Why didn't BB use Stevan Ridley?

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from Grogan77. Show Grogan77's posts

    Why didn't BB use Stevan Ridley?

    Regular season stats:

    Stevan Ridley on 87 att had 447 yds with a 5.1 avg per carry
    BJGE 181 att 667 yds 3.7 yds per carry
    Wood head 77 att 351yds  4.6 yds per carry

    Ridley had the best yards per carry of any of the Pats running backs.  So why was he left out of the Superbowl game plans.  Because of one fumble?  Seems to me Ridley could have been a difference maker in this Superbowl.

    Oh well, I guess BB is a genius!

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

    Re: Why didn't BB use Stevan Ridley?

    Fumbles is probably the number one thing. I also think the guy (due to hopefully inexperience) didn't always choose the right hole or have the timing with the line needed to get you positive yards consistently. He seemed to be running and gaining yards on ability, rather than blocking and patience. I bet Belichick was worried he'd get a nice run and then lose yardage by screwing up the play (funny thing is Benny does this while actually knowing the offense - he just doesn't have the natural ability to do much if anything breaks down).

    I imagine a guy like Ridley will benefit from a year in the off season program.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from sporter81. Show sporter81's posts

    Re: Why didn't BB use Stevan Ridley?

    Probably the fumbles. he has shown that he can make the 20 plus yard runs. I was hoping that he would play, the giants run defense is suspect, even more so when they are looking for the pass on nearly every down.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from tcal2-. Show tcal2-'s posts

    Re: Why didn't BB use Stevan Ridley?

    He's stubborn for the non-dynamic, void of game changing abilities, 4th quarter vanishing and never break a 100 Maroney Lite.

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

    Re: Why didn't BB use Stevan Ridley?

    becase he didn't have a good plan a or plan b
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from Paul_K. Show Paul_K's posts

    Re: Why didn't BB use Stevan Ridley?

    The coaches' rule of thumb states that you lose one game for every rookie that you start. 

    Ridley needs to go one more semester to the Benny School of Law and Not Fumbling.  He needs to hold the football high up on his chest. Also, he needs to run crisp routes and he needs to pass-block like a pro, if he wants to be a pro.
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from GadisRKO. Show GadisRKO's posts

    Re: Why didn't BB use Stevan Ridley?

    I think he will lead us in rushing this upcoming season. Full offseason to work on knowing the offense, improve on his fumbleitits and hopefully gain BB's trust.

    He showed potential this year but, IMO, that fumble against the Broncos ruined any chance he was getting the ball in the SB.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from TrueChamp. Show TrueChamp's posts

    Re: Why didn't BB use Stevan Ridley?

    Why play 3 running backs when you only give 10 carries to the starter?

    We don't run the ball and it is ultimatley why we lose in the playoffs.

    138 pass atts to 55 rush atts in the last 3 games against NY, including 2 SB's.

    Can't win with it, can't coach it, can't do it.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: Why didn't BB use Stevan Ridley?

    Belichick coaches defense and special teams... find a Patriot's offensive coordinator who understands the importance of a run game and I'll give you a cigar.  Maybe McDaniel's this year... maybe...

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from seattlepat70. Show seattlepat70's posts

    Re: Why didn't BB use Stevan Ridley?

    In Response to Re: Why didn't BB use Stevan Ridley?:
    [QUOTE]Belichick coaches defense and special teams... find a Patriot's offensive coordinator who understands the importance of a run game and I'll give you a cigar.  Maybe McDaniel's this year... maybe...
    Posted by wozzy[/QUOTE]

    i'd be pleasantly surprised if mcdaniels installs a real running game. i'll believe it when i see it.
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from wozzy. Show wozzy's posts

    Re: Why didn't BB use Stevan Ridley?

    In Response to Re: Why didn't BB use Stevan Ridley?:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Why didn't BB use Stevan Ridley? : i'd be pleasantly surprised if mcdaniels installs a real running game. i'll believe it when i see it.
    Posted by seattlepat70[/QUOTE]

    Despite a common misperception the Patriots in 2007 also ran the ball very well, all three backs (Maroney, Morris, Faulk) were averaging about 4.5 YPC.  They were ranked 9th in rushing attempts (this year 17th?) and we were actually well balanced until the time it mattered most, the end of the season.  Maroney had two 100+ games prior to the Super Bowl. McDaniels also dusted off a lot of old Weis plays when Matt Cassel was in there so he has the chops for it...
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from Norger. Show Norger's posts

    Re: Why didn't BB use Stevan Ridley?

    In response to "Re: Why didn't BB use Stevan Ridley?": [QUOTE]He's stubborn for the non-dynamic, void of game changing abilities, 4th quarter vanishing and never break a 100 Maroney Lite. Posted by tcal2-[/QUOTE] That's a cold way of putting it but I agree with you. I like BJGE, but he doesn't scare anyone. He's the ultimate "safe" running back. I want to see a back who is a legit threat to make game changing plays. Hope they turn Ridley, Vereen or both loose next year.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from BostonTrollSpanker. Show BostonTrollSpanker's posts

    Re: Why didn't BB use Stevan Ridley?

    " I want to see a back who is a legit threat to make game changing plays."

    You mean, like fumbles? You seriously think that the fact that BJGE has NEVER fumbled and Ridley has shown a propensifty for doing it at the wrong time isn't a consideration?
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from FrnkBnhm. Show FrnkBnhm's posts

    Re: Why didn't BB use Stevan Ridley?

    In Response to Re: Why didn't BB use Stevan Ridley?:
    [QUOTE]" I want to see a back who is a legit threat to make game changing plays." You mean, like fumbles? You seriously think that the fact that BJGE has NEVER fumbled and Ridley has shown a propensifty for doing it at the wrong time isn't a consideration?
    Posted by BostonTrollSpanker[/QUOTE]

    If you are going to look at it like that, Brady made the only two "game changing plays" in the Super Bowl. Intentional Grounding in the End Zone and the interception.

    Simply not fumbling does not make you a good NFL running back. BJGE had zero runs of 20+ yards in the regular season; something no other running back with 120+ carries managed to do. His 3.7 yards per carry both in the regular season and the playoffs was not exactly mind blowing either. There are probably 20-25 RBs in the NFL better than him.

    The biggest other defense of him is that he is consistent, but he is consistently an average at best NFL running back.

    He is an unrestricted FA and I would be surprised if any teams comes knocking on his door his a big contract.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from mbear3915. Show mbear3915's posts

    Re: Why didn't BB use Stevan Ridley?

    Agree that Ridley's fumbles were the main reason he sat out (who knows how he looks in practice - may be a bigger problem than we think).

    One thing about Law Firm's stats - a 3.7 yd average would be fine if we ran more often ... under 3 yds per carry doesn't get you a first down in three tries ... but 3.7 can help you march down the field and control the ball or help in third and short. That said - the Patriots aren't run oriented at all, but like others have pointed out - maybe they should be running more.

    I really want to see what Vereen can do .. he suffered from no off season practices, being a late arrival to camp and nagging injuries. But he might be a young, faster K. Faulk!
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from Norger. Show Norger's posts

    Re: Why didn't BB use Stevan Ridley?

    In Response to Re: Why didn't BB use Stevan Ridley?:
    [QUOTE]" I want to see a back who is a legit threat to make game changing plays." You mean, like fumbles? You seriously think that the fact that BJGE has NEVER fumbled and Ridley has shown a propensifty for doing it at the wrong time isn't a consideration?
    Posted by BostonTrollSpanker[/QUOTE]

    Ridley had a meaningless garbage time fumble against Denver.  Woodhead had a fumble against the Ravens that could have cost them the game.  It looks like in the case of Ridley, his fumble was THE determining factor in his playing time the rest of the way; he never saw the field again in the AFC Championship game or the SB.  I don't think the punishment fit the crime.

    I like BJGE, I just don't think  he's lead running back on a playoff team material.  As a running back, Ridley looks much more explosive than BJGE.  I was hoping they'd at least give Ridley some touches; I think he might have made a difference. 
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from JohnTAlouette. Show JohnTAlouette's posts

    Re: Why didn't BB use Stevan Ridley?

    After Ridley fumbled he knew he wasn't going to see the field again. Was kind of choking back the tears.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from digger0862. Show digger0862's posts

    Re: Why didn't BB use Stevan Ridley?

    Brady's 5000 yards of passing during the regular season didn't translate well in the super bowl. The passing game produced a safety and an interception but not enough points.

    It's high time the running game returns to prominence by unleashing Vereen and Ridley. Brady will greatly benefit from the extra help.
     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share