In response to portfolio1's comment:
In response to BassFishingII's comment:
In response to pcmIV's comment:
Woodhead had 2 carries in the first half both of which came on the hurry up drive before the end of the half. The Pats ran 45 plays in the first half of which 19 were from the shotgun which is a hair over 42% not 90%. Outside of the last drive of the half where they ran 7 of 8 plays from the shotgun they ran 37 plays of which 12 were from the shotgun which is a hair over 32%.
So let's recap. In the first half Ridley had double digit carries of which only 1 was from the shotgun. Woodhead had 2 carries all of which were in the last drive of the half meaning he had ZERO carries before that drive. Other than that drive the Patriots ran under a third of their plays from the shotgun. Believe it or not lots of teams run their hurry up offenses at the end of halves out of the shotgun so harping on that is like harping on football 101. Even including that drive the majority of the plays run were not out of the shotgun. Just stop. You cannot win this no matter how hard you try. I can't wait to hear what new excuse you will come up with next.
Dude, you're not mentioning Vereen. Vereen and Woodhead have the same skill set and are used in the hurry ups or shotguns. I don't care who specifically it is in those formations.
We didn't run a hurry up at the end of a half. I have no issue with that at all. We started the game with it!
Why is it that our offensive gameplans are totally overthought and there is too much tinkering, with no rhythm attempted to be developed, and somehow when we lose those games people act all confused?
Why can't we just go toe to toe and just line up and get the run game established/attempt to do it in traditonal formations? What is the problem?
A hurry up or 2 minute, a shotgun spread, a read option, etc, shouldn't be a base of an offense.
That's sort of the point. You think it can be. I don't think it can be because it's not enough.
In my last post to you, I didn't even count our last drive before halftime, because I fully realize with 1:14 left at the 47, you should be using a 2 minute there.
Why are you so defensive about this anyway?
All we have to do is get back to he basics, smash mouth early, dictate and impose our will, etc. For whatever reason, we don't do that. When we do, we win.
While Vereen and Woodhead both are good 3rd down backs their styles are nothing alike and their skill sets are different. There are certain kinds of plays that Woodhead excels at and others that Vereen excels at. Plus I believe Vereen can be a feature back not wholly unlike Ray Rice (though they are also different players) while Woodhead cannot.
Vereen I think also has more skills as a downfield receiver than Woody. And he has better skills at running the ball outside where Woody is great at cutting back behind blockers but does not have stright line speed to just take it to the outside. I think they are very different players.
I think it's hard to judge or analyze just what Vareen is...the guy has hardly played. I have seen him do some things in preseason games that lead me to believe that he has special skills as a pass catcher, but he's done nothing in my opinion as a runner. His first year I thought he looked quick and shifty, but wetn down too easily on first contact. His second year I thought he looked stronger, but then he was hurt so fast I didn't get a chance to see him and make an opinion on him. I'd have to see him run at least five games as a lead back before I personally can tell what he is.
I am not saying he IS the quality feature back but that he has the skills - and I think he can be one. But regardless of that, the bigger point is that he CAN do things that Woody just cannot and Woody can do some things Vereen is not as adept at. My point was essentially THEY ARE NOT BACKS WITH THE SAME SKILL SETS. They are VERY different.