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 Previous  1, 2
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> New England Patriots
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
24isthelaw


Joined: 15 Nov 2010
Posts: 7702
Location: Where the Patriots are
PostPosted: Sun Jun 16, 2013 11:01 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

patsfan25 wrote:
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....


First of all you have to differentiate between fumbles. AFCCG? Hell of a hit by Pollard. It happens. Same with the one Von Miller forced. What do you want Ridley to do differently in those situations? Running backs fumble, and in both of those cases Ridley was doing everything right. The fumbles in the 49ers game? Those were ugly. But Ridley is not a guy who I'd say has "a fumbling problem" by any stretch of the imagination. He takes care of the rock.

And as for Ridley disappearing, hitting 4-5 yards when your number is called and getting what the line gives you is hard to characterize as disappearing. Not sure what you're trying to say.
_________________

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: 5605
Location: CenCal
PostPosted: Sun Jun 16, 2013 11:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

24isthelaw wrote:
patsfan25 wrote:
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....


First of all you have to differentiate between fumbles. AFCCG? Hell of a hit by Pollard. It happens. Same with the one Von Miller forced. What do you want Ridley to do differently in those situations? Running backs fumble, and in both of those cases Ridley was doing everything right. The fumbles in the 49ers game? Those were ugly. But Ridley is not a guy who I'd say has "a fumbling problem" by any stretch of the imagination. He takes care of the rock.

And as for Ridley disappearing, hitting 4-5 yards when your number is called and getting what the line gives you is hard to characterize as disappearing. Not sure what you're trying to say.


Nothing you said changes the fact that he fumbles in crucial situations, and has done so in many important games. Nothing you said changes the fact that he disappears when we need him the most, whether it's against better run defenses or when we need to close the game out (probably because he tends to fumble the ball).
_________________

Logan Ryan
Tackles:13 Forced Fumbles:1
PDs:3 INTs:1 Pick 6s:


Deadpulse Ink.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
Sciz


Joined: 19 Jan 2009
Posts: 15857
Location: Iowa
PostPosted: Sun Jun 16, 2013 11:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Oh gosh. Now players are expected to hold onto the ball as they lose consciousness? Let's at least consider the circumstances a little.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Richter


Joined: 11 Feb 2010
Posts: 12619
PostPosted: Sun Jun 16, 2013 11:20 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

patsfan25 wrote:
24isthelaw wrote:
patsfan25 wrote:
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....


First of all you have to differentiate between fumbles. AFCCG? Hell of a hit by Pollard. It happens. Same with the one Von Miller forced. What do you want Ridley to do differently in those situations? Running backs fumble, and in both of those cases Ridley was doing everything right. The fumbles in the 49ers game? Those were ugly. But Ridley is not a guy who I'd say has "a fumbling problem" by any stretch of the imagination. He takes care of the rock.

And as for Ridley disappearing, hitting 4-5 yards when your number is called and getting what the line gives you is hard to characterize as disappearing. Not sure what you're trying to say.


Nothing you said changes the fact that he fumbles in crucial situations, and has done so in many important games. Nothing you said changes the fact that he disappears when we need him the most, whether it's against better run defenses or when we need to close the game out (probably because he tends to fumble the ball).

Those rest somewhere between fabrication and opinion. I don't see much fact there. Especially the idea that he has fumbled in "many" important games. He hasn't even played in many important games. But considering your opinion on McDaniels, and how it goes hand in hand with your assertions, I'm not surprised.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
patsfan25


Joined: 07 Dec 2008
Posts: 5605
Location: CenCal
PostPosted: Sun Jun 16, 2013 11:36 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Richter wrote:
patsfan25 wrote:
24isthelaw wrote:
patsfan25 wrote:
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....


First of all you have to differentiate between fumbles. AFCCG? Hell of a hit by Pollard. It happens. Same with the one Von Miller forced. What do you want Ridley to do differently in those situations? Running backs fumble, and in both of those cases Ridley was doing everything right. The fumbles in the 49ers game? Those were ugly. But Ridley is not a guy who I'd say has "a fumbling problem" by any stretch of the imagination. He takes care of the rock.

And as for Ridley disappearing, hitting 4-5 yards when your number is called and getting what the line gives you is hard to characterize as disappearing. Not sure what you're trying to say.


Nothing you said changes the fact that he fumbles in crucial situations, and has done so in many important games. Nothing you said changes the fact that he disappears when we need him the most, whether it's against better run defenses or when we need to close the game out (probably because he tends to fumble the ball).

Those rest somewhere between fabrication and opinion. I don't see much fact there. Especially the idea that he has fumbled in "many" important games. He hasn't even played in many important games. But considering your opinion on McDaniels, and how it goes hand in hand with your assertions, I'm not surprised.


The fumbles against the Ravens and Bills in his rookie year? The ball he gave up to the Broncos at the end of the game last season that would have had Peyton killing us again if the defense didn't come through? When has he closed out a game? There's the first Dolphins game of last season, I'll give him that. Does BB trust him in crucial situations? Absolutely not. These are all facts, because they happened. Show me your facts. When did I say McDaniel's was the god coming of assistant coaches? I debated he was a "fine" offensive coordinator. I don't see how anything you say has so much credibility when you called him a Class A jackass without even knowing the guy. Again, none of this is fabricated. My opinion hinges on reality and event. Not personal feelings....
_________________

Logan Ryan
Tackles:13 Forced Fumbles:1
PDs:3 INTs:1 Pick 6s:


Deadpulse Ink.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
Richter


Joined: 11 Feb 2010
Posts: 12619
PostPosted: Mon Jun 17, 2013 12:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

patsfan25 wrote:
Richter wrote:
patsfan25 wrote:
24isthelaw wrote:
patsfan25 wrote:
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....


First of all you have to differentiate between fumbles. AFCCG? Hell of a hit by Pollard. It happens. Same with the one Von Miller forced. What do you want Ridley to do differently in those situations? Running backs fumble, and in both of those cases Ridley was doing everything right. The fumbles in the 49ers game? Those were ugly. But Ridley is not a guy who I'd say has "a fumbling problem" by any stretch of the imagination. He takes care of the rock.

And as for Ridley disappearing, hitting 4-5 yards when your number is called and getting what the line gives you is hard to characterize as disappearing. Not sure what you're trying to say.


Nothing you said changes the fact that he fumbles in crucial situations, and has done so in many important games. Nothing you said changes the fact that he disappears when we need him the most, whether it's against better run defenses or when we need to close the game out (probably because he tends to fumble the ball).

Those rest somewhere between fabrication and opinion. I don't see much fact there. Especially the idea that he has fumbled in "many" important games. He hasn't even played in many important games. But considering your opinion on McDaniels, and how it goes hand in hand with your assertions, I'm not surprised.


The fumbles against the Ravens and Bills in his rookie year? The ball he gave up to the Broncos at the end of the game last season that would have had Peyton killing us again if the defense didn't come through? When has he closed out a game? There's the first Dolphins game of last season, I'll give him that. Does BB trust him in crucial situations? Absolutely not. These are all facts, because they happened. Show me your facts. When did I say McDaniel's was the god coming of assistant coaches? I debated he was a "fine" offensive coordinator. I don't see how anything you say has so much credibility when you called him a Class A jackass without even knowing the guy. Again, none of this is fabricated. My opinion hinges on reality and event. Not personal feelings....

His rookie year? Those were important games? Who knew...
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
patsfan25


Joined: 07 Dec 2008
Posts: 5605
Location: CenCal
PostPosted: Mon Jun 17, 2013 1:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Richter wrote:
patsfan25 wrote:
Richter wrote:
patsfan25 wrote:
24isthelaw wrote:
patsfan25 wrote:
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....


First of all you have to differentiate between fumbles. AFCCG? Hell of a hit by Pollard. It happens. Same with the one Von Miller forced. What do you want Ridley to do differently in those situations? Running backs fumble, and in both of those cases Ridley was doing everything right. The fumbles in the 49ers game? Those were ugly. But Ridley is not a guy who I'd say has "a fumbling problem" by any stretch of the imagination. He takes care of the rock.

And as for Ridley disappearing, hitting 4-5 yards when your number is called and getting what the line gives you is hard to characterize as disappearing. Not sure what you're trying to say.


Nothing you said changes the fact that he fumbles in crucial situations, and has done so in many important games. Nothing you said changes the fact that he disappears when we need him the most, whether it's against better run defenses or when we need to close the game out (probably because he tends to fumble the ball).

Those rest somewhere between fabrication and opinion. I don't see much fact there. Especially the idea that he has fumbled in "many" important games. He hasn't even played in many important games. But considering your opinion on McDaniels, and how it goes hand in hand with your assertions, I'm not surprised.


The fumbles against the Ravens and Bills in his rookie year? The ball he gave up to the Broncos at the end of the game last season that would have had Peyton killing us again if the defense didn't come through? When has he closed out a game? There's the first Dolphins game of last season, I'll give him that. Does BB trust him in crucial situations? Absolutely not. These are all facts, because they happened. Show me your facts. When did I say McDaniel's was the god coming of assistant coaches? I debated he was a "fine" offensive coordinator. I don't see how anything you say has so much credibility when you called him a Class A jackass without even knowing the guy. Again, none of this is fabricated. My opinion hinges on reality and event. Not personal feelings....

His rookie year? Those were important games? Who knew...


All games are important. Profound stuff, I know......
_________________

Logan Ryan
Tackles:13 Forced Fumbles:1
PDs:3 INTs:1 Pick 6s:


Deadpulse Ink.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message MSN Messenger
Richter


Joined: 11 Feb 2010
Posts: 12619
PostPosted: Mon Jun 17, 2013 2:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

patsfan25 wrote:
Richter wrote:
patsfan25 wrote:
Richter wrote:
patsfan25 wrote:
24isthelaw wrote:
patsfan25 wrote:
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....


First of all you have to differentiate between fumbles. AFCCG? Hell of a hit by Pollard. It happens. Same with the one Von Miller forced. What do you want Ridley to do differently in those situations? Running backs fumble, and in both of those cases Ridley was doing everything right. The fumbles in the 49ers game? Those were ugly. But Ridley is not a guy who I'd say has "a fumbling problem" by any stretch of the imagination. He takes care of the rock.

And as for Ridley disappearing, hitting 4-5 yards when your number is called and getting what the line gives you is hard to characterize as disappearing. Not sure what you're trying to say.


Nothing you said changes the fact that he fumbles in crucial situations, and has done so in many important games. Nothing you said changes the fact that he disappears when we need him the most, whether it's against better run defenses or when we need to close the game out (probably because he tends to fumble the ball).

Those rest somewhere between fabrication and opinion. I don't see much fact there. Especially the idea that he has fumbled in "many" important games. He hasn't even played in many important games. But considering your opinion on McDaniels, and how it goes hand in hand with your assertions, I'm not surprised.


The fumbles against the Ravens and Bills in his rookie year? The ball he gave up to the Broncos at the end of the game last season that would have had Peyton killing us again if the defense didn't come through? When has he closed out a game? There's the first Dolphins game of last season, I'll give him that. Does BB trust him in crucial situations? Absolutely not. These are all facts, because they happened. Show me your facts. When did I say McDaniel's was the god coming of assistant coaches? I debated he was a "fine" offensive coordinator. I don't see how anything you say has so much credibility when you called him a Class A jackass without even knowing the guy. Again, none of this is fabricated. My opinion hinges on reality and event. Not personal feelings....

His rookie year? Those were important games? Who knew...


All games are important. Profound stuff, I know......

Yes, in a short season like the what the NFL has, every game IS important. But I doubt that's what you meant when you said important games; the typical understood meaning for a term like that is games against future playoff opponents that affect seeding and tie-breakers, and playoff games. Ridley's been a mixed bag in closing situations, I'll admit, but you just heap all the responsibility on him. McDaniels is culprit number one (that jackass... I can't believe you thought I was using that term to assail his character, rather than his coaching, which was both implicit and obvious based on the conversation), and the offensive line has its share of blame to carry, though it's not really built for closing out games that way. But how often did we see Woodhead in, in a situation that made little sense, or two runs in a jumbo set followed by asking Brady to throw a pass on third and long? Ridley had solid games against the Texans in the playoffs, and Miami and Buffalo last year in the closer's role. He obviously had a bad fumble in Denver (though he had put them in good field position prior to that, and it was still a two score game), and didn't do much against Seattle or Baltimore (though playcalling was horrendous in the latter game). There isn't a huge sample size to draw from, since the Patriots either blew people out last season (which was half the total games), or went to a last minute finish where the running game didn't figure into things much. Of course, the real question is, why are you focusing on his ability to close out games so much? There's a lot more to his duties as a lead back than that.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
24isthelaw


Joined: 15 Nov 2010
Posts: 7702
Location: Where the Patriots are
PostPosted: Mon Jun 17, 2013 8:59 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Football is a team game, and Ridley has done very well within the context of our offense. Obviously when the offense struggles up front he won't do as well. But who doesn't? If your definition of disappearing is "not being Adrian Peterson", I agree. He disappears all the time. Otherwise its hard to fault the guy when all he does is consistently get what's given to him. His vision running the football is impeccable.
_________________

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

Post new topic   Reply to topic    FootballsFuture.com Forum Index -> New England Patriots All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 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