Ridley on pace for over 1400 yards. not bad for team that treats the run as superfluous

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

    Ridley on pace for over 1400 yards. not bad for team that treats the run as superfluous

    good get for the pats and bb.

    perhaps we use the run a little more (why are we not using vereen our 2nd rd pick more?) and sequence more efectively.

     

    where would he be if we developed him last year instead of "doghouse-ing" him???

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

    Re: Ridley on pace for over 1400 yards. not bad for team that treats the run as superfluous

    Yeah 1400 would be a good number - people like to glamorize Benny's 1000 yard season here and I just don't think it's a impressive milestone anymore when you are playing 16 games. 1400 is a much different story...so is 1200...so is 1150. Seriously if you gain 1000 yards, you are only averaging 62 yards a game. Is 60 yards of offense a big deal? I mean a lead runner is out on that field an awful lot - and you only gain 60 yards of offense? 1400 yards is a much different story.

    I like Ridley - I wish he had a little more speed so he could get outside because defenses are going to start just clogging the middle soon. Who knows, maybe if they start doing that he will be able to get outside? I also wish he could lift his feet a little higher when he runs, because he gets tripped up pretty easily, but the guy is a pretty nice upgrade over what we had last year from our lead runner.

    I can't believe how muscled this guy is up top. He weighs what? 220? He's all muscle. He's doing a nice job holding on to the football now...hope that continues.

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

    Re: Ridley on pace for over 1400 yards. not bad for team that treats the run as superfluous

    Superfluous? They're 5th in rushing, 7th in passing. Also, 2nd in rush attempts/game behind only Houston, and by the way average 4.3/carry vs. 3.9 for Houston. 14 rush TDs lead the league.  

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

    Re: Ridley on pace for over 1400 yards. not bad for team that treats the run as superfluous

    perspective is the phantom in the shadows

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

    Re: Ridley on pace for over 1400 yards. not bad for team that treats the run as superfluous

    In response to Muzwell's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Superfluous? They're 5th in rushing, 7th in passing. Also, 2nd in rush attempts/game behind only Houston, and by the way average 4.3/carry vs. 3.9 for Houston. 14 rush TDs lead the league.  

    [/QUOTE]

    lol, I don't think he understands the meaning of the word.

    PS go back and look at Woody's stats compared to last year, we are running the ball substantially better because we run more, are better versed at it and there is a commitment, runners get better as the game wears on... this something we haven't seen since 2008.  It helps having a talented coordinator...

     

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

    Re: Ridley on pace for over 1400 yards. not bad for team that treats the run as superfluous

    In response to mthurl's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Yeah 1400 would be a good number - people like to glamorize Benny's 1000 yard season here and I just don't think it's a impressive milestone anymore when you are playing 16 games. 1400 is a much different story...so is 1200...so is 1150. Seriously if you gain 1000 yards, you are only averaging 62 yards a game. Is 60 yards of offense a big deal? I mean a lead runner is out on that field an awful lot - and you only gain 60 yards of offense? 1400 yards is a much different story.

    I like Ridley - I wish he had a little more speed so he could get outside because defenses are going to start just clogging the middle soon. Who knows, maybe if they start doing that he will be able to get outside? I also wish he could lift his feet a little higher when he runs, because he gets tripped up pretty easily, but the guy is a pretty nice upgrade over what we had last year from our lead runner.

    I can't believe how muscled this guy is up top. He weighs what? 220? He's all muscle. He's doing a nice job holding on to the football now...hope that continues.

    [/QUOTE]

    when do we develop vereen though. this woudl ahve been a game to do so.

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

    Re: Ridley on pace for over 1400 yards. not bad for team that treats the run as superfluous

    In response to wozzy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Muzwell's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Superfluous? They're 5th in rushing, 7th in passing. Also, 2nd in rush attempts/game behind only Houston, and by the way average 4.3/carry vs. 3.9 for Houston. 14 rush TDs lead the league.  

    [/QUOTE]

    lol, I don't think he understands the meaning of the word.

    PS go back and look at Woody's stats compared to last year, we are running the ball substantially better because we run more, are better versed at it and there is a commitment, runners get better as the game wears on... this something we haven't seen since 2008.  It helps having a talented coordinator...

     

    [/QUOTE]

    please teach me educated one.

    they backed into the runing we are doing, but i guess you are too smart to realize that.

    "talented coordinator" comment is revealing.

    we agree a lot. but not above

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

    Re: Ridley on pace for over 1400 yards. not bad for team that treats the run as superfluous

    In response to bredbru's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to wozzy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Muzwell's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Superfluous? They're 5th in rushing, 7th in passing. Also, 2nd in rush attempts/game behind only Houston, and by the way average 4.3/carry vs. 3.9 for Houston. 14 rush TDs lead the league.  

    [/QUOTE]

    lol, I don't think he understands the meaning of the word.

    PS go back and look at Woody's stats compared to last year, we are running the ball substantially better because we run more, are better versed at it and there is a commitment, runners get better as the game wears on... this something we haven't seen since 2008.  It helps having a talented coordinator...

     

    [/QUOTE]

    please teach me educated one.

    they backed into the runing we are doing, but i guess you are too smart to realize that.

    "talented coordinator" comment is revealing.

    we agree a lot. but not above

    [/QUOTE]

    I'm not that smart, please explain what you mean when you say "they backed into" their running game.  As I see, they run the ball effectively and have all season except for one or two games.  

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

    Re: Ridley on pace for over 1400 yards. not bad for team that treats the run as superfluous

    In response to Muzwell's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to bredbru's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to wozzy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Muzwell's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Superfluous? They're 5th in rushing, 7th in passing. Also, 2nd in rush attempts/game behind only Houston, and by the way average 4.3/carry vs. 3.9 for Houston. 14 rush TDs lead the league.  

    [/QUOTE]

    lol, I don't think he understands the meaning of the word.

    PS go back and look at Woody's stats compared to last year, we are running the ball substantially better because we run more, are better versed at it and there is a commitment, runners get better as the game wears on... this something we haven't seen since 2008.  It helps having a talented coordinator...

     

    [/QUOTE]

    please teach me educated one.

    they backed into the runing we are doing, but i guess you are too smart to realize that.

    "talented coordinator" comment is revealing.

    we agree a lot. but not above

    [/QUOTE]

    I'm not that smart, please explain what you mean when you say "they backed into" their running game.  As I see, they run the ball effectively and have all season except for one or two games.  

    [/QUOTE]


    Of 9 games..... 3 games under 100 yards, 4 under 120. Inconsistent.

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

    Re: Ridley on pace for over 1400 yards. not bad for team that treats the run as superfluous

    I think the Patriots are certainly committing to the run game this year. McD is still trying to get better with playcalling.  It's hard to complain about the offensive results thus far - altho I'm not convinced about McD yet.

    Defensively, I think the entire D took a step backwards yesterday - when the bye week was an opportunity for them to show improvement; even w/o Talib.

    It'll be interesting to see what kind of effect Talib can actually have on the defense as a whole.  I suspect only a little.

    The D did come up with a couple of late clutch plays towards the end of the game, but...will we get or make those kinds of breaks in the playoffs?

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

    Re: Ridley on pace for over 1400 yards. not bad for team that treats the run as superfluous

    In response to Muzwell's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to bredbru's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to wozzy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Muzwell's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Superfluous? They're 5th in rushing, 7th in passing. Also, 2nd in rush attempts/game behind only Houston, and by the way average 4.3/carry vs. 3.9 for Houston. 14 rush TDs lead the league.  

    [/QUOTE]

    lol, I don't think he understands the meaning of the word.

    PS go back and look at Woody's stats compared to last year, we are running the ball substantially better because we run more, are better versed at it and there is a commitment, runners get better as the game wears on... this something we haven't seen since 2008.  It helps having a talented coordinator...

     

    [/QUOTE]

    please teach me educated one.

    they backed into the runing we are doing, but i guess you are too smart to realize that.

    "talented coordinator" comment is revealing.

    we agree a lot. but not above

    [/QUOTE]

    I'm not that smart, please explain what you mean when you say "they backed into" their running game.  As I see, they run the ball effectively and have all season except for one or two games.  

    [/QUOTE]

    if you wathed every play since preseason, they began running more only becasue they had to. in fact, i think to this day, after finally realizing it, i dont remember what game in first 3 or 4, josh still i believe, runs only beacuse it keeps his pass game going, and wouldnt if he didn thave to.

    the run game was very incidental to the game plan ealry on. teh defenses keyed and josh had to actually do some dedication to the run. still doesnt sue it as effectively (not based soleley the # of carriers) as a better offensive coordinator can.

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

    Re: Ridley on pace for over 1400 yards. not bad for team that treats the run as superfluous

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Of 9 games..... 3 games under 100 yards, 4 under 120. Inconsistent.

    [/QUOTE]

    OK, but there are probably 25 teams that would love to have their problems running the ball. This sort of criticism or saying they're "backing into" running the ball, is nitpicky.  Without looking it up, I suspect that in those games where they didn't run for much yardage, they passed it more than usual (taking what the defense was giving), or they just didn't play well offensively.  There will be those games for every team during a season.  

    Overall, they've run the ball extremely well compared to past BB teams going back to at least 2004.  

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

    Re: Ridley on pace for over 1400 yards. not bad for team that treats the run as superfluous

    I looked it up, in 2004 they averaged 32.8 carries per game, 4.1 yds/carry and 133.4 yds/game.

    So far this year: 33.9 carries, 4.3 ypc and 146 ypg.  

    On pace for 2,334 yards vs. 2,134 in '04.

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

    Re: Ridley on pace for over 1400 yards. not bad for team that treats the run as superfluous

    Isn't there someone on this board who always boasts of Maroney Lites 2 year 1400 yard average as being something special? lol

     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from dapats1281. Show dapats1281's posts

    Re: Ridley on pace for over 1400 yards. not bad for team that treats the run as superfluous

    In response to Muzwell's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Of 9 games..... 3 games under 100 yards, 4 under 120. Inconsistent.

    [/QUOTE]

    OK, but there are probably 25 teams that would love to have their problems running the ball. This sort of criticism or saying they're "backing into" running the ball, is nitpicky.  Without looking it up, I suspect that in those games where they didn't run for much yardage, they passed it more than usual (taking what the defense was giving), or they just didn't play well offensively.  There will be those games for every team during a season.  

    Overall, they've run the ball extremely well compared to past BB teams going back to at least 2004.  

    [/QUOTE]

    Statiscally, yes. However, 2004 team did not have an aerial attack like the one we have now.

    2004 offense could absolutely grind you out and win games with Brady throwing it under 30 times.

     

    Maybe the 2012 running game can do that. Maybe the team won't need that. It was a different game back in 2004, but I still like that 2004 running game more than the 2012.

     

    This team can still prove me wrong though. Plenty of games left

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

    Re: Ridley on pace for over 1400 yards. not bad for team that treats the run as superfluous

    In response to Muzwell's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to BabeParilli's comment:
    [QUOTE]


    Of 9 games..... 3 games under 100 yards, 4 under 120. Inconsistent.

    [/QUOTE]

    OK, but there are probably 25 teams that would love to have their problems running the ball. This sort of criticism or saying they're "backing into" running the ball, is nitpicky.  Without looking it up, I suspect that in those games where they didn't run for much yardage, they passed it more than usual (taking what the defense was giving), or they just didn't play well offensively.  There will be those games for every team during a season.  

    Overall, they've run the ball extremely well compared to past BB teams going back to at least 2004.  

    [/QUOTE]

    wasnt tht they didnt run it more. it means it was an afterthought. pass ofense was gettign shut down. ran a little to try put the defense off, wihtout a plan to actaully have a run game. after being forced into it 3 games or so, to josh's dismay, ridley became something in and of himself. if you look back at game threads you can find where i said, bb is fed up and told josh to run the damn ball.

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

    Re: Ridley on pace for over 1400 yards. not bad for team that treats the run as superfluous

    In response to bredbru's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to wozzy's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    In response to Muzwell's comment:
    [QUOTE]

    Superfluous? They're 5th in rushing, 7th in passing. Also, 2nd in rush attempts/game behind only Houston, and by the way average 4.3/carry vs. 3.9 for Houston. 14 rush TDs lead the league.  

    [/QUOTE]

    lol, I don't think he understands the meaning of the word.

    PS go back and look at Woody's stats compared to last year, we are running the ball substantially better because we run more, are better versed at it and there is a commitment, runners get better as the game wears on... this something we haven't seen since 2008.  It helps having a talented coordinator...

     

    [/QUOTE]

    please teach me educated one.

    they backed into the runing we are doing, but i guess you are too smart to realize that.

    "talented coordinator" comment is revealing.

    we agree a lot. but not above

    [/QUOTE]

    Saying a team that up until recently led the entire NFL in rushing attempts and signed 5 tightends/fullbacks to it's roster this off season, whose coach has already stated that there has been a concentrated effort to run the ball more and run when the game is tight is "backing into a run game" is an opinion and not a very good one.  

    It's been the subject of articles and commentary by all of the Pat's commentators and national media alike, the only ones in denial are the passy happy contingent.  You're the only person on the planet who hasn't noticed that the Pat's have shifted philosophical gears regarding their finesse offense becoming more smashmouth, you would have us believe it's an accident... laughable.  You lead a very rich fantasy life. 

     

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share