Comparing Woodhead to Faulk

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

    Comparing Woodhead to Faulk

    In the Woodhead article today, comments section, someone said it was foolish to compare him to Kevin Faulk. Now, I loved Faulk, but here goes:

    In their first 3 years with the Pats, Woodhead has had

    more yards from scrimmage (1199 vs 966 rushing, 982 vs 752 receiving),

    more yds per game (48.5-38.2)

    more touchdowns (14-10)

    higher yds per carry (4.8-3.5) and

    per reception (10.7-8.1).

    Faulk did it for longer, so far, and I loved his contributions, but I think the comparison is valid. Am I saying Woodhead is better? No, not yet anyway. But I love what he does, too.


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

    Re: Comparing Woodhead to Faulk

    I agree, right now Woodhead is filling the role well. But there is one thing stats don't measure. When you absolutely needed the first Faulk somehow always found the way to get it. Now Woodhead also does it very well but I've seen Woodhead drop balls that Faulk never would have. Still Woodhead has earned the comparison and it's well worth dicussing becuase Woodhead has better numbers but Faulk had a slightly better X-factor quality on 3rd downs

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from TFB12. Show TFB12's posts

    Re: Comparing Woodhead to Faulk

    Great thread!

    Kevin Faulk was mr dependable!  Woodhead is playing that role well, not at Faulk status yet, but not far behind. 

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

    Re: Comparing Woodhead to Faulk

    In response to PatsEng's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I agree, right now Woodhead is filling the role well. But there is one thing stats don't measure. When you absolutely needed the first Faulk somehow always found the way to get it. Now Woodhead also does it very well but I've seen Woodhead drop balls that Faulk never would have. Still Woodhead has earned the comparison and it's well worth dicussing becuase Woodhead has better numbers but Faulk had a slightly better X-factor quality on 3rd downs

    [/QUOTE]


    I also don't remember Faulk getting wrecked like Woodhead did, at least twice that i seem to remember, and Faulk wasn't that much bigger.

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

    Re: Comparing Woodhead to Faulk

    In response to miSOXfan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In the Woodhead article today, comments section, someone said it was foolish to compare him to Kevin Faulk. Now, I loved Faulk, but here goes:

    In their first 3 years with the Pats, Woodhead has had

    more yards from scrimmage (1199 vs 966 rushing, 982 vs 752 receiving),

    more yds per game (48.5-38.2)

    more touchdowns (14-10)

    higher yds per carry (4.8-3.5) and

    per reception (10.7-8.1).

    Faulk did it for longer, so far, and I loved his contributions, but I think the comparison is valid. Am I saying Woodhead is better? No, not yet anyway. But I love what he does, too.


    [/QUOTE]

    One key aspect your stats do not reflect at all is pass blocking. Faulk was always very good at it. Mighty Mouse was not good at first. He has surely gotten better. But in this area not as good as Faulk.

     

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

    Re: Comparing Woodhead to Faulk

    In response to portfolio1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to miSOXfan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In the Woodhead article today, comments section, someone said it was foolish to compare him to Kevin Faulk. Now, I loved Faulk, but here goes:

    In their first 3 years with the Pats, Woodhead has had

    more yards from scrimmage (1199 vs 966 rushing, 982 vs 752 receiving),

    more yds per game (48.5-38.2)

    more touchdowns (14-10)

    higher yds per carry (4.8-3.5) and

    per reception (10.7-8.1).

    Faulk did it for longer, so far, and I loved his contributions, but I think the comparison is valid. Am I saying Woodhead is better? No, not yet anyway. But I love what he does, too.


    [/QUOTE]

    One key aspect your stats do not reflect at all is pass blocking. Faulk was always very good at it. Mighty Mouse was not good at first. He has surely gotten better. But in this area not as good as Faulk.

     

    [/QUOTE]


    Agree with you there, there are aspects that stats don't reflect.  I think Woodhead is adequate as a pass blocker, though at nearly 200 he should improve.  And he seems to get the occasional chip in there.

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

    Re: Comparing Woodhead to Faulk

    Yeah I like Woodhead but I agree with Portfolio Faulk was a great run blocker, Woody used to get run over alot. I do predict though......wait for it......Super Bowl MVP for Danny Woodhead. You heard it here first!

     
  8. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Comparing Woodhead to Faulk

    In response to ricky12684's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    be perpared for woody will be gone after this year. 

    [/QUOTE]


    Y? where is he going? has anyone thought to take away his passport?

     

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

    Re: Comparing Woodhead to Faulk

    In response to Quagmire3's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Yeah I like Woodhead but I agree with Portfolio Faulk was a great run blocker, Woody used to get run over alot. I do predict though......wait for it......Super Bowl MVP for Danny Woodhead. You heard it here first!

    [/QUOTE]


    Quag - Actually I could see Mighty Mouse making a bid for that! It wold be hard of Brady and/or Ridley have big days though.

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

    Re: Comparing Woodhead to Faulk

    In response to miSOXfan's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In the Woodhead article today, comments section, someone said it was foolish to compare him to Kevin Faulk. Now, I loved Faulk, but here goes:

    In their first 3 years with the Pats, Woodhead has had

    more yards from scrimmage (1199 vs 966 rushing, 982 vs 752 receiving),

    more yds per game (48.5-38.2)

    more touchdowns (14-10)

    higher yds per carry (4.8-3.5) and

    per reception (10.7-8.1).

    Faulk did it for longer, so far, and I loved his contributions, but I think the comparison is valid. Am I saying Woodhead is better? No, not yet anyway. But I love what he does, too.


    [/QUOTE]


    I love what Woody is doing this year but so far there is no comparison. Faulk has had too many clutch situations he has been in and performed well. Danny has come up big hasnt been asked to be that clutch guy every 3rd down like Faulk was in the past and not sure woody will be here long enough to compare but I would like to retain him. some reason BB hasnt signed him yet.  Maybe waiting for Vareen to make him redundant.

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

    Re: Comparing Woodhead to Faulk

    In response to Quagmire3's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Yeah I like Woodhead but I agree with Portfolio Faulk was a great run blocker, Woody used to get run over alot. I do predict though......wait for it......Super Bowl MVP for Danny Woodhead. You heard it here first!

    [/QUOTE]

    Damn, I didn't know Faulk blocked for himself when he was running; now that's impressive. I know you meant pass blocking but had to point that out Quag  lol

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

    Re: Comparing Woodhead to Faulk

    In response to ricky12684's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    be perpared for woody will be gone after this year. 

    [/QUOTE]

    Why do you think this? Vereen clearly isn't being used as much or in nearly as many key situations as Woodhead and Woodhead is the best pass blocker of the bunch. Actually if anything I'd be looking at Bolden. After getting caught he really hasn't been used or done very much except late in games. Clearly Bolden is in BB's dog house and might not be the player we think his is within his little helpers.

    But really they've carried 5 RB's before so carrying Woodhead, Vereen, Ridley, Bolden, and Demps moving forward wouldn't be out of the question. It also wouldn't be out of the question if they convert Demps into a WR given his speed and carry the 4 current RB's into next season 

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

    Re: Comparing Woodhead to Faulk

    I compare Woody more to a Darren Sproles, maybe a poor man's Sproles. Same size, not quite as explosive.  More explosive than Faulk, but not as big, so not necessarily as suited to blocking.  Better in space.  Different guys, similar role. Don't know why people talk about replacing him all the time, I think he's an asset.

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

    Re: Comparing Woodhead to Faulk

    I believe Faulk had a Fumbling issue early on.  I think Head has been very good at securing the ball (without actually looking up the numbers).

    Thanks Rex!!

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

    Re: Comparing Woodhead to Faulk

    What makes Woody great is the Jets just gave him away... Also his name.

     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from 347pg. Show 347pg's posts

    Re: Comparing Woodhead to Faulk

    Cue the TFB12 Woody Tree Stump Helmet pic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Never gets old!

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

    Re: Comparing Woodhead to Faulk

    Loved Faulk but Woodhead sems to be headed to whole 'nother level with what he does.

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

    Re: Comparing Woodhead to Faulk

    I think Woody has had a great year this year . . . and he was great in 2010.  Last year he was good, but compared to this year and 2010, 2011 was a bit of a down year for him in my opinion.  Overall, I'd say Faulk had better skills (running, receiving, and blocking), but Woody isn't far behind and has been an important contributor in this offense.  

    It still surprises me how many fans seem to dislike it when the Pats sub in Woodhead.  I guess it relates to the hatred of some fans for the shotgun . . . but both Woodhead and the spread formations he tends to be used in are important and highly effective components of the offense.  

    Nice to see a thread giving Woodhead the appreciation he deserves.  Maybe we can start one on the benefits of the shotgun too :-)

     

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

    Re: Comparing Woodhead to Faulk

    Woodhead is a good player and he helps this team, but I think Faulk was almost special catching the ball and made more difficult catches regularly. How many times did we see Faulk lined up wide and actually catch the thing like a reciever would? Or catch a over the shoulder fade in the endzone? I don't see Woodhead doing those things yet...Faulk was real good like that..added another dimension to the offense.  

     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Comparing Woodhead to Faulk

    In response to PatsEng's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I agree, right now Woodhead is filling the role well. But there is one thing stats don't measure. When you absolutely needed the first Faulk somehow always found the way to get it. Now Woodhead also does it very well but I've seen Woodhead drop balls that Faulk never would have. Still Woodhead has earned the comparison and it's well worth dicussing becuase Woodhead has better numbers but Faulk had a slightly better X-factor quality on 3rd downs

    [/QUOTE]

    +1

    I hate the term "clutch", but I feel like Faulk was that. 

    Also, lest we forget, Faulk was an undeafeatable chip blocker. Really the best I can recall seeing. 

    Woodhead is the best on the team, Ridley is terrible at it, despite his size. 

    But no one is a lock on a chip like Faulk was. 

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

    Re: Comparing Woodhead to Faulk

    Woody is showing flashes of Faulk's dependability in the passing game. I would say he has stepped up quite a bit after a rather disappointing year last season.

     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from krismk. Show krismk's posts

    Re: Comparing Woodhead to Faulk

    I remember the game (2002?) last game of the season at home against the Zach Thomas/ Jason Taylor Fins, and the Pats were getting their butts kicked.  They went to Faulk in the second half on runs and dump offs, and he single-handedly squished the fish...I think he had 200 combined, most in the second half.

     

    The Pats didn't make the playoffs despite the win. but it was a spectacular single effort.

     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from Low-FB-IQ. Show Low-FB-IQ's posts

    Re: Comparing Woodhead to Faulk

    People focus on the last thing they saw or remember in a game or season or look back on a few amazing plays in a career and that perceived legend then becomes a players career in the mind of the passionate fan.

     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from krismk. Show krismk's posts

    Re: Comparing Woodhead to Faulk

    True enough...but other people look at career or season stats, and miss the performances that were above average, and positively affected the outcome of a game.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share