JJDChE

So you're suggesting teams play pass on every down, essentially giving us a free 5 yards every time we run the ball? How does that make sense?

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

JJDChE

Yeah, when you responded in enormous font that Ridley wasn't more talented than GreenEllis.


The runs he's made are indicative of a player who sees the field better than BJGE and has the physical ability to exploit what he sees better than BJGE.

I file field vision and explosiveness under 'RB talent'.

Yeah. What's your point?

I have no expectations for the guy. I just know the little I've seen looks way better than what we have.

Exactly, Brady is too good to allow teams to put more focus on the run game, which is why it is successful even with a couple of castoffs back there. I agree completely.


The only time we've had a back with top tier talent on the roster was when we caught the tail end of Dillon's productive years in 2004. We gave him the ball 345 times.

Antowain Smith was a 2nd tier guy and we still gave it to him 287 and 252 times in '01 and '02.

If Ridley has what it looks like he has he'll be getting it 250+ times a year. I don't know if you consider that RBBC, I don't. That'll still leave 50-75 carries a piece for BJGE and Woodhead/Vereen or whoever else.

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

ausbacker

I responded to a peculiar line of thought. I don't have an opinion on Ridley being more talented than Green-Ellis because he's contributed for a total of 4 quarters. Shoot your load by all means, I'm staying with a grounded approach until I've seen it on a weekly basis through week 8 and week 12.

Or you can take what Ridley said himself about the size of the holes the OL opened for him.

I'd agree it's a component to being a running back.

229 carries 1,008 yards 4.4YPC 13TD

I disagree. The little I've seen looks more explosive than what we have. This is why I would like MORE exposure, as I've pointed out to you time and time again. 4 quarters of effort is not a substantial enough sample size to make a definitive conclusion.

I really don't want to know what your opinion of Danny Woodhead is then do I?

No issues with either of these comments.

I doubt it. I'd think the Patriots will place more emphasis on the run and split the carries according to form and match ups.

I don't buy nor endorse your comment earlier about the RB committee approach.

Patspsycho

There is a hole in your stud back theory and his name is Shane Vereen. Why did we draft two RBs if we weren't going to go the RBBC route? If Ridley has the rock 300 times a year, and BJGE is the 2nd RB, Woodhead the "change of back" according to your proclamations, then that leaves a 2nd round pick on the bench all year long.

Patspsycho

I am making no suggestions. You are the one that is saying our run game is not a threat. If that were the fact, our play actions would not be very successful.

Patspsycho

I thought it was 300? Now it's 250?

Sciz

Okay. How about 6 of last year's top 10? Two are basically there, two almost there, but also two pretty darn far off. And this is percentage of RB carries, with WR and QB (and DL, and P, etc) carries taken out.
2. Jamaal Charles - 44.4%
3. Michael Turner - 74.7%
5. Maurice Jones-Drew - 71.2%
6. Adrian Peterson - 74.7%
9. Ahmad Bradshaw - 62.3%
10. Ray Rice - 70.6%

__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

Don Kipines

I'm not sure if those numbers back you up that much. Charles is a terrific back, but he's a smaller guy who can't really run 20 times a game. And I'm not sure how much better Bradshaw is than Jacobs; he certainly fumbles more. If you had those two backs, you'd definitely want Jacobs to get as close to half the carries as possible, because he wears down defenses.

A true stud runner is a guy you can keep on the field at all times, who catches passes and pass-blocks and is good in short yardage and on the goal line, and doesn't need to be protected too much from wear and tear. Your ideal guy is a bigger back who can take the pounding. Guys like MJD and Rice and Charles are definitely lead backs, but they're all a little undersized and need to have their carries managed.

The exciting thing about Ridley is that he's a big back who's got explosion, catches the ball well and pass-blocks. He's got the size to carry the ball 20 times a game and he seems to have a lot more skill in the passing game than BJGE. Obviously we haven't seen that much of him, but he looks terrific.

Nunchucks

I think that Vereen was drafted because Ridley's pass catching skills and 3rd down blitz pickup skills were an unknown. Also, Ridley was probably rated very high on their board when their time to draft came up.

I think it is always better to have a 3 down back than a guy that just does 3rd downs or a guy that just does first downs. It makes it more difficult for defenses to figure out what you are going to do.

PATSYLICIOUS

Well I hope you're right jjdiche. If Ridley is BJGE between the tackles plus the explosiveness we saw last Sunday, he is capable of putting up Corey Dillon #'s for the next 7-10 seasons. If his frame can handle that many carries.

__________________
Organized madness
The young Gott-stra
Young Frank Sinatra