Re: Trent v Ridley: Who will have the better career?
posted at 9/21/2013 6:25 PM EDT
In response to dapats1281's comment:
In response to neinmd's comment:
I posted Ridley's stats from 2012 on another thread. Statistically, he has better numbers than Richardson. Career 4.5 yards/carry Ridley; 3.4 YPC for Richardson.
However, if I was looking for a back that could get me 1-2 yards when I really needed it, Richardson might be a better choice. If I was looking for a better balance overall between passing and rushing, I would pick Ridley.
On fumbles, he has had 6 over ~400 carries, Richardson has had 3 over ~300 carries.
Ridley does not get as much credit as he deserves. He is also a humble guy who accepts responsibility for his weaknesses and tries to fix them.
What? You would pick Ridley catching over Richardson? You do know that Richardson is a very good pass catcher out of the backfield. Ridley had 3 catches all of last season and was taken off on 3rd down cause Woodhead is a better pass blocker.
Trent had 200 more carries over Ridley in college, which isnt that much more significant. Shane Vereen had more college carries than Richardson.
Trent is way better than Ridley. Swap the teams, and I would guess Ridley couldn't do what Trent did when he was on the Browns...Put Trent on last years Pats team, and he has a decent chance to get 2000 total yards
Richardson has closer to 250 more carries, about 30 more KRs, and about 50 more catches. In college terms, of touches, that is about 1.5 seasons of work.
It's significant at a formative age for a lot of atheletes. You aren't even done growing at 20, and Richardson was a heavy lead back at that point.
Vereen does have miles as well. That is a fact. But they aren't the same kind of miles. He also isn't getting 300+ touches per season in the pros.