Ridley "Under-rated?" - Vereen Vs. Ridley for Lead Back?

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

    Re: Ridley

    Ridley, Bolton, Blount are the inside runners (the amount and time Ridley is on the field will be dependent on how he takes care of the ball . . .  he will be off the field on long passing plays because he has marginal hands and blocking abilities). . . Vereen will be on the field more his year if he is healthy but he will be a receiver out of the backfield, in a slot position when they run two slot receivers, and you will see him as a wideout.    Don't expect he will get many more touches on running plays out of the backfield but may get a few more reverses . . .  but he certainly will have the ball in his hands more than last year as they move him around and look for whom they can match him up with for the best results.

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

    Re: Ridley

    In response to 49Patriots' comment:


    Babe, I'm going to start calling you Grampa because you're old and say silly things that are silly...just like my Grampa. Ridley has one FF in the post-season.

     



    Yeah, I'm senile, but apparently still sharper than you. LMAO@U He has one lost against the Ravens in the last playoffs and one lost against the Broncos in the playoffs before that.

     

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

    Re: Ridley

    bb despises turnovers; especially in the playoffs.

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

    Re: Ridley

    In response to anonymis' comment:

     

    Running Game Still Needs Improvement?

    http://bostonherald.com/sports/patriots_nfl/new_england_patriots/2013/08/patriots_backs_focus_on_converting_in_short_yardage

     

     



    Good article, particularly the quote:

     

    "The running game just can’t show up during the regular season, and disappear in the AFC Championship Game or Super Bowl. That’s the difference between being good on paper, and just plain good."

    I'd love for Blount to make this team because it would add another dimension to our running game, though I am a fan of Bolden.  To me Ridely and Bolden are interchangeable and basically the same player, both are good, well rounded players.  Ridley needs to learn that when the play is over just go down, if you don't initiate the contact then you should avoid it, that way he would stop fumbling.

    I think the lead back and the third down back carries will look roughly the same as they did last year or in peak Kevin Faulk years provided Vereen and Washington stay healthy.

     

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

    Re: Ridley

    In response to wozzy's comment:

    In response to anonymis' comment:

     

    Running Game Still Needs Improvement?

    http://bostonherald.com/sports/patriots_nfl/new_england_patriots/2013/08/patriots_backs_focus_on_converting_in_short_yardage

     

     



    Good article, particularly the quote:

     

    "The running game just can’t show up during the regular season, and disappear in the AFC Championship Game or Super Bowl. That’s the difference between being good on paper, and just plain good."

    I'd love for Blount to make this team because it would add another dimension to our running game, though I am a fan of Bolden.  To me Ridely and Bolden are interchangeable and basically the same player, both are good, well rounded players.  Ridley needs to learn that when the play is over just go down, if you don't initiate the contact then you should avoid it, that way he would stop fumbling.

    I think the lead back and the third down back carries will look roughly the same as they did last year or in peak Kevin Faulk years provided Vereen and Washington stay healthy.

     




    But was that poor execution, or poor game plan/offensive play calling by McD/BB?

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

    Re: Ridley

    In response to anonymis' comment:

     

    But was that poor execution, or poor game plan/offensive play calling by McD/BB?

    I think that was a general statement about the past few years, maybe longer, not just last year.  

    I agree with the entire article's premise which is our offense needs to get tougher, meaner and ram the ball down an opponents throat.  Undoubtedly an aspect of our offense that has been missing for a long time, regardless of the reason's why.  

    That an Eagle defender just complained our offense were "bullies" is a good indicator we are headed in the right direction.

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

    Re: Ridley

    In response to wozzy's comment:

    In response to anonymis' comment:

     

     

    But was that poor execution, or poor game plan/offensive play calling by McD/BB?

     

     

    I think that was a general statement about the past few years, maybe longer, not just last year.  

    I agree with the entire article's premise which is our offense needs to get tougher, meaner and ram the ball down an opponents throat.  Undoubtedly an aspect of our offense that has been missing for a long time, regardless of the reason's why.  

    That an Eagle defender just complained our offense were "bullies" is a good indicator we are headed in the right direction.



    I think this is where BB is partly to blame. Even if we have a good run game in reg. season, in playoffs its about running and stopping the run. Teams will put more resources into stopping your run. The question is DID You put more gameplanning into the run game during the week? I would say no and here is why. Even if BB entertained the thought of ground and pound during the week, once the game starts and the 1st few runs get sniffed out, BB gets impatient and scraps it. Why?  because he has TFB! Right or wrong, how many plays is BB gonna watch go for no yardage or negative yardage when he knows TFB can hit Wes at any time for 5 plus yards? That was the problem as Rusty astutely points out, but the problem is he blames a player and not the coach who calls all the shots and this isnt debatable. Knowing how much ego and power this guy has, to say otherwise it trolling. We also need to have a back behind Brady that teams respect(Dillon) or Brady will keep facing these pass defenses set up to stop him.

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

    Re: Ridley

    In response to TripleOG's comment:

     

    I think this is where BB is partly to blame. Even if we have a good run game in reg. season, in playoffs its about running and stopping the run. Teams will put more resources into stopping your run. The question is DID You put more gameplanning into the run game during the week? I would say no and here is why. Even if BB entertained the thought of ground and pound during the week, once the game starts and the 1st few runs get sniffed out, BB gets impatient and scraps it. Why?  because he has TFB! Right or wrong, how many plays is BB gonna watch go for no yardage or negative yardage when he knows TFB can hit Wes at any time for 5 plus yards? That was the problem as Rusty astutely points out, but the problem is he blames a player and not the coach who calls all the shots and this isnt debatable. Knowing how much ego and power this guy has, to say otherwise it trolling. We also need to have a back behind Brady that teams respect(Dillon) or Brady will keep facing these pass defenses set up to stop him.

    The buck stops with Belichick, though I've always maintained that he was a defensive minded coach who needed a strong offensive coordinator next to him to be the yin to his yang.  The missing personnel while maybe his "fault" as it were, can also be attributed to his coaches either not telling him what they need to be successful or demanding it.  It isn't surprising that the moment McDaniels came back the team loaded up at tightend and fullback, Josh seems to know exactly what this offense was lacking.

    If you watch any Pats game usually BB is over coaching up the defense while his offense is on the field, he puts a lot of responsibility on his offensive coaches to handle that side of the ball, I'm sure the same is true regarding the draft, free agency etc...

    I've never said the Patriots were cheap, but I always said that coordinators and coaches don't count against the cap, we should pay the best offensive coordinator available, in this case McDaniels because his is the only position beyond Bill as the head coach that we truly need.

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

    Re: Ridley

    In response to wozzy's comment:

    In response to TripleOG's comment:

     

     

    I think this is where BB is partly to blame. Even if we have a good run game in reg. season, in playoffs its about running and stopping the run. Teams will put more resources into stopping your run. The question is DID You put more gameplanning into the run game during the week? I would say no and here is why. Even if BB entertained the thought of ground and pound during the week, once the game starts and the 1st few runs get sniffed out, BB gets impatient and scraps it. Why?  because he has TFB! Right or wrong, how many plays is BB gonna watch go for no yardage or negative yardage when he knows TFB can hit Wes at any time for 5 plus yards? That was the problem as Rusty astutely points out, but the problem is he blames a player and not the coach who calls all the shots and this isnt debatable. Knowing how much ego and power this guy has, to say otherwise it trolling. We also need to have a back behind Brady that teams respect(Dillon) or Brady will keep facing these pass defenses set up to stop him.

     

     

    The buck stops with Belichick, though I've always maintained that he was a defensive minded coach who needed a strong offensive coordinator next to him to be the yin to his yang.  The missing personnel while maybe his "fault" as it were, can also be attributed to his coaches either not telling him what they need to be successful or demanding it.  It isn't surprising that the moment McDaniels came back the team loaded up at tightend and fullback, Josh seems to know exactly what this offense was lacking.

    If you watch any Pats game usually BB is over coaching up the defense while his offense is on the field, he puts a lot of responsibility on his offensive coaches to handle that side of the ball, I'm sure the same is true regarding the draft, free agency etc...

    I've never said the Patriots were cheap, but I always said that coordinators and coaches don't count against the cap, we should pay the best offensive coordinator available, in this case McDaniels because his is the only position beyond Bill as the head coach that we truly need.




    agreed and promoting Patricia is just a way of saying, I need someone to run MY defense. When Capers got here, he was basically a ghost because the 2 had different views and ideas and thats why I questioned the signing. Dont you usually work those things out before you decide to bring him in? I like Patricia but he is far from being his own brand and only does what BB wants and seems to call conservative plays. Thats why I liked Crennell, He was a defensive genius in his own right and wasnt afraid to use unothodox plans and also his relationship to players and his open door policy of offering advice was always talked about and appreciated by the old heads like Willie and Bru, Milloy. A guy like Matty P is just missing too much IMO to lead a SB D without all the hands on exp. and ability to talk to younger players freely. This is why BB usually ends up overseeing it anyway. I wish he would just bring Crennel back and stop trying to do it on his own.

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

    Re: Ridley

    In response to wozzy's comment:

    In response to anonymis' comment:

     

    Running Game Still Needs Improvement?

    http://bostonherald.com/sports/patriots_nfl/new_england_patriots/2013/08/patriots_backs_focus_on_converting_in_short_yardage

     

     



    Good article, particularly the quote:

     

    "The running game just can’t show up during the regular season, and disappear in the AFC Championship Game or Super Bowl. That’s the difference between being good on paper, and just plain good."

    I'd love for Blount to make this team because it would add another dimension to our running game, though I am a fan of Bolden.  To me Ridely and Bolden are interchangeable and basically the same player, both are good, well rounded players.  Ridley needs to learn that when the play is over just go down, if you don't initiate the contact then you should avoid it, that way he would stop fumbling.

    I think the lead back and the third down back carries will look roughly the same as they did last year or in peak Kevin Faulk years provided Vereen and Washington stay healthy.

     



    I often agree with waht you say Woz. More than most here. BUt I really do not see RIdley and Bolden the way you do. While they both run tough and are used well between the tackles Ridley has to date been a much, much more dynamic play maker. He has a notably greater ability to break a run of 20 yards or more. Bolden is a bit like something beween Green-Ellis and Ridley.

     

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

    Re: Ridley

    In response to wozzy's comment:

    In response to anonymis' comment:

     

    Running Game Still Needs Improvement?

    http://bostonherald.com/sports/patriots_nfl/new_england_patriots/2013/08/patriots_backs_focus_on_converting_in_short_yardage

     

     



    Good article, particularly the quote:

     

    "The running game just can’t show up during the regular season, and disappear in the AFC Championship Game or Super Bowl. That’s the difference between being good on paper, and just plain good."

    I'd love for Blount to make this team because it would add another dimension to our running game, though I am a fan of Bolden.  To me Ridely and Bolden are interchangeable and basically the same player, both are good, well rounded players.  Ridley needs to learn that when the play is over just go down, if you don't initiate the contact then you should avoid it, that way he would stop fumbling.

    I think the lead back and the third down back carries will look roughly the same as they did last year or in peak Kevin Faulk years provided Vereen and Washington stay healthy.

     



    I will also add that I am NOT a big fan of Blount. I dont mind he is competing but my past impression is of a player who does not run as tough as his size. He runs like a 210 pounder... which is roughly Vereens size this preseason. But if he wins over the coaches I will not complain!

     

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

    Re: Ridley

    Blount looks like a power back, but he looks for the sideline more than anything and will Hurdler a defender before he barrels over him. Dont be fooled by size. Some fans think he will help on goal line and I say, havent seen him do it yet. I dont think he makes the team anyways..

     

    "Take care of my B*tch, I may need her back in a couple years"

    Brady to Manning after Wes signed with Denver

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

    Re: Ridley

    In an ideal world Vereen has a better total skill set than Ridley as a three down back. He is the kind of size/hands combination that means you don't need to sub on third downs. That gives you more options from whatever set you start your drive with.

    But there is reality to contend with.

    Ridley doesn't offer much on third down. He isn't the kind of elusive open field threat that can ice a first down marker, and he isn't the best pass catcher.

    But Ridley has been as effective as you need (and then some!) running between the tackles every down.

    On the other hand, as effective as he has been in space, the one area that Vereen has been inconsistent in is running down hill, in tight spaces between the tackles.

    If you can't do that, for 4.5ypc, then you will always be a third down guy. 

    Unless Vereen can get to that level with the football in his hands and linebackers coming down hill at him, it is going to be Ridley's job.

    And it should be, because Ridley's been great on early downs. 

    To be frank, outside of QB, RB is the only position on offense I feel good about coming in. NE has talent and depth there. They may not have the super stud RB like Adrian Peterson, nor do they have a hyper dynamic three down guy like Marshall Faulk.

    But they've got a d@rn good two-down back, and a good set of third down backs that put them ahead of the curve against the field of NFL teams that don't have one, the other, or either. 

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

    Re: Ridley

    In response to TripleOG's comment:

    Blount looks like a power back, but he looks for the sideline more than anything and will Hurdler a defender before he barrels over him. Dont be fooled by size. Some fans think he will help on goal line and I say, havent seen him do it yet. I dont think he makes the team anyways..

     

    "Take care of my B*tch, I may need her back in a couple years"

    Brady to Manning after Wes signed with Denver



    Blount isn't afraid of contact ... he just doesn't have a good idea of how to run for short yardage. He always takes too long choosing the right hole. 

    It's amazing ... I've seen third down backs that register as a better short yardage threat because they know in those situations you need to be decisive. 

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

    Re: Ridley

    In response to ghostofjri37's comment:


    Vareen is not a 20 carry a game back... that being said he can run inside the tackles effectively (did it at Cal) those carries just need to be limited. His biggest contributions will be in the hurry up, 3rd downs and in the passing game if they can get him in match-ups against linebackers.

    As someone mentioned he is going to be a dynamic player.



    If you are discussing a back like Vereen you think in terms of touches, not carries. I could see him getting 20-25 touches a game ... but he needs to be more consistent between the tackles to get those touches. 

    The 5-10 catches are a by-product of doing something effective with the 15-20 carries. 

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

    Re: Ridley

    In response to zbellino's comment:

    In an ideal world Vereen has a better total skill set than Ridley as a three down back. He is the kind of size/hands combination that means you don't need to sub on third downs. That gives you more options from whatever set you start your drive with.

    But there is reality to contend with.

    Ridley doesn't offer much on third down. He isn't the kind of elusive open field threat that can ice a first down marker, and he isn't the best pass catcher.

    But Ridley has been as effective as you need (and then some!) running between the tackles every down.

    On the other hand, as effective as he has been in space, the one area that Vereen has been inconsistent in is running down hill, in tight spaces between the tackles.

    If you can't do that, for 4.5ypc, then you will always be a third down guy. 

    Unless Vereen can get to that level with the football in his hands and linebackers coming down hill at him, it is going to be Ridley's job.

    And it should be, because Ridley's been great on early downs. 

    To be frank, outside of QB, RB is the only position on offense I feel good about coming in. NE has talent and depth there. They may not have the super stud RB like Adrian Peterson, nor do they have a hyper dynamic three down guy like Marshall Faulk.

    But they've got a d@rn good two-down back, and a good set of third down backs that put them ahead of the curve against the field of NFL teams that don't have one, the other, or either. 



    good post Z, I agree. I saw flashes of running between the tackes from Vareen, but to this point, Ridley has been better. Its nice to have options but Ridley is the better early down back but ideally you would like to keep from subbing in to throw off the D. All in all , we need to be able to run when the D is expecting it.

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

    Re: Ridley

    In response to zbellino's comment:

    In response to ghostofjri37's comment:
    [QUOTE]

     


    Vareen is not a 20 carry a game back... that being said he can run inside the tackles effectively (did it at Cal) those carries just need to be limited. His biggest contributions will be in the hurry up, 3rd downs and in the passing game if they can get him in match-ups against linebackers.

    As someone mentioned he is going to be a dynamic player.

     



    If you are discussing a back like Vereen you think in terms of touches, not carries. I could see him getting 20-25 touches a game ... but he needs to be more consistent between the tackles to get those touches. 

     

    The 5-10 catches are a by-product of doing something effective with the 15-20 carries. 

    [/QUOTE]

    I am a fan of Vereen and expect bigger things from him. I do think he can run well between the tackles though he is not Ridley there. Still I do not expect 20 touches a game from Vereen over the entire season. In some games perhaps. I do expect something more like 15 touches a game over the season. And considering Gronk, Amendola, the current look of some of the rookie WRs, and Edelman as at least a #3 or #4 WR and Sudfeld there are already a good number of targets to throw to. Plus Ridley is expected to get the most touches in the running game. So 15 is a lot from Vereen with all the other players getting their touches too.

     

     

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

    Re: Ridley

     

     I personally have been more disappointed with the run blocking in the playoffs than with the backs themselves.  Some of that has to with the absence of Gronk who is an absolutely superb run blocker (power combined with great feet and agility for a guy his size).  But the O linemen have been a little inconsistent at times I think.  I haven't rewatched last season's playoff games that closely, but looking at the coaching film of the 2011 Super Bowl, BJGE got stuffed on a couple of runs because of missed blocks.  That has to change if we're going to be a dominant running team.

     

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

    Re: Ridley

    In response to wozzy's comment:

    In response to anonymis' comment:
    [QUOTE]

     

     

    But was that poor execution, or poor game plan/offensive play calling by McD/BB?

     

     

    I think that was a general statement about the past few years, maybe longer, not just last year.  

    I agree with the entire article's premise which is our offense needs to get tougher, meaner and ram the ball down an opponents throat.  Undoubtedly an aspect of our offense that has been missing for a long time, regardless of the reason's why.  

    That an Eagle defender just complained our offense were "bullies" is a good indicator we are headed in the right direction.

    [/QUOTE]

    agreed.  I'd like to see more defensive "bullies" myself....lol Laughing

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

    Re: Ridley

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

     I personally have been more disappointed with the run blocking in the playoffs than with the backs themselves.  Some of that has to with the absence of Gronk who is an absolutely superb run blocker (power combined with great feet and agility for a guy his size).  But the O linemen have been a little inconsistent at times I think.  I haven't rewatched last season's playoff games that closely, but looking at the coaching film of the 2011 Super Bowl, BJGE got stuffed on a couple of runs because of missed blocks.  That has to change if we're going to be a dominant running team.

     



    well, when Gronk (one of the better blockers) goes down - it reduces options and has a domino effect for other things.  If Ballard and Gronk can be healthy come playoff time....we're good.

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

    Re: Ridley

    In response to TripleOG's comment:


    good post Z, I agree. I saw flashes of running between the tackes from Vareen, but to this point, Ridley has been better. Its nice to have options but Ridley is the better early down back but ideally you would like to keep from subbing in to throw off the D. All in all , we need to be able to run when the D is expecting it.

     



    who's it gonna be....?

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

    Re: Ridley

    In response to TripleOG's comment:

    In response to zbellino's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

    In an ideal world Vereen has a better total skill set than Ridley as a three down back. He is the kind of size/hands combination that means you don't need to sub on third downs. That gives you more options from whatever set you start your drive with.

    But there is reality to contend with.

    Ridley doesn't offer much on third down. He isn't the kind of elusive open field threat that can ice a first down marker, and he isn't the best pass catcher.

    But Ridley has been as effective as you need (and then some!) running between the tackles every down.

    On the other hand, as effective as he has been in space, the one area that Vereen has been inconsistent in is running down hill, in tight spaces between the tackles.

    If you can't do that, for 4.5ypc, then you will always be a third down guy. 

    Unless Vereen can get to that level with the football in his hands and linebackers coming down hill at him, it is going to be Ridley's job.

    And it should be, because Ridley's been great on early downs. 

    To be frank, outside of QB, RB is the only position on offense I feel good about coming in. NE has talent and depth there. They may not have the super stud RB like Adrian Peterson, nor do they have a hyper dynamic three down guy like Marshall Faulk.

    But they've got a d@rn good two-down back, and a good set of third down backs that put them ahead of the curve against the field of NFL teams that don't have one, the other, or either. 

     



    good post Z, I agree. I saw flashes of running between the tackes from Vareen, but to this point, Ridley has been better. Its nice to have options but Ridley is the better early down back but ideally you would like to keep from subbing in to throw off the D. All in all , we need to be able to run when the D is expecting it.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Not many teams find a Roger Craig type back who is good in almost every situation. 

    I'm happy with what NE has there ... a little worried about TE/WR if Gronk doesn't come back sooner rather than later. 

    The best thing is hearing how Cannon is pushing the for the job at G. That's been a weak spot since Stephen Neal left ... and one that has shown up against teams with strong interior pass rushers like the Ravens and Giants. 

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

    Re: Ridley

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

      Some of that has to with the absence of Gronk who is an absolutely superb run blocker (power combined with great feet and agility for a guy his size).  But the O linemen have been a little inconsistent at times I think.  



    You have to factor in the changes to protection packages that occur when Gronk goes down. 

    That and the fact that NE is usually shuffling around up front because their right side interior line isn't a great grouo. I'd love Connolly as a backup, but as a starter he just isn't ideal.

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

    Re: Ridley

    In response to anonymis' comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     I personally have been more disappointed with the run blocking in the playoffs than with the backs themselves.  Some of that has to with the absence of Gronk who is an absolutely superb run blocker (power combined with great feet and agility for a guy his size).  But the O linemen have been a little inconsistent at times I think.  I haven't rewatched last season's playoff games that closely, but looking at the coaching film of the 2011 Super Bowl, BJGE got stuffed on a couple of runs because of missed blocks.  That has to change if we're going to be a dominant running team.

     

     



    well, when Gronk (one of the better blockers) goes down - it reduces options and has a domino effect for other things.  If Ballard and Gronk can be healthy come playoff time....we're good.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Right. They tend to roll protection down the line on passing plays. 

    The overall effectiveness just drops off if Gronk is missing on a running play. He usually seals off a whole tackler. 

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

    Re: Ridley

    In response to anonymis' comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    [QUOTE]

     

     

     I personally have been more disappointed with the run blocking in the playoffs than with the backs themselves.  Some of that has to with the absence of Gronk who is an absolutely superb run blocker (power combined with great feet and agility for a guy his size).  But the O linemen have been a little inconsistent at times I think.  I haven't rewatched last season's playoff games that closely, but looking at the coaching film of the 2011 Super Bowl, BJGE got stuffed on a couple of runs because of missed blocks.  That has to change if we're going to be a dominant running team.

     

     



    well, when Gronk (one of the better blockers) goes down - it reduces options and has a domino effect for other things.  If Ballard and Gronk can be healthy come playoff time....we're good.

     

    [/QUOTE]

    Yep, I agree.  The loss of Gronk has really hurt us in the playoffs.  He has a huge impact in both the passing and run game.

     

Share