Does Faulk Stay Now?

[RobertWeathers]

With BJGE, Woodhead, Vereen and Ridley sure-fire choices to make the roster, the question is who do they keep on as a 5th RB (assuming that they do)? I say Faulk by making the following assumptions:

-He is healthy.
-He stays for reasonable cash (vet min $850k or whatever it is.)
-He has committed to BB that he is comfortable taking on a mentoring role (some games not dressing- see Troy Brown 2007).

Personally, I would like to see this scenario play out for the following reasons:

-Can continue to help Woody develop as the CoP/3rd down back he seems to have the potential to become.

-Can help Vereen & Ridley become men in the pro game and learn the offense.

-Can provide insurance in case Woody or BJGE goes down by picking up a few carries here and there.

-Can serve in an emergency role in KR and PR

-In some offensive sets, having Faulk and Woody in the backfield would be a interesting dynamic for opposing defenses to handle.

Thoughts?

 

[Brettlax3434]

With BJGE, Woodhead, Vereen and Ridley sure-fire choices to make the roster, the question is who do they keep on as a 5th RB (assuming that they do)? I say Faulk by making the following assumptions:

-He is healthy.
-He stays for reasonable cash (vet min $850k or whatever it is.)
-He has committed to BB that he is comfortable taking on a mentoring role (some game not dressing- see Troy Brown 2007).

Personally, I would like to see this scenario play out for the following reasons:

-Can continue to help Woody develop as the CoP/3rd down back he seems to have the potential to become.

-Can help Vereen & Ridley become men in the pro game

-Can provide insurance in case Woody or BJGE goes down

-Can serve in an emergency role in KR and PR

Thoughts?

If we bring him back he is going to play. Not as much as in the past but he will play. BB loves Faulk and before the injury he was still effective.

 

[Kasmir]

With BJGE, Woodhead, Vereen and Ridley sure-fire choices to make the roster, the question is who do they keep on as a 5th RB (assuming that they do)? I say Faulk by making the following assumptions:

-He is healthy.
-He stays for reasonable cash (vet min $850k or whatever it is.)
-He has committed to BB that he is comfortable taking on a mentoring role (some games not dressing- see Troy Brown 2007).

Personally, I would like to see this scenario play out for the following reasons:

-Can continue to help Woody develop as the CoP/3rd down back he seems to have the potential to become.

-Can help Vereen & Ridley become men in the pro game

-Can provide insurance in case Woody or BJGE goes down

-Can serve in an emergency role in KR and PR

Thoughts?

I think your analysis is spot on. It will all come down to whether Kevin will take the implied pay cut to stay on the team. Would be a good stable of backs.

 

[ctpatsfan77]

With BJGE, Woodhead, Vereen and Ridley sure-fire choices to make the roster, the question is who do they keep on as a 5th RB (assuming that they do)? I say Faulk by making the following assumptions:

Part of it is money. Remember that Faulk's salary cap was about $4M/yr the last couple of years (this gives you an idea of how highly valued he was in BB's eyes, AND an idea of how ridiculously cheap Woody's contract was).

 

[willard]

I believe if he is injury free and wants to play another year; so long as the Patriots carry 5 backs, then he will be on the roster.

There is the distinct possibility that only 4 running backs will be kept. We have what looks like a very strong, young 4 guys and Bill may elect to just go with them.

Would be nice to see Kevin go out with 4 rings

 

[RobertWeathers]

Part of it is money. Remember that Faulk's salary cap was about $4M/yr the last couple of years (this gives you an idea of how highly valued he is in BB's eyes, AND an idea of how important Woody is).

Yep. Thats the biggie IMO too.

If he does well in his workouts, some team may give him a nice 1yr deal. Granted it'll be a year later, but he played VERY well at the start of the 2010 season. No question that hes lost a step, but hes pretty good for a CoP/3rd down RB well into his 30s.

 

[Gwedd]

If the Patriots keep only 4 backs, and IF Faulk is willing to continue the mentoring role, I can very well see him hired as a position coach, or special assistant.

 

[ausbacker]

If the Patriots keep only 4 backs, and IF Faulk is willing to continue the mentoring role, I can very well see him hired as a position coach, or special assistant.

I'd rather see him on the coaching roster to be honest.

 

[BradyFTW!]

I'm not sure why the Pats would keep Faulk, Woodhead, and Vereen, to be honest. As much as I don't want to see him go, I'd be mildly surprised if he's on the roster in week 1. If he sticks, I think that it will be largely because Belichick doesn't trust Woodhead to protect Brady in the passing game.

 

[Deus Irae]

I don't know if it will be Faulk or not, but there will be veteran running backs in camp to battle the young players.

 

[RobertWeathers]

I'm not sure why the Pats would keep Faulk, Woodhead, and Vereen, to be honest.

Interesting. Is your view that Vereen is a CoP/3rd down RB?

I'm operating under the assumption that with is draft status, size & strength BB sees him as a every-down runner. No?

 

[jczxohn1]

Carried 5 backs the last few yrs and never seem to have too many by the time the season is 1/2 over, so, yeah, there's room for Kevin and he could even be pupped to start the season.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Interesting. Is your view that Vereen is a CoP/3rd down RB?

I'm operating under the assumption that with is draft status, size & strength BB sees him as a every-down runner. No?

No, definitely not exclusively, but I think that when you have two guys who can capably fill that role, a third becomes a bit of a luxury. If they keep 5 RBs, I assume he'll stay, but if they go with 4, it's got to be one of those three, since Ridley has a skillset that none of them have. And since I assume that they're going with 3 QBs next season, that one roster spot has to come from somewhere

 

[capetide]

I love Kevin Faulk but you dont use a roster spot on a "mentor".

 

[BlueThunder]

No, definitely not exclusively, but I think that when you have two guys who can capably fill that role, a third becomes a bit of a luxury. If they keep 5 RBs, I assume he'll stay, but if they go with 4, it's got to be one of those three, since Ridley has a skillset that none of them have. And since I assume that they're going with 3 QBs next season, that one roster spot has to come from somewhere

Agree..3 QB's means 4 RB's IMHO.......Faulk would be a luxury.....put him on PUP as insurance for 6 weeks.....BB always does whats best for the team....hate to say it, but unless one of the RB's goes down in camp, there's no room for Kevin...would love to see him as a RB coach...

 

[Brady'sButtBoy]

Faulk may want to find a place where he'll play more often. Between Woodhead and now Vereen, his snaps are likely to diminish, especially if Vereen turns out to be as good a reciever as advertised. IOTW, Faluk may make the squad here but could get more snaps on another team, and almost certainly get paid more somewhere else. If the Pats keep 5 backs and activate 4 on Sundays I bet it would be Ridley who would sit for now so who knows? Faulk may see the field plenty, the question then becomes will he be looking for max $$ - I don't think he'll get it here.

 

[Triumph]

Faulk would hardly play IMO.

Vereen, Woody and Faulk all basically do the same thing. Assuming he makes the roster, Vereen will likley split carries with BJGE, but one of his strengths is receiving out of the backfield like Faulk and Woody. Ridley will need carries too.

If the Pats focus more on a run game and play action, Vereen will see the field more because Faulk isnt as much a threat to a defense via the run. Of course Vereen will have to earn those snaps in practice and training camp. BB simply wont play him because hes a new draft pick.

I just dont see Faulk back with a 4 Mil cap hit at a lesser role than he already had.

 

[JoeSixPat]

The role that Kevin Faulk played is critical to the Pats offensive scheme. We got lucky last year that Woodhead was able to step in and play that role, but Belichick clearly wants to make sure he's got depth for an all around pass catching RB.

That's what the Vereen choice seemed to be - a proven pass catching/all around RB.

When it comes to filling out the RB roster you have to think that both rookies are locks - but training camp and pre-season (how ever long that is) will sort that out. Maybe one of the rookies winds up needing more work and finds himself on IR to open a roster spot for someone ready to contribute now? Wouldn't be the first time that's happened.

In Faulk's case he needs to do the following:

1. Sign with the Pats - or potentially someone else - likely for the Vet minimum with some incentives worked in.

2. Show what he can still do and hope he can make the final roster.

Until he signs with the Pats or someone else and shows he can play all speculation doesn't mean much.

 

[mgteich]

That's nice. Instead of trying to get him to be the #5 RB at $850K, we should try to get him to be an assistant position coach at $85K or so. I'm sure he'll go for that.????

If the Patriots keep only 4 backs, and IF Faulk is willing to continue the mentoring role, I can very well see him hired as a position coach, or special assistant.

 

[Sciz]

Faulk is the kind of player who I definitely want in the meeting room, but I don't think that his contributions on the field warrant a roster spot. He's made around $20 million in his career, so I don't think only making a coach's salary would bother him too much.