back.

    I could be wrong (maybe they think Bolden is too much like Ridley, or his suspension last year still weighs heavily in many different ways), but I just can't picture a upright Blount running into the teeth of a defense when it matters and having it turn out ok. You can also add in the fact that Blount does have a little history and Belichick may be looking to rid the team of guys like that.

         Don't think you're crazy at all. In fact, I think BB would be crazy to cut a young talent like Bolden. Every year, RBs get nicked up. I see BB keeping five RBs, Ridley, Vereen, Blount, Washington, and Boldin. Vereen is going to be used more as a receiver than a RB. I expect the Pats to run the ball 50% of the time, this year. Keep in mind that Bolden is also a good special teams' player. 
        

     

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from seattlepat70. Show seattlepat70's posts

    Re: Brandon Bolden

    In response to HOTBLITZ's comment:

    Not sure you can have 5 rbs and 3qbs..



    I definitely would not want that. Carry 2 QBs. Pick up a third if an injury happens. RBs? I don't see the point of carrying both Blount and Bolden. If Pats plan to grind it out on the ground, better to have additional OLmen than have a fifth RB. OLmen are the ones who will get dinged up.

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

    Re: Brandon Bolden


    All I can say is if we do keep 5 running backs, the problem is only one of them can catch. And that guy gets hurt a lot. So we would have 3 runners with similar skill sets and another guy as your returner - and I must say Washington should be more than that - what is his deal..why isn't this guy a third down back too? I mean if he can field punts and kickoffs, you would think he can catch passes, especially with his added dimension of quickness.

    Ridley should of concentrated on pass catching this off season instead of putting on size, back in 95 we had a runner who you wouldn't think could catch passes (Leroy Thompson...I think) and it wasn't like he was flanked out wide making over the shoulder grabs for touchdowns, but he could run five yards, turn around and get us some relief. Ridley needs to do that - Thompson helped out so much on third downs when everything else was covered...Bledsoe would just dump it down to him when he was in trouble. 

    And Ridley is a much better runner than Thompson ever was.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from TexasPat. Show TexasPat's posts

    Re: Brandon Bolden

    In response to mthurl's comment:


    All I can say is if we do keep 5 running backs, the problem is only one of them can catch. And that guy gets hurt a lot. So we would have 3 runners with similar skill sets and another guy as your returner - and I must say Washington should be more than that - what is his deal..why isn't this guy a third down back too? I mean if he can field punts and kickoffs, you would think he can catch passes, especially with his added dimension of quickness.

    Ridley should of concentrated on pass catching this off season instead of putting on size, back in 95 we had a runner who you wouldn't think could catch passes (Leroy Thompson...I think) and it wasn't like he was flanked out wide making over the shoulder grabs for touchdowns, but he could run five yards, turn around and get us some relief. Ridley needs to do that - Thompson helped out so much on third downs when everything else was covered...Bledsoe would just dump it down to him when he was in trouble. 

    And Ridley is a much better runner than Thompson ever was.



    I think you're selling their RBs short. Vereen isn't the only one that can catch the ball coming out of the backfield. He's just the best of the five at it...and a potential deep threat. I say keep all five, and ground and pound. Fresh legs at RB really make a difference, particularly in the 4th quarter of games, and in the second half of the season, when it starts getting cold. Remember, the SB is being played outdoors in NY, this year.

     

     

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from rkarp. Show rkarp's posts

    Re: Brandon Bolden


    I dont think Bolden has to prove anything to the staff. They know him, know what he can do, and like him. It is on Blount to either pass over him on the depth chart, or on the Pats to keep 5. I agree that we do not see Bolden, Blount and TT on the team. 2 of them make it. The question should be, who has shown more, Blount or TT? At this point I think TT has.

    Pats may open with 7 OL...but I think that is light, and an 8th will be on the team in short time. Have to also see when Connolly is ready. Not sure he needs a ton of reps, but would like to see him in at least one preseason game.

    looks like Waters is signing with the Cowboys and playing THIS WEEK. so much for practice, and knocking off the rust.

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

    Re: Brandon Bolden

     

    Belichick almost always keeps 16 offensive skills players (QB, RB, FB, TE, WR).   I think we have a minimum of 5 receivers (including Slater), 3 TEs, 4 RB/FB, and 2 QB.  So there are likely two "open" slots for extra backs, TEs, QBs, and WRs. 

     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from Philskiw1. Show Philskiw1's posts

    Re: Brandon Bolden

    I still think once we find/have an established FB we start with 6 till Gronk gets back. 

     

     

    Now you got the easy part done telling me about it.

    Does that handshaped bruise on your back hurt?

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

    Re: Brandon Bolden

    In response to TexasPat's comment:

    In response to mthurl's comment:

     


    All I can say is if we do keep 5 running backs, the problem is only one of them can catch. And that guy gets hurt a lot. So we would have 3 runners with similar skill sets and another guy as your returner - and I must say Washington should be more than that - what is his deal..why isn't this guy a third down back too? I mean if he can field punts and kickoffs, you would think he can catch passes, especially with his added dimension of quickness.

    Ridley should of concentrated on pass catching this off season instead of putting on size, back in 95 we had a runner who you wouldn't think could catch passes (Leroy Thompson...I think) and it wasn't like he was flanked out wide making over the shoulder grabs for touchdowns, but he could run five yards, turn around and get us some relief. Ridley needs to do that - Thompson helped out so much on third downs when everything else was covered...Bledsoe would just dump it down to him when he was in trouble. 

    And Ridley is a much better runner than Thompson ever was.

     



    I think you're selling their RBs short. Vereen isn't the only one that can catch the ball coming out of the backfield. He's just the best of the five at it...and a potential deep threat. I say keep all five, and ground and pound. Fresh legs at RB really make a difference, particularly in the 4th quarter of games, and in the second half of the season, when it starts getting cold. Remember, the SB is being played outdoors in NY, this year.

     

     

     




    Do you think Bolden or Ridley can catch say, 25-30 passes? Maybe they can, if so that would be huge because all of the sudden the defense would have to think a little when these guys came in. Put them in a two back set and have one of them go out to catch a pass - if these two can catch it would make this offense so diverse - it could change things again...like when we kind of revolutionized the tight end position in our offense.

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

    Re: Brandon Bolden

     

    Bolden actually seems to have decent hands--better than Ridley's.  But I think Ridley is the better runner.  Belichick has run mostly one-back sets recently, except near the goal line or in short yardage situations.  We'll see if he decides to go two-back (outside of short yardage), but I kind of doubt it if he's using two TEs, since that leaves only one WR on the field. 

     

     

     

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from rkarp. Show rkarp's posts

    Re: Brandon Bolden

    assuming health, Ridley and Vareen will see 70-75% of the snaps. So ST will play an important role in roster management. Bolden has shown he can play all 4 ST's, while Blount is a weakness playing ST's..

     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from portfolio1. Show portfolio1's posts

    Re: Brandon Bolden

    In response to mthurl's comment:

    Call me crazy, but I think this guy makes the team. To me he has the quickness we need for a guy that weighs 220 pounds. I wasn't all that impressed watching Blount lumbering along on a broken play against preseason tackling - if the guy can do that during the regular season, fine, but I just can't picture that. Bolden - while getting nowhere near the yardage - looked quicker, lower and more powerful to me.

    This is a big week for Bolden, if he turns in a favorable week of practice against Tampa and then follows it up in the game, I think Blount will be out. A couple of things on Blount...his face looks so fat that it barely fits in his helmet, he can't catch, he runs upright and for a guy that big he doesn't run with power. I can't see Belichick falling for a power back that tries to run like a scat back.

    I could be wrong (maybe they think Bolden is too much like Ridley, or his suspension last year still weighs heavily in many different ways), but I just can't picture a upright Blount running into the teeth of a defense when it matters and having it turn out ok. You can also add in the fact that Blount does have a little history and Belichick may be looking to rid the team of guys like that.



    I am not a Blount fan and have thought Bolden would be ahead of him in the depth chart.

    BUT - size is not what makes a back a power back. It is power. Blount does not run with power. He is a bit odd, hard to categorize. I agree that in a game against a decent team during the regular season he doesnt break that big run. But he has had some success running his style.

    The value he has on this team is that if the D does not respect the run at all he can make them pay. That is in fact the sort of thing that will help our passing game. It is the ability to break runs that will force a D to be honest... or at least more honest.

    At this point I think Blount has a real chance to make the team. I am surprised. But it is early yet. Bolden on the other hand cannot make mistakes like running into the punter. He needs to up his total package. I think he can do it.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from nyjetssuc. Show nyjetssuc's posts

    Re: Brandon Bolden


    Agree with the small liklihood that if there are 3 QBs there won't be 5 RBs...that being said, it is the NFL and it is the survival of the fittest...let the best man win.

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: Brandon Bolden

    In response to portfolio1's comment:

    In response to mthurl's comment:

     

    Call me crazy, but I think this guy makes the team. To me he has the quickness we need for a guy that weighs 220 pounds. I wasn't all that impressed watching Blount lumbering along on a broken play against preseason tackling - if the guy can do that during the regular season, fine, but I just can't picture that. Bolden - while getting nowhere near the yardage - looked quicker, lower and more powerful to me.

    This is a big week for Bolden, if he turns in a favorable week of practice against Tampa and then follows it up in the game, I think Blount will be out. A couple of things on Blount...his face looks so fat that it barely fits in his helmet, he can't catch, he runs upright and for a guy that big he doesn't run with power. I can't see Belichick falling for a power back that tries to run like a scat back.

    I could be wrong (maybe they think Bolden is too much like Ridley, or his suspension last year still weighs heavily in many different ways), but I just can't picture a upright Blount running into the teeth of a defense when it matters and having it turn out ok. You can also add in the fact that Blount does have a little history and Belichick may be looking to rid the team of guys like that.

     



    I am not a Blount fan and have thought Bolden would be ahead of him in the depth chart.

     

    BUT - size is not what makes a back a power back. It is power. Blount does not run with power. He is a bit odd, hard to categorize. I agree that in a game against a decent team during the regular season he doesnt break that big run. But he has had some success running his style.

    The value he has on this team is that if the D does not respect the run at all he can make them pay. That is in fact the sort of thing that will help our passing game. It is the ability to break runs that will force a D to be honest... or at least more honest.

    At this point I think Blount has a real chance to make the team. I am surprised. But it is early yet. Bolden on the other hand cannot make mistakes like running into the punter. He needs to up his total package. I think he can do it.



    You're right, he has had some success running with his style....and that's a good way to put it..."his style". I guess I'm not used to that type of style, I don't see it often. I'm trying to think of who he reminds me of, I'd say Bettis, but he ran lower and with more power, but he had that little bit of finesse in his running. We had a guy back in the 80's from Arizona State that was bigger and had that upright style, but he was more a power guy. Eddie George was straight up, but he was all power...Dillon was upright, but he was the most violent runner I've ever seen...never seen a guy that looked like he wanted to beat the guys who were tackling him (I mean beat them with his fists). I once saw Dillon throw a forearm so hard into a guy's head that I thought he killed him.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share