Discuss football with over 60,000 fans. Free Membership. Join now!

 FAQFAQ  RegisterRegister   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

FootballsFuture.com Forum Index
FootballsFuture.com Home

Is Stevan Ridley still "The guy" in the Patriot ba
Goto page 1, 2  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> New England Patriots
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
JaguarCrazy2832


Joined: 28 Jun 2008
Posts: 83560
PostPosted: Sat Jun 15, 2013 7:06 pm    Post subject: Is Stevan Ridley still "The guy" in the Patriot ba Reply with quote

Last year Ridley was a very effective runner last year 1250 and 12 TDs, but I'm wondering if BB will continue to give him the rock ~280+ carries like last year. Obviously this is a fantasy football question, but i wasnt sure if the Pats fans had some insight for me
_________________


Last edited by JaguarCrazy2832 on Sat Jun 15, 2013 9:42 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tzimisce


Most Valuable Poster
Joined: 13 Oct 2005
Posts: 47419
Location: Tuntmore Tower
PostPosted: Sat Jun 15, 2013 7:22 pm    Post subject: Re: Is Stevan Ridley still "The guy" in the Patrio Reply with quote

JaguarCrazy2832 wrote:
Last year Ridley was a very effective runner last year 1250 and 12 TDs, but I'm wondering if BB will continue to give him the rock ~280+ carries like last year. Obviously this is a fantasy football question, but i wasnt sure if the Pats fans had some insight for me
I doubt his workload will decrease by more than 5-10% if at all. Vereen is going to be getting more carries, but I think the backfield in general is going to be getting more work because of the uncertainty surrounding the passing game.
_________________

I adopted some kid named Malcolm Butler
If anyone sees him, let me know.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
patsfan25


Joined: 07 Dec 2008
Posts: 5279
Location: CenCal
PostPosted: Sat Jun 15, 2013 9:00 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I'm not high on Ridley like some are. He doesn't offer anything outstanding for a Back besides good balance and vision, which is maximized in our scheme because it compliments his good traits so well. He also disappears against stout competition and always seems to fail in crunch time. I actually stated I believe Vereen will overtake him as the primary RB. From a FF standpoint, he'd be the guy to take on this team though. He'll get the goal line opportunities.
_________________
2014 Adopt-A-Patriot: Logan Ryan
Status Quo: Steal of 2013 Draft
Tackles:4
Forced Fumbles:1
PDs2:
INTs:1
Pick 6s:
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
mcmurtry86


Joined: 02 Mar 2010
Posts: 24523
PostPosted: Sat Jun 15, 2013 9:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

patsfan25 wrote:
He also disappears against stout competition and always seems to fail in crunch time.


Other than the San Francisco game, when he was sparingly used due to the huge deficit the team found themselves in (using more 5 WR/TE sets and Vereen/Woodhead), this is totally untrue. He had marginal numbers against Seattle and Baltimore (regular season), thanks in large part to the OL totally crapping the bed but otherwise he was just fine against good run defenses. He had no problems against Houston which was a top 10 run defense.

Denver had the #2 run defense in the league and Ridley gashed them for 5.39 YPC and 151 yards. So his best game of the year came against the stoutest run defense the team faced all year.

Like most RB's, he struggles when his OL gets pushed around - a common problem they have had vs. Baltimore. There's nothing to suggest that he "disappears" against good defenses.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
patsfan25


Joined: 07 Dec 2008
Posts: 5279
Location: CenCal
PostPosted: Sat Jun 15, 2013 9:21 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcmurtry86 wrote:
patsfan25 wrote:
He also disappears against stout competition and always seems to fail in crunch time.


Other than the San Francisco game, when he was sparingly used due to the huge deficit the team found themselves in (using more 5 WR/TE sets and Vereen/Woodhead), this is totally untrue. He had marginal numbers against Seattle and Baltimore (regular season), thanks in large part to the OL totally crapping the bed but otherwise he was just fine against good run defenses. He had no problems against Houston which was a top 10 run defense.

Denver had the #2 run defense in the league and Ridley gashed them for 5.39 YPC and 151 yards. So his best game of the year came against the stoutest run defense the team faced all year.

Like most RB's, he struggles when his OL gets pushed around - a common problem they have had vs. Baltimore. There's nothing to suggest that he "disappears" against good defenses.


You really just don't know when to stop do you? I'll reserve my time for another day.
_________________
2014 Adopt-A-Patriot: Logan Ryan
Status Quo: Steal of 2013 Draft
Tackles:4
Forced Fumbles:1
PDs2:
INTs:1
Pick 6s:
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
mcmurtry86


Joined: 02 Mar 2010
Posts: 24523
PostPosted: Sat Jun 15, 2013 9:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

patsfan25 wrote:
mcmurtry86 wrote:
patsfan25 wrote:
He also disappears against stout competition and always seems to fail in crunch time.


Other than the San Francisco game, when he was sparingly used due to the huge deficit the team found themselves in (using more 5 WR/TE sets and Vereen/Woodhead), this is totally untrue. He had marginal numbers against Seattle and Baltimore (regular season), thanks in large part to the OL totally crapping the bed but otherwise he was just fine against good run defenses. He had no problems against Houston which was a top 10 run defense.

Denver had the #2 run defense in the league and Ridley gashed them for 5.39 YPC and 151 yards. So his best game of the year came against the stoutest run defense the team faced all year.

Like most RB's, he struggles when his OL gets pushed around - a common problem they have had vs. Baltimore. There's nothing to suggest that he "disappears" against good defenses.


You really just don't know when to stop do you? I'll reserve my time for another day.


When to stop? You made an easily disprovable point. You said he struggled against "stout" defenses. But he tore up the best run defense he faced all year and ran quite well against the #9 run defense (Houston) in two separate games.

There's nothing wrong with criticizing a player, but at least make truthful critiques of him. As far as starting NFL RB's go, Ridley has no noticeable tendency to "disappear" the way you claim he did.

If you remember him "disappearing" it is likely because of the - at times - idiotic playcalling which went away from the run when the team needed just to kill the clock or move the chains.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JaguarCrazy2832


Joined: 28 Jun 2008
Posts: 83560
PostPosted: Sat Jun 15, 2013 10:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

That got heated quickly Laughing

Anyone else else want to elaborate on this? If he can get 1100 and 10 then he obviously a good #2, but im worried about consistently getting carries too
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mcmurtry86


Joined: 02 Mar 2010
Posts: 24523
PostPosted: Sat Jun 15, 2013 10:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

JaguarCrazy2832 wrote:
That got heated quickly Laughing

Anyone else else want to elaborate on this? If he can get 1100 and 10 then he obviously a good #2, but im worried about consistently getting carries too


The problem with projecting Ridley is that the Patriots have usually used their RB's on an opponent-specific basis. Last year, they didn't really have good alternatives to Ridley (Vereen didn't earn Belichick's trust until later in the year), so Ridley got heavy usage.

If Vereen and some combo of Bolden/Blount/Washington show that they can be consistent and trusted, Ridley's touches will likely go down. He doesn't offer much in the passing game (unlike Vereen/Washington) so it's possible that his reps will decrease significantly if Vereen proves himself (Washington seems likely to just be situational).
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Tzimisce


Most Valuable Poster
Joined: 13 Oct 2005
Posts: 47419
Location: Tuntmore Tower
PostPosted: Sat Jun 15, 2013 10:44 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

It'll be interesting to see if/how they split up the workload for Vereen and Washington. Washington could stick purely as a return specialist, but his value in the passing game is such that if Vereen doesn't continue to improve, he could take touches away from him.
_________________

I adopted some kid named Malcolm Butler
If anyone sees him, let me know.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
Richter


Joined: 11 Feb 2010
Posts: 12353
PostPosted: Sat Jun 15, 2013 11:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

JaguarCrazy2832 wrote:
That got heated quickly :lol:

Anyone else else want to elaborate on this? If he can get 1100 and 10 then he obviously a good #2, but im worried about consistently getting carries too

There's no one to take his touches, and he has far more in the way of positive traits than some people seem to ascribe to him. He's fast for his size, hits the hole hard, generates first downs at a rapid clip, busts off intermediate gains on a regular basis, has solid vision and a nose for the goal line. The biggest negative as far as fantasy football goes is that in a passing league, he doesn't offer much as a receiver. He's never going to be Ray Rice, who can rush for 30 yards and still give you a 20 point game with receiving touches. But as a number 2, or a super flex, yeah, I'd feel safe rolling with him.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
JaguarCrazy2832


Joined: 28 Jun 2008
Posts: 83560
PostPosted: Sun Jun 16, 2013 12:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Richter wrote:
JaguarCrazy2832 wrote:
That got heated quickly Laughing

Anyone else else want to elaborate on this? If he can get 1100 and 10 then he obviously a good #2, but im worried about consistently getting carries too

There's no one to take his touches, and he has far more in the way of positive traits than some people seem to ascribe to him. He's fast for his size, hits the hole hard, generates first downs at a rapid clip, busts off intermediate gains on a regular basis, has solid vision and a nose for the goal line. The biggest negative as far as fantasy football goes is that in a passing league, he doesn't offer much as a receiver. He's never going to be Ray Rice, who can rush for 30 yards and still give you a 20 point game with receiving touches. But as a number 2, or a super flex, yeah, I'd feel safe rolling with him.


He def. would be a #2 or a flex, although idk if he makes it to the middle of round 3 in a 12 team league
_________________
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Grachuus


Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 25287
Location: Thanks for the Sig Deadpulse!
PostPosted: Sun Jun 16, 2013 7:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

JaguarCrazy2832 wrote:
Richter wrote:
JaguarCrazy2832 wrote:
That got heated quickly Laughing

Anyone else else want to elaborate on this? If he can get 1100 and 10 then he obviously a good #2, but im worried about consistently getting carries too

There's no one to take his touches, and he has far more in the way of positive traits than some people seem to ascribe to him. He's fast for his size, hits the hole hard, generates first downs at a rapid clip, busts off intermediate gains on a regular basis, has solid vision and a nose for the goal line. The biggest negative as far as fantasy football goes is that in a passing league, he doesn't offer much as a receiver. He's never going to be Ray Rice, who can rush for 30 yards and still give you a 20 point game with receiving touches. But as a number 2, or a super flex, yeah, I'd feel safe rolling with him.


He def. would be a #2 or a flex, although idk if he makes it to the middle of round 3 in a 12 team league


I don't see an issue with the slotting you have on him. Biggest thing that could hurt him I think is if Bolden gets as many touches as he did last season before the PED suspension. Don't get me wrong, I don't think Bolden is the superior option but BB does seem to enjoy keeping his guys fresh.
_________________

Mark Twain wrote:
Sanity and happiness are an impossible combination.

QBvsDefensiveQuality
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
TreeFiddy350


Joined: 15 Jan 2013
Posts: 122
PostPosted: Sun Jun 16, 2013 4:39 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Ridley is very effective in the ba.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
24isthelaw


Joined: 15 Nov 2010
Posts: 7634
Location: Where the Patriots are
PostPosted: Sun Jun 16, 2013 8:50 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

patsfan25 wrote:
You really just don't know when to stop do you? I'll reserve my time for another day.


Wut. Laughing

Ridley is a stud. The only things one could possibly hold against him are that he's not good in the passing game and that is production is relatively feast or famine (either rips off a 10 yarder or gets stopped behind the LOS). I'd argue that is a function of the types of run plays we relied on last year (stretch plays that by nature either get blown up or work out, zone runs where our smaller OL sometimes get pusher around), and is unrelated to him as a player.

As for the OP: Ridley will get as many touches as he did last year. Shane Vereen will be absorbing Danny Woodhead's substantial snaps, which is a different role than that we ask out of Ridley. As for Bolden or Blount, they would need to make some substantial/unexpected improvements to cut into Ridley's snaps.
_________________

Adopt-a-Patriot: Marcus Forston - Practice squad (0 tackles, 0 sacks)
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message AIM Address
patsfan25


Joined: 07 Dec 2008
Posts: 5279
Location: CenCal
PostPosted: Sun Jun 16, 2013 11:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mcmurtry86 wrote:
patsfan25 wrote:
mcmurtry86 wrote:
patsfan25 wrote:
He also disappears against stout competition and always seems to fail in crunch time.


Other than the San Francisco game, when he was sparingly used due to the huge deficit the team found themselves in (using more 5 WR/TE sets and Vereen/Woodhead), this is totally untrue. He had marginal numbers against Seattle and Baltimore (regular season), thanks in large part to the OL totally crapping the bed but otherwise he was just fine against good run defenses. He had no problems against Houston which was a top 10 run defense.

Denver had the #2 run defense in the league and Ridley gashed them for 5.39 YPC and 151 yards. So his best game of the year came against the stoutest run defense the team faced all year.

Like most RB's, he struggles when his OL gets pushed around - a common problem they have had vs. Baltimore. There's nothing to suggest that he "disappears" against good defenses.


You really just don't know when to stop do you? I'll reserve my time for another day.


When to stop? You made an easily disprovable point. You said he struggled against "stout" defenses. But he tore up the best run defense he faced all year and ran quite well against the #9 run defense (Houston) in two separate games.

There's nothing wrong with criticizing a player, but at least make truthful critiques of him. As far as starting NFL RB's go, Ridley has no noticeable tendency to "disappear" the way you claim he did.

If you remember him "disappearing" it is likely because of the - at times - idiotic playcalling which went away from the run when the team needed just to kill the clock or move the chains.


Whether he was taken out or ineffective, that would mean disappearing in case you've lost sight of the definition. His production has been a result of defenses zoning in on the pass and the up-tempo style we've surprised opponents with. Why do you think we've had so many problems closing out teams? Yes, blame it on the playcalling. We've stayed away from running the clock out because we haven't found a closer at the RB position, let alone use Ridley as one. His costly and inconvenient fumbles against the Bills, Broncos, Ravens (X2) say so. Disprove that....
_________________
2014 Adopt-A-Patriot: Logan Ryan
Status Quo: Steal of 2013 Draft
Tackles:4
Forced Fumbles:1
PDs2:
INTs:1
Pick 6s:
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
Display posts from previous:   

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> New England Patriots All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum




Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group