Shane Vereen

[mgteich]

Who think that he shown anything yet?

I think that we will keep Bolden on the 53 precisely because Vereen is not yet someone to be counted on. We have THREE developmental running backs: Vereen, Demps and Bolden. I'm not sure which of them I would want active for Game 1. It is good that Ridley is stepping up. We are fine with Ridley and Woodhead as our running backs, but we do need depth that can contribute.

I still think that Belichick will be scouring the waiver wire for a veteran backup. Bolden hasn't shown enough to be anywhere but on the Practice Squad.

 

[strngplyr]

This is my post on Vereen from another thread. Basically a quick rundown of my thoughts about him.

Vereen is safe for this year, but his future is anything but certain.

He hasn't come close to living up to the hype surrounding him yet everyone speaks of him challenging for the #1 job here.

4
2
-3
10
19
1
2
4 (TD)

0
1
8
1
2
8
-2

Those are his carries in games that count, all in garbage time of blowout wins. He was about as explosive and Benny in his limited playtime last year and he looks slower than Ridley (not to say Ridley is slow).

Ridley simply appears to do everything we've seen Vereen do ...except he does it better. He looks quicker, faster, stronger, and he actually makes it onto the field.

He actually hasn't even looked good in the preseason outside of the New Orleans game this season where all his carries came against scrubs. He missed 3/4 of the games last year and posted 11 carries for 34 yards with a long of 14 (3.1ypc).

I understand the hype coming out of college, but his skills simply haven't translated into the NFL. Yet, hopefully it's just taking time.

Like I said, I get the hype, but I don't think he has it (yet?).

 

[ausbacker]

Vereen is miles ahead of Bolden. Vereen can catch a football.

 

[strngplyr]

Vereen is miles ahead of Bolden. Vereen can catch a football.

You know that they both have 0 catches in the NFL, right?

You know that Bolden has more catches for more yards in college, right?

 

[BradyFTW!]

You know that they both have 0 catches in the NFL, right?

You know that Bolden has more catches for more yards in college, right?

http://www.patsfans.com/new-england...16-film-study-shane-vereen-slot-receiver.html

 

[supafly]

How has Vereen looked in his limited role at picking up the blitz/pass blocking?

IIRC, I think that he was supposed to be fairly decent in this aspect.

 

[ausbacker]

You know that they both have 0 catches in the NFL, right?

You know that Bolden has more catches for more yards in college, right?

What relevance does that have to the NFL and this preseason?

 

[Frezo]

I don't see Vereen being worse than what might turn up in waivers. If a change has to be made, let's do Faulk. We know he can at least pick up a blitz and do it very well.

 

[ATippett56]

With Jabar Gaffney jettisoned, I should see no reason why both Bolden and Vereen can't be on the 53 man roster.

 

[strngplyr]

What relevance does that have to the NFL and this preseason?

You stated that Vereen is ahead of Bolden because he can catch, as if you're implying that Bolden can't, while Bolden actually did it more in college.

Why do you bring up a topic and then question the relevance of the response you get which was a direct reply to what you stated.

 

[ausbacker]

You stated that Vereen is ahead of Bolden because he can catch, as if you're implying that Bolden can't, while Bolden actually did it more in college.

Vereen has demonstrated an ability in the passing game this preseason. Bolden has looked like a fish out of water (even against second and third stringers). If you're happy pulling college stats be my guest but realize they have no application in the NFL.

 

[strngplyr]

Vereen has demonstrated an ability in the passing game this preseason. Bolden has looked like a fish out of water (even against second and third stringers). If you're happy pulling college stats be my guest but realize they have no application in the NFL.

Vereens preseason stats mean as much as his college stats. Vereen has had a grand total of ONE good showing on any stage in the NFL, and it all came against 2nd and 3rd stringers. Against anything that resembles an NFL defense he's been invisible.

 

[ausbacker]

Vereens preseason stats mean as much as his college stats. Vereen has had a grand total of ONE good showing on any stage in the NFL, and it all came against 2nd and 3rd stringers. Against anything that resembles an NFL defense he's been invisible.

While I agree with the premise preseason NFL stats are more applicable than college statistics. Whilst Vereen may have had one good showing that's one more than Bolden.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Vereens preseason stats mean as much as his college stats. Vereen has had a grand total of ONE good showing on any stage in the NFL, and it all came against 2nd and 3rd stringers. Against anything that resembles an NFL defense he's been invisible.

Technically, the same's true for Bolden. It should kind of go without saying that, when you're talking about two guys with virtually no NFL track record, it's all conjecture and not based on prior NFL production.

Anyways, check this out: Shane Vereen 2010 Highlights - YouTube
Pay particular attention to 0:27, 1:05, even 4:30 (since that's how we'll be using him a lot), and 5:08.

Definitely not saying that Bolden can't catch, because he proved that he can in college. But Vereen's versatility is such that he can credibly move into the slot and act as a receiver, and the Patriots have already made it clear that they see value there. Makes sense, since that makes him a potentially lethal weapon in the no-huddle. Maybe Bolden can do the same, but I doubt it - seems like his role would be far closer to that of a standard RB.

 

[UK_Pat37]

Don't understand the love affair with Bolden. Guys has sown next to nothing for me.

 

[strngplyr]

Don't understand the love affair with Bolden. Guys has sown next to nothing for me.

Mike Reiss talked him up a lot and he became a legitimate RB around here.

 

[Batman]

Don't understand the love affair with Bolden. Guys has sown next to nothing for me.

Here at pats fans every year we get really high in guys who show a bit of promise last year there were questions about Richard Medlin after a decent preseason he didn't even make it too our PS.

I can't see us cutting Demps we put a lot of effort into signing him. It's clear he is a hard worker you can't go pro in two sports without hard work.

I believe that Ridley and Woodhead are locks right now. The fact we don't have other guys in camp as a practice body makes me believe that BB is happy with what he's got and knows what he is going to do. In the game vs the giants I think bolden has to show that he is worth us carrying 5 backs. Depending on the condition of Vereen will dictate who we have to an extent as I don't see us having just 3 running backs healthy going into week 1.

As for a FB I see it as something we don't need and therefore won't have we may carry one on the PS to help with scout stuff

 

[UK_Pat37]

Here at pats fans every year we get really high in guys who show a bit of promise last year there were questions about Richard Medlin after a decent preseason he didn't even make it too our PS.

I can't see us cutting Demps we put a lot of effort into signing him. It's clear he is a hard worker you can't go pro in two sports without hard work.

I believe that Ridley and Woodhead are locks right now. The fact we don't have other guys in camp as a practice body makes me believe that BB is happy with what he's got and knows what he is going to do. In the game vs the giants I think bolden has to show that he is worth us carrying 5 backs. Depending on the condition of Vereen will dictate who we have to an extent as I don't see us having just 3 running backs healthy going into week 1.

As for a FB I see it as something we don't need and therefore won't have we may carry one on the PS to help with scout stuff

I'm with you on FB. Since Larsen's release, I don't see one on the team. Kettani still needs work if he's going to transfer there but he is one to watch as there's no reason why he can't earn a roster spot this week. If they still intend to carry one.

I think they go with Ridley, Woodhead, Vereen, Demps and Bolden myself and try and utilise Bolden as a FB which they reportedly did in camp. I really want to see Bolden do something more in games though given his hype.

 

[stcjones]

Now I'm one that thinks that Vereen has shown as much positive stuff overall as Ridley. Much more than Bolden who really didn't impress me. Bolden needs at least another year of practice and refinement before he will be there. Vereen to me, got the slight edge over Ridley with versatility and ability to make some positive yards...even when the crap OL (sure it will get better ) caved in. He even showed great ability to catch the ball out of the backfield better than Ridley. The only question on Vereen imho is durability. Ridley seems much more durable. But I think it will be Ridley and Vereen as starters with woodhead coming in off bench....we shall see.

Who think that he shown anything yet?

I think that we will keep Bolden on the 53 precisely because Vereen is not yet someone to be counted on. We have THREE developmental running backs: Vereen, Demps and Bolden. I'm not sure which of them I would want active for Game 1. It is good that Ridley is stepping up. We are fine with Ridley and Woodhead as our running backs, but we do need depth that can contribute.

I still think that Belichick will be scouring the waiver wire for a veteran backup. Bolden hasn't shown enough to be anywhere but on the Practice Squad.

 

[stcjones]

Don't understand the love affair with Bolden. Guys has sown next to nothing for me.

That is not true.
He has shown that he doesn't know how to field a punt.