BlueThunder

I don't see Woody being cut....and it's too soon to release either Vereen or Ridley ( Ridley has established a bit of what he can do already with a 5.1 ypc and Vereen gets his shot this season). If Josh keeps a FB, I hope they use 5 RB's, even if it means keeping one on inactive on gameday. Insurance/depth is always good.

Injuries usually sort these problems out...IR anyone???

__________________
My guns are no threat to anyone who isn't trying to deprive me or my family of life,liberty or property. They are,however, EXTREMELY dangerous to anyone who threatens to take those things.

KontradictioN

Let's pump the brakes here, speed racer. First of all, Bolden (as of right now) has to beat out any one (or comination of) Ridley, Vereen, and Woodhead for playing time. Ridley is the thumper, Vereen is the change of pace, and Woodhead has been our third down running back. If he can do that, then he would see some playing time in a system that has been RBBC since 2006. That's just the very beginning for him. On top of that, he has to show what he has in order to beat out any one of those guys in actual in-game action... not just in practice.

__________________

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


CREDIT - Sicilian

patsfan13

I think we keep 4 RB's whether we keep a FB or not, so currently I think that baring injury the 4 are Ridley Vareen, Woodhead and Bolden. This is a position where players are getting nicked and injured all the time and depth is required.

__________________
"Some guys play in all-star games, some guys don't. I don't know who picks all those all-star teams. In all honesty, I don't know who picks the combine, for that matter," Belichick said. "How does (Miami-Ohio offensive lineman Brandon) Brooks not get invited to the combine? How did Vollmer not get invited to the combine? I don't know. We can't really worry about that. We just have to try to evaluate them the best we can."

patsfaninpittsburgh

The real question is why would anyone NOT want to have a RBBC where four guys have specific yet overlapping skills?

Why would anyone think a short shelf life "feature back" that cost $7-8 million is preferred.

Besides, the definition of a "feature back" is team has zero at QB.

Off The Grid

How about you follow the game the way you follow it, and those of us who actually get excited about Potential and Possibilities follow it our way, without your unsolicited, uninvited, and utterly useless advice??

__________________

patchick

Of course, but RB may be the position where it's most common to find UDFA success stories (just look at our own Green-Ellis and Woodhead), and where it's most common for rookies to hit the ground running, metaphorically as well as literally.

That said, I'd be shocked to see the rookie become a true "feature back" this year. For one thing, he'd have to show a massive overnight improvement in blitz pickup. In this offense there will be plenty of snaps where versatility will trump pure rushing potential.

KontradictioN

You have every right to get excited. But labeling the guy a fantasy sleeper without any evidence against actual in-game competition instead of a defense that he knows like the back of his hand by now is jumping the gun a little bit, IMO. I like Bolden. I like what I've heard and I like his potential, being the avid SEC fan that I am. But I want to actually see him beat out any one of the three that I named first before pumping this guy up as the next clock killin' Corey Dillon for our offense.

__________________

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


CREDIT - Sicilian

patchick

I can very easily envision scenarios where each of Woodhead, Ridley, Vereen and Bolden gets the most reps. I wouldn't make any fantasy bets on any one of them. But as a group...with the increasingly positive camp reports on Vereen, the consistently positive ones on Bolden, and what we've already seen from Woodhead and Ridley...my irrational exuberance about the RB corps is starting to feel a wee bit more rational.

patsinthesnow

The thing that's interesting about the competition is the UDFA is on equal or better talent level than the two second year early round drafted players, when the hell does that ever happen?

Brandon Bolden 2010: (SEC)

163 attempts 976 yards 6.0 ypc 14 TDs 32 receptions 344 yards 3 TDs

Stevan Ridley 2010: (SEC)

249 attempts 1,147 yards 4.6 ypc 15 TDs 11 receptions 61 yards 0 TDs

Shane Vereen 2010: (PAC 10)

231 attempts 1,167 yards 5.1 ypc 13 TDs 22 receptions 209 yards 3 TDs

AndyJohnson

Again, naming a few that have made it doesn't mean much.
Are all 6th rounders now potential HOFer because of Brady? If Brady were drafted in the 7th do those players get better?
There are thousands of UDFAs who do not make it, so naming the few that do doesn't prove much. I would also suggest that it SEEMS that way with RBs because they are more noticable. I bet there are a similar # of DTs, OGs, CBs, etc, but its just not as noticable.
Finally, I think the track record you are speaking of is much thinner for UDFAs in their rookie year, which is what this discussion was about.