Do We NEED Five Running Backs?

[NEPettyOfficer72]

You can never underestimate the importance of good to great depth at the running back position, especially on an extremely productive and prolific offense because of the simple fact that injuries occur every season. And besides, who wouldn't want 5 very good options at running back who all have different sizes, skillsets that can add different dimensions to an already dangerous offense? That's a great thing to have. Think about.. like Ridley said, they can all contribute and think about how much of a hard time defenses would have trying to guess and switch personnel each play according to who we have taking the hand offs.

1) You know what Stevan Ridley brings, the speed, and power combo with very good vision and patience.

2) Boom, hit them with a punch in the mouth of bruising, punishing and hurdling LeGarrett Blount, perhaps the most talented runner of NE and 2nd most, just when you think they've had enough.. So he can truck a few people

3) You can shift things up behind throwing little hitch screens to Shane Vereen or Leon Washington to give a little Danny Woodhead flavor, make a few people miss for a first down on third and short or even third and long.

4) Brandon Bolden gives you some of LeGarrett Blount, he is deceptively strong and very quick. Hopefully he stays healthy..

But do you see what I'm saying? Because the main focus of defenses will be to stop Tom Brady and those outside weapons that he now has including the TE's but now look what they also have to contend with if we keep all 5. I'd say why not, it just makes us that more scary on offense...

 

[Triumph]

I would not at all be surprised to see Bolden gone if Blount works out.

Id rather see Fells or Hooman gone.

Bolden is the next BJGE only better.

 

[patsinthesnow]

I know I'm in the small minority on the RB issue here, and MG will strongly disagree. But I see the starting RB spot up for grabs.

-First, Vereen has secured his spot as the Faulk/Woodhead successor. BB wouldn't ditch Woodhead for peanuts if he wasn't confident Vereen could be the next 3rd down back. Washington hasn't seen regular 3rd down action in over 4 years, he's not the guy. If Vereen can become the next Faulk at pick #60, that's a fine draft pick.

-Blount's only making the team as the starter if he really worked his tail off (unlikely). We aren't going to keep a malcontent as a reserve, thus I end up seeing us carry the 4 RBs of Ridley, Bolden, Vereen, Washington.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now onto the unpopular opinion (remember BJGE vs. Maroney, good times)

-Bolden in the preseason had 3.5 ypc and fumbled the ball twice on kickoffs, yet BB didn't even try to sneak him on the PS, giving him a spot on the 53. He got suspended as an undrafted rookie and BB still kept him. Before getting injured in the early part of the Seattle game, he passed Ridley on the depth chart. You could see the difference in burst between the two of them in the Buffalo game.

For people that are so eager to cut Bolden, he displayed alot before the injury/suspension wound him in the doghouse. He was the most sought after UDFA RB and would've been drafted before Ridley in 2011 if he came out. I was at TC, the hype was real around this guy.

I may end up being way wrong and can be tarred and feathered come September, but Bolden is the better RB and will be our starting RB this season.

 

[Triumph]

I know I'm in the small minority on the RB issue here, and MG will strongly disagree. But I see the starting RB spot up for grabs.

-First, Vereen has secured his spot as the Faulk/Woodhead successor. BB wouldn't ditch Woodhead for peanuts if he wasn't confident Vereen could be the next 3rd down back. Washington hasn't seen regular 3rd down action in over 4 years, he's not the guy. If Vereen can become the next Faulk at pick #60, that's a fine draft pick.

-Blount's only making the team as the starter if he really worked his tail off (unlikely). We aren't going to keep a malcontent as a reserve, thus I end up seeing us carry the 4 RBs of Ridley, Bolden, Vereen, Washington.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now onto the unpopular opinion (remember BJGE vs. Maroney, good times)

-Bolden in the preseason had 3.5 ypc and fumbled the ball twice on kickoffs, yet BB didn't even try to sneak him on the PS, giving him a spot on the 53. He got suspended as an undrafted rookie and BB still kept him. Before getting injured in the early part of the Seattle game, he passed Ridley on the depth chart. You could see the difference in burst between the two of them in the Buffalo game.

For people that are so eager to cut Bolden, he displayed alot before the injury/suspension wound him in the doghouse. He was the most sought after UDFA RB and would've been drafted before Ridley in 2011 if he came out. I was at TC, the hype was real around this guy.

I may end up being way wrong and can be tarred and feathered come September, but Bolden is the better RB and will be our starting RB this season.

You see Boldens value as well.

I dont believe he will start over Ridley though. Cutting Bolden would be a mistake some here propose to make and I agree on Blount. If the Pats cut Blount its no loss because Demps wasnt playing anyway.

 

[Ring 6]

I know I'm in the small minority on the RB issue here, and MG will strongly disagree. But I see the starting RB spot up for grabs.

-First, Vereen has secured his spot as the Faulk/Woodhead successor. BB wouldn't ditch Woodhead for peanuts if he wasn't confident Vereen could be the next 3rd down back. Washington hasn't seen regular 3rd down action in over 4 years, he's not the guy. If Vereen can become the next Faulk at pick #60, that's a fine draft pick.

-Blount's only making the team as the starter if he really worked his tail off (unlikely). We aren't going to keep a malcontent as a reserve, thus I end up seeing us carry the 4 RBs of Ridley, Bolden, Vereen, Washington.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now onto the unpopular opinion (remember BJGE vs. Maroney, good times)

-Bolden in the preseason had 3.5 ypc and fumbled the ball twice on kickoffs, yet BB didn't even try to sneak him on the PS, giving him a spot on the 53. He got suspended as an undrafted rookie and BB still kept him. Before getting injured in the early part of the Seattle game, he passed Ridley on the depth chart. You could see the difference in burst between the two of them in the Buffalo game.

For people that are so eager to cut Bolden, he displayed alot before the injury/suspension wound him in the doghouse. He was the most sought after UDFA RB and would've been drafted before Ridley in 2011 if he came out. I was at TC, the hype was real around this guy.

I may end up being way wrong and can be tarred and feathered come September, but Bolden is the better RB and will be our starting RB this season.

Bolden never passed Ridley on the depth chart.

 

[patsinthesnow]

Bolden never passed Ridley on the depth chart.

False.

Bolden 6 rushes for 28 yards 4.8 ypc going into the second quarter. He got injured with 11 minutes left in the second quarter. He started the entire 2nd and 3rd drives over Ridley. Ridley had 2 carries for 3 yards on the opening drive and was benched for an entire quarter. Is that BB doing that for sh**s n giggles? Btw with Bolden out Ridley went 16 carries for 34 yards.

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

I would rather keep just 4. What I'm hoping is Bolden/Blount are competing for the 4th slot and the other is given the boot but who knows. We have lots of competition at WR and DB where we don't really have enough proven guys but also guys I wouldn't be quick to give up on so I'm hoping more spots are used at those positions. RB we know we are good there IMO, a 5th would be a waste of a spot

 

[mgteich]

Bolden as BJGE is an interesting idea.

Unfortunately for your argument, Ridley is not Maroney. Ridley has done all Belichick has asked and more.

I don't think Vereen is the next Faulk, but that is a side issue.

FInally, there is no evidence that minimum salary Blount would be a malcontent as a reserve.

I know I'm in the small minority on the RB issue here, and MG will strongly disagree. But I see the starting RB spot up for grabs.

-First, Vereen has secured his spot as the Faulk/Woodhead successor. BB wouldn't ditch Woodhead for peanuts if he wasn't confident Vereen could be the next 3rd down back. Washington hasn't seen regular 3rd down action in over 4 years, he's not the guy. If Vereen can become the next Faulk at pick #60, that's a fine draft pick.

-Blount's only making the team as the starter if he really worked his tail off (unlikely). We aren't going to keep a malcontent as a reserve, thus I end up seeing us carry the 4 RBs of Ridley, Bolden, Vereen, Washington.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now onto the unpopular opinion (remember BJGE vs. Maroney, good times)

-Bolden in the preseason had 3.5 ypc and fumbled the ball twice on kickoffs, yet BB didn't even try to sneak him on the PS, giving him a spot on the 53. He got suspended as an undrafted rookie and BB still kept him. Before getting injured in the early part of the Seattle game, he passed Ridley on the depth chart. You could see the difference in burst between the two of them in the Buffalo game.

For people that are so eager to cut Bolden, he displayed alot before the injury/suspension wound him in the doghouse. He was the most sought after UDFA RB and would've been drafted before Ridley in 2011 if he came out. I was at TC, the hype was real around this guy.

I may end up being way wrong and can be tarred and feathered come September, but Bolden is the better RB and will be our starting RB this season.

 

[DocHoliday]

Bolden was an absolute Bell Cow in the Buffalo game. Hope he juices up again and gives us that kind of output.

To the ninnies out there - all RBs juice, the stupider ones get caught.

 

[Ivan]

I really don't see Blount makinjg this team, i would take Bolden over him any day.

 

[Stilla]

Ridley took a concussion last year. That's why we keep all 5.

Vereen can't carry us at RB if Ridley goes down.
If Washington becomes our return man, we don't want him to fill Ridleys roll.
Bolden is our depth everyone else fills other rolls.

 

[Stilla]

I know I'm in the small minority on the RB issue here, and MG will strongly disagree. But I see the starting RB spot up for grabs.

-First, Vereen has secured his spot as the Faulk/Woodhead successor. BB wouldn't ditch Woodhead for peanuts if he wasn't confident Vereen could be the next 3rd down back. Washington hasn't seen regular 3rd down action in over 4 years, he's not the guy. If Vereen can become the next Faulk at pick #60, that's a fine draft pick.

-Blount's only making the team as the starter if he really worked his tail off (unlikely). We aren't going to keep a malcontent as a reserve, thus I end up seeing us carry the 4 RBs of Ridley, Bolden, Vereen, Washington.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Now onto the unpopular opinion (remember BJGE vs. Maroney, good times)

-Bolden in the preseason had 3.5 ypc and fumbled the ball twice on kickoffs, yet BB didn't even try to sneak him on the PS, giving him a spot on the 53. He got suspended as an undrafted rookie and BB still kept him. Before getting injured in the early part of the Seattle game, he passed Ridley on the depth chart. You could see the difference in burst between the two of them in the Buffalo game.

For people that are so eager to cut Bolden, he displayed alot before the injury/suspension wound him in the doghouse. He was the most sought after UDFA RB and would've been drafted before Ridley in 2011 if he came out. I was at TC, the hype was real around this guy.

I may end up being way wrong and can be tarred and feathered come September, but Bolden is the better RB and will be our starting RB this season.

I can see Bolden beating out Ridley. I think if we have to cut 1 RB its between Washington and Blount. Washington would have to show that he is a threat on kick returns to make this team. He would have to show alot more production on sp against they guys we already have at that same roll, but also start other rolls. If we loose 1 RB it him.

 

[mgteich]

Only one KR in the entire league had a better kick return average than Washington last year. He is one of the best. How exactly is someone else going to beat him out with their preseason play?

The patriots now have one of the top punt returners in the league (Edelman) and one of the best kick returners in the league (Washington). I think that we will keep them.

I can see Bolden beating out Ridley. I think if we have to cut 1 RB its between Washington and Blount. Washington would have to show that he is a threat on kick returns to make this team. He would have to show alot more production on sp against they guys we already have at that same roll, but also start other rolls. If we loose 1 RB it him.

 

[supafly]

I can see Bolden beating out Ridley. I think if we have to cut 1 RB its between Washington and Blount. Washington would have to show that he is a threat on kick returns to make this team. He would have to show alot more production on sp against they guys we already have at that same roll, but also start other rolls. If we loose 1 RB it him.

I can't agree with either one of these thoughts...

You're saying that the guy who had a suspension and was in BB's doghouse is going to suddenly beat out our 1300 yd bellcow RB? That's ridiculous in my opinion. If anything, Bolden and Blount would be battling for the "last" RB spot if they'd only keep 4, since they have the same kind of skillset as a bigger/bruising back with a low salary.

As far as Belichick cutting Leon Washington, I find that incredibly hard to believe too. Belichick has not been happy with the KR game for at least a couple/few seasons now and went out and made the ST/3rd down back move as one of the immediate moves in free agency.

Not only is Washington a huge asset to the KR game/ST, he is also going to help to fill the role of Danny Woodhead with Vereen--although I'd certainly expect Shane Vereen to have the upper hand. I'd expect Washington to offer an insurance position for the 3rd down back though.

 

[ausbacker]

I can see Bolden beating out Ridley. I think if we have to cut 1 RB its between Washington and Blount. Washington would have to show that he is a threat on kick returns to make this team. He would have to show alot more production on sp against they guys we already have at that same roll, but also start other rolls. If we loose 1 RB it him.

I find it difficult to believe that Bolden is beating Vereen let alone Ridley.

 

[supafly]

I would not at all be surprised to see Bolden gone if Blount works out.

That's what I'm saying. Just because we had a need for a bigger, bruising, goal line RB last year and decided to keep Bolden on the 53 man roster does NOT suddenly mean that our star RB Ridley (who ran for 1300 yds) is in any danger of losing his spot.

Obviously Belichick could have decided to just outright cut Demps...instead he apparently had some sort of plan in place by deciding to give up a 7th round draft pick. That tells me that he's either contemplating keeping 5 RB's again, or he's expecting a strong competition between Blount/Bolden for the last spot.

 

[patsinthesnow]

That's what I'm saying. Just because we had a need for a bigger, bruising, goal line RB last year and decided to keep Bolden on the 53 man roster does NOT suddenly mean that our star RB Ridley (who ran for 1300 yds) is in any danger of losing his spot.

Obviously Belichick could have decided to just outright cut Demps...instead he apparently had some sort of plan in place by deciding to give up a 7th round draft pick. That tells me that he's either contemplating keeping 5 RB's again, or he's expecting a strong competition between Blount/Bolden for the last spot.

Our "star" RB is a one dimensional powerback like BJGE. Name me one other starting RB that just had 5 receptions. Furthermore, he was one of the worse starting RBs in the league the second half of the season.

I realize I'm in the minority here, but calling Ridley a "star" is a joke. He is an above average RB with no receiving threat. He may of been 7th in rushing yardage, but he was 11th in total yards (rushing and receiving).

 

[IllegalContact]

its not a 53 man roster right now, so the question is really moot.

if Blount returns to rookie form, it is a good problem to have......

as for Bolden beating out Ridley........that's a good one

 

[Avenger]

before Bolden got hurt his senior year he was rated around the same level as Ridley for what it's worth

 

[ausbacker]

Our "star" RB is a one dimensional powerback like BJGE. Name me one other starting RB that just had 5 receptions. Furthermore, he was one of the worse starting RBs in the league the second half of the season.

I realize I'm in the minority here, but calling Ridley a "star" is a joke. He is an above average RB with no receiving threat. He may of been 7th in rushing yardage, but he was 11th in total yards (rushing and receiving).

I apportion a large amount of that to the play-calling and Josh McDaniels. He really needs to include our backs in the passing game to a far greater degree.