Pats Running Backs

[mayoclinic]

Heath Evans goes out on a limb and thinks that the Pats need to involve the running game more:

“I’ll say this: If you look at the three Super Bowls they’ve won, they ran the ball, and they ran the ball extremely well,” NFL Network analyst Evans said Friday. “There were a lot of two-back sets. Patrick Pass was your fullback in some of them. And they also had Marc Edwards, the original (No.) 44. Look, I’m just going to say it. The Patriots, if they want to win another Super Bowl, they need to have a dominant, physical ground game. And I would say this: The Patriots’ goal-line scheme, they need to take that and implement it into the open field.”

BostonHerald.com - Blogs: The Blitz» Blog Archive » Morning links: What’s up with all the fullbacks?

I tend to agree with him. I don't think the Pats ever want to be a run-first team, but I do think they need to have a dominant, physical ground game that they can use when appropriate.

 

[mayoclinic]

More from Heath Evans via Karen Guregian:

Evans believes running the football is the key to beating teams with talented defensive fronts such the Giants. Without a commitment to running, it’s tough to beat Tom Coughlin’s crew.

“You neutralize an Osi (Umenyiora), you neutralize a (Justin) Tuck, you neutralize a JPP (Jason Pierre-Paul) by running the football,” he said. “Sure, you can beat the Jets and you can beat the Dolphins and Bills, you can beat up on most teams being as disciplined and as structured as the Patriots are. But when you get to the Super Bowl, you find another disciplined, structured, physically sound and physically tough football team — just like you are. Then when you allow their best assets to tee off on your offensive line because you’re not consistently running the ball . . . you’re probably not going to win.”

As the lead blocker, Evans said a lot of the time he would be asked to find the hole or be like a human GPS for the running back. That could be what’s in store here. Still, he’s not sure that’s what the Pats have in mind with their fullback set to help the younger backs.

“When you have a Tom Brady, it’s so hard to take the ball out of his hands,” Evans said. “It’s so hard to bet against him. But I do think they need to carry a fullback. They need to be more like we were in ’06.” Those were the final days of Dillon. It’s also possible we’ll see more of a screen game presence than what was employed by previous offensive coordinator Bill O’Brien.
“Josh is definitely a screen guy,” Evans said. “That’s part of his run game, which I always loved, because I was a recipient.”

That would mean said fullback would have to be somewhat versatile. Given that, Evans predicts Larsen would be the guy that’s kept. Assuming Kettani is in the halfback pack, Fiammetta is more of a traditional blocking fullback, one of the better ones in the league. But Larsen, who was with McDaniels in Denver, can pretty much do it all. He can catch the ball coming out of the backfield, can be an effective lead blocker and also plays special teams. Or, maybe they keep no one. We’ll see. Larsen signed a two-year deal, while Fiammetta is only on the books for one year. Given the reappearance of the fullback in Foxboro, it’s fun to speculate.

Pats appear ‘fully’ loaded - BostonHerald.com

 

[captain stone]

I'm buying what Evans is cooking, and I'm smelling what he's selling.

 

[Deus Irae]

Heath Evans goes out on a limb and thinks that the Pats need to involve the running game more...

I tend to agree with him. I don't think the Pats ever want to be a run-first team, but I do think they need to have a dominant, physical ground game that they can use when appropriate.

The current rules make Evans' argument a terrible one. History has shown that repeatedly since 2005.

 

[patsfan13]

Certainly wearing down pass rushers like the Giants have with the running game is a component of being successful, but lost our #1 target and the QB getting injured in the third qtr is what cost the Pats the SB.

 

[Deus Irae]

Certainly wearing down pass rushers like the Giants have with the running game is a component of being successful, but lost our #1 target and the QB getting injured in the third qtr is what cost the Pats the SB.

And the lack of a running game isn't what caused Welker to drop that pass, either...

 

[Marqui]

Certainly wearing down pass rushers like the Giants have with the running game is a component of being successful, but lost our #1 target and the QB getting injured in the third qtr is what cost the Pats the SB.

That's kind of a weak excuse. The Packers had a ton of important players on IR when the won the SB. A real champion should be deep and versatile enough to overcome their big injuries and still win.

 

[Snake Eyes]

And the lack of a running game isn't what caused Welker to drop that pass, either...

No, but these things don't exist in a vacuum. Perhaps TFB would have completed more passes throughout the game if the Giants actually had to read and react more because our running game was more of a threat.

We don't necessarily need to run more, we need to run better. With a better running game BB and Co. will figure out what the ratios should be.

 

[Deus Irae]

No, but these things don't exist in a vacuum. Perhaps TFB would have completed more passes throughout the game if the Giants actually had to read and react more because our running game was more of a threat.

We don't necessarily need to run more, we need to run better. With a better running game BB and Co. will figure out what the ratios should be.

Look, this is basic logic. You can't argue that the only way the Patriots will beat the Giants is if the Patriots get a better running game when the Patriots would almost certainly have beaten the Giants, regardless of the running game, if Welker had caught a catchable pass.

 

[Snake Eyes]

Look, this is basic logic. You can't argue that the only way the Patriots will beat the Giants is if the Patriots get a better running game when the Patriots would almost certainly have beaten the Giants, regardless of the running game, if Welker had caught a catchable pass.

I never said it was the only way, I don't think there is an only way. With a stronger passing game we would have had better chances, that's one of the reasons I wanted to trade for Lloyd mid-season and even earlier.

I just believe that a stronger running game is a very good step in the right direction, and it looks like that's where things are going.

 

[Ivan]

Let's see what Ridley and Vereen can actually do first before we write off the unit as a whole.

It is impossible to have a 53 man roster that is entirely filled with proven players, every team, the patriots included, has to depend upon young players who have yet to establish themselves. The Patriots have 2 good young prospects at RB and 2 proven players in Addai and Woodhead, it's hardly a weakness and won't be unless they all fail. As you say, let's wait and see.

 

[Deus Irae]

I never said it was the only way, I don't think there is an only way. With a stronger passing game we would have had better chances, that's one of the reasons I wanted to trade for Lloyd mid-season and even earlier.

I just believe that a stronger running game is a very good step in the right direction, and it looks like that's where things are going.

You have a habit of doing this. If you're going to jump into a conversation, first familiarize yourself with what's being said. Let's look at what Evans said:

Look, I’m just going to say it. The Patriots, if they want to win another Super Bowl, they need to have a dominant, physical ground game. And I would say this: The Patriots’ goal-line scheme, they need to take that and implement it into the open field.”

Now, seeing that, and re-reading what I wrote:

he current rules make Evans' argument a terrible one. History has shown that repeatedly since 2005.

realize that my posts weren't about you, and that my posts were on point in response to Mr. Evans.

 

[Why?PJ]

You have a habit of doing this. If you're going to jump into a conversation, first familiarize yourself with what's being said. Let's look at what Evans said:



Now, seeing that, and re-reading what I wrote:



realize that my posts weren't about you, and that my posts were on point in response to Mr. Evans.

and your point was totally 100% wrong. Or did you like seeing Brady get sacked for a safety in the first play of the SB? Only reason that happened is because every single person in the entire world knew the Pats were going to throw the ball like every single other time they were in that situation the entire year.

Notice how when the Pats were winning Super Bowls, they were running more? Or did that slip your notice? You need a running game the defense respects to have a chance. The Patriots have not had that for a long while.

 

[Deus Irae]

and your point was totally 100% wrong. Or did you like seeing Brady get sacked for a safety in the first play of the SB? Only reason that happened is because every single person in the entire world knew the Pats were going to throw the ball like every single other time they were in that situation the entire year.

Notice how when the Pats were winning Super Bowls, they were running more? Or did that slip your notice? You need a running game the defense respects to have a chance. The Patriots have not had that for a long while.

My post wasn't wrong at all, since Welker making the catch would, in all probability, have sealed the game for the Patriots. Perhaps you should have avoided compounding someone else's error by not doing the same thing he did, and not responding without bothering to read what's actually being discussed.

 

[mgteich]

Yup! So, our plan is to depend on Solder staying healthy (like Brady and Wilfork).

We're in good shape as long as Solder doesn't get hurt.

 

[mayoclinic]

Yup! So, our plan is to depend on Solder staying healthy (like Brady and Wilfork).

I don't like it any better than you do. Though presumably we'd be ok as long as one of Solder or Vollmer is ok, since the other one would man the LT spot, and Gallery and Cannon could probably both handle RT. But that's sailing a bit too close to the wind for my liking.

 

[mgteich]

IMPROVING THE PRODUCTION FROM OUR RUNNING BACKS

Significantly increasing the number of running yards and plays is one of the leasst important aspect of improved production of from our running backs.

1) We will have better production in short yardage situations, especially in the red zone. Or perhaps, we will have similar production WITHOUT having Brady as our #1 option on short yardage.

2) With Josh back, the screen is back. These are PASSING plays.

3) There should be better schemes to pick up the blitz and protecting Brady.

4) Brady will have more success dumping the ball off.

I expect Josh to keep Larsen as a utility player. We game him a decent bonus, and Josh knows what he can do.

 

[patchick]

Yup! So, our plan is to depend on Solder staying healthy (like Brady and Wilfork).

I think it's fair to say that losing your starting LT or QB would be a lousy roadmap to the Superbowl for any team.

The Pats were in an extraordinary position last year, starting the season with 3 tackles more talented than the average starter. They've never been there before, in my recollection. I miss it, but I knew it couldn't last!

 

[ProudestRyno]

Other than the fumble (SINGULAR), when he played Ridley looked like a stud last year. So I'd like to see what he has before I label him a bust like Shonn Greene. We know nothing about Vereen either. Or Bolden. Unless you are going to trade for a stud or draft one high, both of which would have detracted from greater areas of need on this team, then it makes sense to go with this group and see who emerges.

Fixed for accuracy. Why do people continue to claim that Ridley has these terrible fumbling issues? He lost ONE fumble last season. The one in the postseason. That's it.

 

[TyronePoole]

Fixed for accuracy. Why do people continue to claim that Ridley has these terrible fumbling issues? He lost ONE fumble last season. The one in the postseason. That's it.

OOOH Well look at you with your fancy statistics and spreadsheets, I'm just so envious of your advanced saber metric prowess. Sorry I don't have a super computer keeping track of these things professor Einstein, not all of us are NASA rocket scientists.

























homer simpson being sarcastic.wmv - YouTube