Danny Woodhead

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Bisson1. Show Bisson1's posts

    Danny Woodhead

    I like him as a role player, but think he was involved in way too many plays on Sunday night. In fact, the play calling has been a bit strange so far this year - I expected the return of McDaniels to benefit the offense. Hopefully they get it together soon.

     

    Would rather see Ridley in there instead of Woodhead.

     

    Also, where has Shane Vereen gone?

     
  2. This post has been removed.

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from ma6dragon9. Show ma6dragon9's posts

    Re: Danny Woodhead

    Shane Vereen is in the same place he's been since they drafted him: trainer's room.

    I, too, would like to see Ridley more. I asked the same question and the response I got, and tend to agree with, is he probably is not very good at picking up the blitz right now. In spite of his size, Woodhead does actually do a good job. He almost always reads it correctly, and fills the correct hole (...pfffffff! Just killed my train of thought).

     
  4. This post has been removed.

     
  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. This post has been removed.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from ma6dragon9. Show ma6dragon9's posts

    Re: Danny Woodhead

    They're still waiting for McKnight to develop into a playmaker. I can see why they ditched Woodhead for him. He's averaging a solid 12.5 yards per GAME over his 2+ year career.

    At least thay have QB figured out...

    and WR...

    And CB beyond Revis...

    Well, at least they have a core of solid, veteran leadership...

    Solid coaching...

    A dependable GM restocking the team yearly...

    ...

    ...

    ...

     

     
  11. This post has been removed.

     
  12. This post has been removed.

     
  13. This post has been removed.

     
  14. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Danny Woodhead

    In response to Bisson1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I like him as a role player, but think he was involved in way too many plays on Sunday night. In fact, the play calling has been a bit strange so far this year - I expected the return of McDaniels to benefit the offense. Hopefully they get it together soon.

     

    Would rather see Ridley in there instead of Woodhead.

     

    Also, where has Shane Vereen gone?

    [/QUOTE]


    Exactly, I love him as a role player, perfect for him. The problem is thinking he can do his thing more often, which he can't. So as when my wife cooks a pan of brownies I can't stop eating them until I'm ill, the Pats (someone) can't leave Woodhead in the pan for the times when his role would be just the right portion.

    I'm thinking this will get adjusted as the season rolls along.

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

    Re: Danny Woodhead

    In response to Bisson1's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    I like him as a role player, but think he was involved in way too many plays on Sunday night. In fact, the play calling has been a bit strange so far this year - I expected the return of McDaniels to benefit the offense. Hopefully they get it together soon.

     

    Would rather see Ridley in there instead of Woodhead.

     

    Also, where has Shane Vereen gone?

    [/QUOTE]

    I don't understand the constant Woodhead discussion? The O line could not open holes for Ridley (2.7 UPC) against the Ravens oline. BB decided spreading the offense would be better served. Woodhead is the spread offense RB due to he is a better receiver, and better blocker. 

    The decision on what play to call from the spread is on Brady. Not the coaching staff. Brady comes to the line, reads the defense and then calls or changes the play. Woodhead running the ball was Brady's call based on the defense the Ravens were playing. 

     
  17. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Danny Woodhead

    I think he's yesterday news.

     
  19. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Danny Woodhead

    In response to rkarp's comment:
    [QUOTE]I don't understand the constant Woodhead discussion? The O line could not open holes for Ridley (2.7 UPC) against the Ravens oline. BB decided spreading the offense would be better served. Woodhead is the spread offense RB due to he is a better receiver, and better blocker. 

    The decision on what play to call from the spread is on Brady. Not the coaching staff. Brady comes to the line, reads the defense and then calls or changes the play. Woodhead running the ball was Brady's call based on the defense the Ravens were playing. [/QUOTE]


    Hey, someone who actually watches the games! Woodhead is playing for a reason.  (The coaches aren't as incompetent as the fans apparently think based on this and other threads.)  The problem I have is that Woodhead isn't all that good . . . that's why Vereen was drafted.  Unfortunately, Vereen can't seem to shake the injury bug.  

     

     
  21. This post has been removed.

     
  22. This post has been removed.

     
  23. This post has been removed.

     
  24. This post has been removed.

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

    Re: Danny Woodhead

    When our offensive line starts working as a cohesive unit on every play, and they're not there yet but improving, all of our runningbacks will be better off.  Nobody will have success running on the Ravens now even though they had a slow start, they're massive inside and their linebackers fly to the ball.  

    BB will play a smashmouth gameplan against them in the playoff's when there's a reason to risk injury or anything for a win... I hope?

     

     

     

Share