Ridley Fumbles - Let's not let facts get in the way

[Mogamedogz]

He's gotta learn to stop swinging that arm out like he's carrying it in a sling. I swear my heart stops every time he does that.

That said, I think we gotta keep feeding him/Blount/Vereen on Sunday night. Slowing the game down is really our only shot in this game IMO.

 

[MassPats38]

There are two ways of looking at the cause of fumbles: (1) a lack of strength in holding the ball or (2) a lack of discipline in protecting the ball. I don't believe Ridley's issue is (1), because his fumbles career-wise have not been strips. The ball lost at the goal line was a lack of discipline as it appeared to be away from his body when it needed to be protected. That is absolutely unacceptable, and it was a critical failure in that loss. This is year 3, so a little late to call it a rookie mistake. You can guarantee he was read the riot act last year on ball protection and coached on the topic, so sloppy and stupid will not win points with BB - a coach who puts winning the turnover battle high on the list of winning games.

Historical fumbles are fairly useless. Kevin Faulk had fumbling issues early on and corrected them (he fumbled 1 time in his last 8 seasons and was one of the more trusted RBs on critical downs). His worst year was 2000, and BB reduced his carries in 2001 by 75% and changed the way he was used. As of "right now", Blount has 1 fumble in 95 touches this year (as many lament, he also does kickoff returns). Whatever his issues were, they are not Pats issues now. Ridley's issues are now.

I like Ridley, and hope he gets a clue and better protects the ball after this lesson. Ridley's season last year was comparable in many ways to Dillon's 2004 season, but he had 55 fewer snaps and the same number of fumbles. You can give him a pass on fumbles, but let's call them losses this year instead of lost fumbles if that gives a better perspective on their importance. The fumble in Buffalo gave the Bills life and resulted in a 14 point second quarter in a game that the Pats easily could have lost. The Panthers game would have been a very different scenario with a FG or TD on that drive, so 0 was a killer. If a player makes game management difficult, then he will probably not be a Pats player for long.

In the end, 'electric' and 'dynamic' is great, but it had better consistently lead to predictable and sustained drives. Turnovers do not. That article compares Ridley to Maroney, but I don't believe the two are comparable (I don't know Maroney ever flashed "potential outstanding RB", and Ridley has been that at times). I am not sure Ridley has a future with the Pats solely because it is the Catch 22 of if he stops fumbling, his contract value goes too high and if he keeps fumbling he isn't of much value to the team.

 

[TinhWoodhead]

I'm worried about the fumbles, but it is a mistake to bench the guy for this game, or any part of it. And, I know I sound like a broken record, but if they had given him the ball on 3rd & 1 right before the Pats settled for a FG to go ahead in the game against the Panthers, I believe he would have gotten the 1st down, we had a good chance of scoring the TD that we desperately needed, we would have run more time off the clock, and we would have won the game. Bad coaching mistakes, including not using Ridley there and heave-ho-ing it into the endzone. Sigh. I need to move on, and so does BB.

I completely agreed. The not running it on 3rd & 1 bothers me more than the non flag at the end. I know they're trying to suprise the other team but sometimes they just out-think themselves. Even if they can't get a 1st down running the ball, they still have another chance to get it.

 

[Brady6]

As of "right now", Blount has 1 fumble in 95 touches this year (as many lament, he also does kickoff returns). Whatever his issues were, they are not Pats issues now. Ridley's issues are now.

Blount has one fumble this season and it happen to come in the one game that Ridley missed, that fumble occurred in the second quarter as we were right outside of the red zone. Other than that game many of Blount's carries take place toward the end of decided football games against a worn down and less competitive defense. I don't really feel confident saying Blount has better ball security, I think circumstances have to have some impact on the assessment.

I 100% agree with the remainder of what you posted.

 

[Brady6]

Firstly Blount has been in the league longer and basically WAS Tampa Bays offense for 1.5 years. Secondly seems to me Blount has corrected how he holds the ball as that is a huge part of the issue. Ridley has been worked with on this for what?...almost 3 years....enough is enough. Guy is extremely talented...but if everytime he takes a handoff the collective fans , coaches and players hold their breath. ....its not worth it. Especially the history of fumbling in the RZ or on goal line. I would never use him in RZ situations again...would u?

I don't think Blount is any better personally I think his one fumble compared to Ridley having three is more of a causation vs. correlation falsely - Blount carries correlate with lesser worn down defense.

 

[MassPats38]

Blount has one fumble this season and it happen to come in the one game that Ridley missed, that fumble occurred in the second quarter as we were right outside of the red zone. Other than that game many of Blount's carries take place toward the end of decided football games against a worn down and less competitive defense. I don't really feel confident saying Blount has better ball security, I think circumstances have to have some impact on the assessment.

Blount doesn't hang the ball away from his body. Ridley does. Neither of Ridley's major fumbles have been close to fundamentally sound, so you cannot explain the lack of fundamentals by quality of the competition. And I would submit teams are more desperate when games are out of hand, and more likely to try to strip the ball. Also, I suspect kickoff returns carry a high fumble possibility due to the speed of the defenders (full tilt) and problems with getting a handle on the ball. He has played those pretty much all year, and has not been a problem.

Returning to Ridley and the fumble against the Panthers, it would have come out if the wind blew too hard. I know you like Ridley, but you are reaching with your attempt to downplay his failings by comparing that to Blount's one fumble. Despite his huge upside, careless loses games. And comparing a fumble on a run from the 32 to a fumble that turned into 6 points for the other team immediately or a fumble within reach of the goal line is also a stretch. Blount simply has not given you cause to call him unreliable since he joined the Pats. If he listened to coaching or fixed his Bucs issues, then he is more reliable now than Ridley. Now is all that matters. The fact Ridley would be killer if he fixed his fumbling problem does not change the risk/reward calculus now.

And don't get me wrong. I would prefer to see Ridley run the ball over all others if he can hang onto it because of his upside. But the Pats believe you win games by collecting more fumbles and interceptions than you cough up. Ridley can run for 2100 yards, but if he loses the ball too often then he will lose games for the team. There is a reason BB did not want a gunslinger QB, and there is a reason BB would prefer a 4.0 YPC average to a 5.0 YPC average with a higher turnover probability. Usually gunslingers and fumblers are the staple of unsuccessful or mediocre teams. Electric and exciting, but unsuccessful.

 

[Brady6]

Blount doesn't hang the ball away from his body. Ridley does. Neither of Ridley's major fumbles have been close to fundamentally sound, so you cannot explain the lack of fundamentals by quality of the competition. And I would submit teams are more desperate when games are out of hand, and more likely to try to strip the ball. Also, I suspect kickoff returns carry a high fumble possibility due to the speed of the defenders (full tilt) and problems with getting a handle on the ball. He has played those pretty much all year, and has not been a problem.

Returning to Ridley and the fumble against the Panthers, it would have come out if the wind blew too hard. I know you like Ridley, but you are reaching with your attempt to downplay his failings by comparing that to Blount's one fumble. Despite his huge upside, careless loses games. And comparing a fumble on a run from the 32 to a fumble that turned into 6 points for the other team immediately or a fumble within reach of the goal line is also a stretch. Blount simply has not given you cause to call him unreliable since he joined the Pats. If he listened to coaching or fixed his Bucs issues, then he is more reliable now than Ridley. Now is all that matters. The fact Ridley would be killer if he fixed his fumbling problem does not change the risk/reward calculus now.

And don't get me wrong. I would prefer to see Ridley run the ball over all others if he can hang onto it because of his upside. But the Pats believe you win games by collecting more fumbles and interceptions than you cough up. Ridley can run for 2100 yards, but if he loses the ball too often then he will lose games for the team. There is a reason BB did not want a gunslinger QB, and there is a reason BB would prefer a 4.0 YPC average to a 5.0 YPC average with a higher turnover probability. Usually gunslingers and fumblers are the staple of unsuccessful or mediocre teams. Electric and exciting, but unsuccessful.

I do like Ridley but I am not blind to what you’re saying he does become lackadaisical with the photo ball especially when he is making a move or redirecting, to me it is more of a maturity thing where he understands that he is no longer playing in high school or college and his skill set is not so superior that he can hold the football like a bag of bread. My only point is to say that I do not think Blount is that much better, the play against the Bengals was his holding the ball in a similar way that Ridley was against the Panthers, when he is taking the ball at the end of the game on intent on running out the clock he holds the ball more securely but when he is trying to make plays earlier in the game he has similar tendencies with the football. I am not saying Blount is as careless as Ridley but in my opinion I would rather have Ridley with his ball security issues on the field than Blount with his slightly better security, Blount is not Green-Ellis. Bolden has 113 career touches without a fumble, and Shane Vereen has 133 career touches (including playoffs) with 1 fumble – so if you wanted to look at the best person to carry the football I would be more inclined to lean towards one of them.

New England Patriots running back LeGarrette Blount fumbles - NFL Videos

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

It's okay to bench Ridley with Vereen back, but I still can't believe Blount is getting important carries. Zero reason he should be the back in there when the game was tied late in the game, even though he ran okay, it looked like he had plenty of room. On that 2nd and long right before we had to settle for that last FG, it looked like there was alot of space which Ridley/Vereen could have gotten a first but Blount ran into his own guy and came up a yard shy and then the moronic 3rd down playcall. Not saying Blount's the main reason we didn't get 7 there but it still frustrates the **** out of me when he's in there over Ridley and/or Vereen.

 

[MassPats38]

I do like Ridley but I am not blind to what you’re saying he does become lackadaisical with the photo ball especially when he is making a move or redirecting, to me it is more of a maturity thing where he understands that he is no longer playing in high school or college and his skill set is not so superior that he can hold the football like a bag of bread. My only point is to say that I do not think Blount is that much better, the play against the Bengals was his holding the ball in a similar way that Ridley was against the Panthers, when he is taking the ball at the end of the game on intent on running out the clock he holds the ball more securely but when he is trying to make plays earlier in the game he has similar tendencies with the football. I am not saying Blount is as careless as Ridley but in my opinion I would rather have Ridley with his ball security issues on the field than Blount with his slightly better security, Blount is not Green-Ellis. Bolden has 113 career touches without a fumble, and Shane Vereen has 133 career touches (including playoffs) with 1 fumble – so if you wanted to look at the best person to carry the football I would be more inclined to lean towards one of them.

I think Blount is fine as a knockout punch to put the game away given his size and speed. Frankly. I prefer Ridley in that role if he gets his technique down, because he has size. I look at Vereen as more of a Woodhead/Faulk-type back, so I would be reluctant to put him out there for too many carries. Ridley just needs to fix his technique, but I assume some of his use restrictions have been attributable to technique issues the coaching is aware of. My hope is he fixes those issues as he is a very dangerous weapon if he does so and I would love to see him used as much as possible.

 

[dales804]

It was the wind that screwed everything up.

Had the wind not been a factor, we'd have had more scoring opportunities.

They had the ball SEVEN times inside what normally would have been FG range (opposition's 35 yd line) and only came away with 13 total points. The wind added to those decisions greatly.

Yeah, I understand about the wind. But I still think they should have gone for it. Brady can sling it and get the ball 8 yards on target through the wind (as he did on 3rd down). I think the 20 yards of field position is worth the gamble from that spot on the field regardless of wind. But I digress.

 

[Brady6]

I think Blount is fine as a knockout punch to put the game away given his size and speed. Frankly. I prefer Ridley in that role if he gets his technique down, because he has size. I look at Vereen as more of a Woodhead/Faulk-type back, so I would be reluctant to put him out there for too many carries. Ridley just needs to fix his technique, but I assume some of his use restrictions have been attributable to technique issues the coaching is aware of. My hope is he fixes those issues as he is a very dangerous weapon if he does so and I would love to see him used as much as possible.

I agree with you that Blount is a fine knock them around type back although I like you would prefer if Ridley was doing that as well. I do feel you’re selling Vereen short in your thinking of him as a third down scat back, he is actually a well put together 5’10 210+ pound guy who led his draft class of running backs with 31 reps at 225 pounds - in fact Vereen’s 31 reps at 225 pounds is currently the most ever by a running back at the combine a record he now shares Knile Davis who had 31 reps at 225 pounds at this year’s combine. To put that strength in perspective Bolden performed 21 reps at 225 pounds, and Ridley and Blount both performed 18 reps at 225. Vereen could be an every down player if he ever was able to stay healthy, I think we saw a lot of that in week 1 against Buffalo when he carried the ball 14 times for 101 rushing yards and was targeted 10 times for 7 receptions and 58 receiving yards.

I personally expect to see Vereen lead the running backs in snaps every game moving forward with Ridley seeing 15-18 carries a game as a primary runner. Blount and Bolden will fill in behind that, if Ridley continues to have fumbling issues then that might change things.

I will say if Ridley had any trouble with ball security during this week of practice I would not be at all surprised to see him catch a game day inactive tomorrow with Bolden being on the 46 in his place, I hope that is not the case but I wouldn’t put it past Belichick to make a real statement to the kid.

 

[supafly]

Firstly Blount has been in the league longer and basically WAS Tampa Bays offense for 1.5 years.

This argument is flawed, since Stevan Ridley actually has more career carries than LeGarrette Blount.

Ridley--508 carries

Blount--506 carries


As stated, LeGarette Blount has a higher rate of fumbling than Stevan Ridley does. Blount fumbles every 51 touches, where Ridley fumbles every 64 touches.

To this point, Blount hasn't had the issues that he had previously had prior to coming here. Prior to this season he had a historic rate of fumbing 1/43 touches, where Ridley only had 1/73 rate. Obviously that has changed a bit with Ridley outfumbling Blount 3-1 this season, as shown by the numbers in the previous paragraph.

 

[I am party]

Am I remembering wrong, or didn't Ridley have 2 fumbles in the season opener in Buffalo? He had the one where no one touched him and he fell to the ground and coughed it up, but he also had one before that IIRC. Was that one not counted in the official stats?

That would give him 4 for the season. (1 vs Steelers, 1 vs Panthers)

 

[TheBostonStraggler]

This argument is flawed, since Stevan Ridley actually has more career carries than LeGarrette Blount.

Ridley--508 carries

Blount--506 carries


As stated, LeGarette Blount has a higher rate of fumbling than Stevan Ridley does. Blount fumbles every 51 touches, where Ridley fumbles every 64 touches.

To this point, Blount hasn't had the issues that he had previously had prior to coming here. Prior to this season he had a historic rate of fumbing 1/43 touches, where Ridley only had 1/73 rate. Obviously that has changed a bit with Ridley outfumbling Blount 3-1 this season, as shown by the numbers in the previous paragraph.

It's interesting to see the stats/the reality. Unfortunately Ridley got the 'fumbler' label (unfairly, imho) and that put the spotlight on him every time he fumbled. I think some of that was due to being opposite BJGE. When two guys are splitting the handoffs and one of them never fumbles, the guy who does fumble a couple times is going to be more harshly criticized for it.

I did not agree (still don't) with BB's decision to not use Ridley in the 2011 playoffs. I also have not fully agreed with BB for reducing Ridley's carries on a couple of his fumbles. Yet it's hard to knock BB for this method of coaching. The Patriots under BB rightly gained the reputation for winning by making less mistakes than the other guys. Top of that list is turnovers. I suspect he sees fumbling at even a normal rate as thoroughly unacceptable. Ridley could probably go to many other teams and fumble at a more significant rate without seeing his carries reduced whatsoever. Not that the other coaches would be thrilled with fumbles, I just don't think they see it as a reason to sanction a player. But on the BB Patriots? Put it this way, any Patriot that pulls a Sanchez butt fumble better high tail it out of the stadium after the game (maybe call in sick the next couple of days too).

 

[MassPats38]

I agree with you that Blount is a fine knock them around type back although I like you would prefer if Ridley was doing that as well. I do feel you’re selling Vereen short in your thinking of him as a third down scat back, he is actually a well put together 5’10 210+ pound guy who led his draft class of running backs with 31 reps at 225 pounds - in fact Vereen’s 31 reps at 225 pounds is currently the most ever by a running back at the combine a record he now shares Knile Davis who had 31 reps at 225 pounds at this year’s combine. To put that strength in perspective Bolden performed 21 reps at 225 pounds, and Ridley and Blount both performed 18 reps at 225. Vereen could be an every down player if he ever was able to stay healthy, I think we saw a lot of that in week 1 against Buffalo when he carried the ball 14 times for 101 rushing yards and was targeted 10 times for 7 receptions and 58 receiving yards.

I guess my view of Vereen is he is more than that generally, in that he has good receiving skills and I see him better employed with a focus on his other talents than as a straight running back. That wasn't a knock on his strength, but weight is weight and strength will not necessarily offset that concern. Some of the better players are not necessarily beasts in the weight room. A 180 pound back who can bench press 380 and squat 600 pounds will likely not do well in a collision with a 325 pound lineman (there was a reason why Woodhead looked like a golf ball driven off the tee when hit squarely by a lineman, and it was not physical weakness - it was weight differential). There is a big difference between a 230 pound and 205 pound back when you are trying to wear a defense down. Effects of running backs are kinetic energy, momentum and center of gravity. All involve the mass factor.

 

[Joker]

Am I remembering wrong, or didn't Ridley have 2 fumbles in the season opener in Buffalo? He had the one where no one touched him and he fell to the ground and coughed it up, but he also had one before that IIRC. Was that one not counted in the official stats?

That would give him 4 for the season. (1 vs Steelers, 1 vs Panthers)

Ridley had one fumble...Brady had the other one. ESPN game stats

 

[I am party]

Ridley had one fumble...Brady had the other one. ESPN game stats

He coughed it up twice in the Buffalo game, but on one of them he was ruled down by contact:
Stevan Ridley, after two fumbles, focused on earning his job back - Extra Points - Boston.com

I just remember watching it and thinking that even though it wasn't ruled a fumble it was real sloppy ball security by Ridley and he got lucky.

 

[IcyPatriot]

This thread is a jonah ... get rid of it.

 

[1960Pats]

This thread is a jonah ... get rid of it.

Sorry, but it's too late.

 

[Kid~Brady]

I remember making a thread about this and I was shunned.

Hate to say it but I told you so. i love the kid but he fumbles way too much for me