Woodhead phase out?

[PATSYLICIOUS]

He got 6 carries, I think that's alot for him to be honest. But I'd rather see him more in the passing game. I'd like to see his carries kept under 5 (probably will when Vereen comes back).

 

[mgteich]

We are agreed.

I would note that what we offer Woodhead will depend a lot on Vereen and little on Demps. We will have lots more information about Vereen by season's end. Demps will still be a developmental prospect who has a place because of his speed and his presumed ability to return kicks.

1. If we carry five RBs as par for the course then Ridley, Bolden, Woodhead, Vereen, Demps would be absolutely fine.

3. I think Woodhead is a fine player. I don't however think he's particularly special and I think we've seen the best we'll ever see out of him. I do not think Demps is someone who'll automatically be an upgrade to Woodhead but I see a much higher ceiling in Demps. I do not think we should be packing Woodhead off automatically, I was just making the original point that questioning his long-term viability on the roster was not a question of wanting to play with "shiny new toys" but that there was a legitimate roster debate to be had in terms of his longer term viability.

4/ I agree on Vereen. I was one of his biggest fans leading up to the draft. But we haven't seen an ability to carry a significant burden from him yet.

 

[BradyFTW!]

Well...yeah.

No offense, but...It's called "Depth", Brother Manx.

Don't you suppose that if we'd had a substantial substitute for Gronkowski around, last Winter, we might've won our 4th Super Bowl??

I do.

Depth of Talent, Baby.

short of cloning Gronk, I don't see how it's possible to have someone who can do the things that he does

I do agree, though, that going with two TEs on the roster when you frequently line up with two TEs on the field is reckless, to say the least. Hated it before Gronk got hurt, and hated it even more after.

 

[patfanken]

First it was Edelman, then McCourty, then its Welker, and now its Woodhead. Why is it that we have so many posters who just can't wait to throw some player under the bus as soon as they have something less than a HOF game.

Danny Woodhead has averaged 5ypc over the course of his 2+ yrs as a Patriot. He catches the ball well. Blocks as well as he can for his size in protection, and plays well on special teams from returns to coverage. Yup, sounds like a perfect candidate for the head hunter's mafia go after next

 

[manxman2601]

First it was Edelman, then McCourty, then its Welker, and now its Woodhead. Why is it that we have so many posters who just can't wait to throw some player under the bus as soon as they have something less than a HOF game.

Danny Woodhead has averaged 5ypc over the course of his 2+ yrs as a Patriot. He catches the ball well. Blocks as well as he can for his size in protection, and plays well on special teams from returns to coverage. Yup, sounds like a perfect candidate for the head hunter's mafia go after next

It's called being spoilt. Be thankful these are the debates we're having and not the ones the likes of the Bills, Dolphins and Browns are having. At least we're wondering about getting rid of good players. They're wondering about where they're going to get good players from.

 

[Danger Zone]

Maybe the Patriots will trade Ridley, Woody, and the entire fired scouting staff to the Cowboys for Demarco Murray.

Or maybe the Cowboys will trade Witten, Murray and their entire fired scouting staff for Ridley?

 

[Off The Grid]

Well...yeah.

No offense, but...It's called "Depth", Brother Manx.

Don't you suppose that if we'd had a substantial substitute for Gronkowski around, last Winter, we might've won our 4th Super Bowl??

I do.

Depth of Talent, Baby.

short of cloning Gronk, I don't see how it's possible to have someone who can do the things that he does

Well...yeah.

Nobody was suggesting that we could've casually had Kong II awaiting on the bench.

But a "substantial substitute" ~ the term I used ~ would've done enough that we would've won the Super Bowl.

Kind of hard to blow that off...don't you think??

 

[Joker]

The Pats won their opener on the road yesterday...I think they should cut 25 players because I'm tired of them..they all play football so they're all similar...bring in some tennis pros...and how about the Undertaker, huh? Bet HE would really clog the middle up and body slam running backs...yeah, just do anything new because I...I...uh....I forgot ...hey how about the draft?...I think we need to draft some......
..............

......................

 

[JJDChE]

But Woodhead is so productive!!!


I love that BS line. Hopefully Vereen knocks him to benchwarmer duty.

EDIT: I don't think he's being phased out. He's the best option as a 3rd down/change of pace back until Vereen or someone else establishes themselves. Ridley is going to cannibalize some of his touches though.

 

[Patsrock]

Can we please stop mentioning Demps name. He is not going to play this year and he CAN'T play this year. So stop bringing it up.

 

[manxman2601]

Can we please stop mentioning Demps name. He is not going to play this year and he CAN'T play this year. So stop bringing it up.

Why? Does the world end after this season?

 

[Patsrock]

Why? Does the world end after this season?

For this season Demps means nothing. Why would they try to phase Woodhead out when he cheap and a UFA after this season.

 

[manxman2601]

For this season Demps means nothing. Why would they try to phase Woodhead out when he cheap and a UFA after this season.

Well they wouldn't but Demps is worthy of consideration as part of a strategic discussion regarding the roster moving forward. If we're assuming that Woodhead is gone at the end of the year then Demps needn't be part of the discussion. If not, then he very much should be.

 

[Joey007]

Let's just see how Vereen does before making any moves with Woodhead.

 

[IllegalContact]

You honestly believe that Demps was close to beating out Woodhead? Based on what, getting like 5 snaps in the 4th quarter of week 3? Like 10 snaps in week 4 before getting injured in a game that starters didn't play?

that and the fact that demp had not touched a football in 9 months.....there's a reason the pats went after him.

 

[IllegalContact]

Can we please stop mentioning Demps name. He is not going to play this year and he CAN'T play this year. So stop bringing it up.

LOL.......go cry

 

[patman52]

The game plan will change from week to week, sometimes he will have a bigger role, sometimes less.

 

[woolster22]

I wouldn't say phase out...more line the result of having a fully capable lead back. Would anyone suggest subbing woody for Ridley in any of those runs yesterday? If vereen can get his ass on the field, he could be a dangerous change of pace back late in the game. Let Ridley gash and grind, then swap for the (slightly) quicker vereen after the defense gets gassed.



As for my question, I didn't think so...

Sent from my ADR6425LVW using Tapatalk 2

 

[Gumby]

I think it is interesting how many guys posts thoughts on Woodhead just based on their recollections of the game without checking the facts. So just for clarity:

2Q
New England Patriots at 7:17
1st and 10 at NE 33 S.Ridley left end to NE 48 for 15 yards (D.Morgan).
1st and 10 at NE 48 (No Huddle) T.Brady pass short left to B.Lloyd ran ob at TEN 43 for 9 yards.
2nd and 1 at TEN 43 (No Huddle) T.Brady up the middle to TEN 41 for 2 yards (Mi.Martin).
1st and 10 at TEN 41 (No Huddle) T.Brady pass incomplete deep left to W.Welker.
2nd and 10 at TEN 41 D.Woodhead right tackle to TEN 35 for 6 yards (M.Griffin). TEN-C.McCarthy was injured during the play. His return is Questionable.
3rd and 4 at TEN 35 (Shotgun) Direct snap to A.Hernandez. A.Hernandez left tackle to TEN 30 for 5 yards (A.Verner).
1st and 10 at TEN 30 (No Huddle, Shotgun) T.Brady pass short middle to R.Gronkowski to TEN 23 for 7 yards (R.Mouton).
2nd and 3 at TEN 23 (No Huddle, Shotgun) T.Brady pass short left to J.Edelman to TEN 16 for 7 yards (A.Verner).
1st and 10 at TEN 16 (No Huddle, Shotgun) T.Brady pass short right to W.Welker to TEN 11 for 5 yards (R.Mouton).
2nd and 5 at TEN 11 D.Woodhead up the middle to TEN 10 for 1 yard (J.Casey).
Timeout #1 by NE at 02:48.
3rd and 4 at TEN 10 S.Ridley left guard to TEN 2 for 8 yards (A.Ayers).
1st and 2 at TEN 2 T.Brady pass short right to R.Gronkowski for 2 yards, TOUCHDOWN



4Q
New England Patriots at 9:17
1st and 10 at NE 17 T.Brady pass short left to S.Ridley to NE 37 for 20 yards (A.Verner) [K.Wimbley].

1st and 10 at NE 37 (No Huddle) D.Woodhead right tackle to NE 40 for 3 yards (R.Mouton; W.Witherspoon).
2nd and 7 at NE 40 (No Huddle, Shotgun) T.Brady pass short right to B.Lloyd to TEN 44 for 16 yards (J.McCourty).

1st and 10 at TEN 44 (No Huddle) D.Woodhead right guard to TEN 42 for 2 yards (D.Morgan).
2nd and 8 at TEN 42 (No Huddle) T.Brady pass short left to W.Welker to TEN 34 for 8 yards (A.Ayers; A.Verner).

1st and 10 at TEN 34 (No Huddle) D.Woodhead left end to TEN 28 for 6 yards (M.Griffin; K.Wimbley).
2nd and 4 at TEN 28 (No Huddle) D.Woodhead left end pushed ob at TEN 26 for 2 yards (A.Verner; M.Griffin).

3rd and 2 at TEN 26 (No Huddle) S.Ridley left tackle to TEN 10 for 16 yards (R.Johnson; Z.Brown).
1st and 10 at TEN 10 (No Huddle) S.Ridley left end to TEN 9 for 1 yard (A.Ayers).
Timeout #1 by NE at 04:33.

So, putting his role into context - IMO:
It appears he is coming in at the drives at/near the end of the halfs.
It appears he is being used intermittently with Ridley and NOT instead of as in both cases (2Q and 4Q); Ridley came on again after him. Although it could be a bit more of instead of in CERTAIN FORMATIONS.

I think for now Woodhead is the change of pace/ give Ridley a breather, good hands (pass catcher), safe hands (no fumbler), help run out the clock guy.

From that perspective he is safe on the team and not being phased out as long as Vereen cant get healthy and prove he has good hands and safe hands, Bolden doesnt prove he has good hands, or someone else comes along.
.......
which to me means he will be doing this role (5-10 carries / 2 catches per game) til the end of the year. I dont see that as phase-out - just limited role.

(And in an occaissional game-plan he may have a larger role.)

 

[Gumby]

Follow-up to my own post.

Guilty of my own charge (a little). I assumed that those runs being at end of 2/4Q implied that woodhead was a bit lower in ypc due to being in run-expected conditions.

But look at those 3 runs by Ridley following Woodhead runs. 3-25 is an 8 ypc avg compared to 3.5 for Woodhead. So the qualitative argument that Ridley should stay out there is potentially there/valid.

But I think the fact that woodhead is a multi year vet with safe hands is important to BB in those end of halfs situations. So until / unless Ridley proves he has tons of stamina/ great 'safe hands' he is going to get changed out throughout the year (as I said above).