8/25: Reiss Predicting Ridley Gets Cut

[Triumph]

Still waiting for you to provide us with that list of teams who have had as much success as Belichick has while replacing over 90 percent of their roster Triumph? Why is it taking so long? A fantasy genius like you should be able to write that up for us in no time.

Do you have a list of the players that BB has cut who have gone on to success?

 

[primetime]

Ridley looked good on his carries in the last preseason game. When the first team offense was on the field, seems like they were more interested in passing the ball. Over the course of the game, they only ran the ball 27 times (disregarding Brady's sneak and Jimmy G's kneels).

James White hasn't shown anything at all, and Jonas Grey has looked like practice squad material. Vereen isn't a between-the-numbers runner. If anything, Brandon Bolden has had more impressive runs than anyone else this preseason.

Cutting Ridley seems pointless since, in addition to him being a very good running back whose fumbling issues are overblown, there's no value at all from jettisoning him on the last year of his rookie contract.

 

[Ring 6]

But what would that evidence look like? If Ridley were not taking coaching in practice and had issues with ball security in practice, and then he put the ball on the ground in a game, that might explain why some feel BB is over-reacting to what many perceive as a merely mediocre fumbling rate. I think there is evidence that BB regards his ball security issues as more important than many on this site. If BB sees him as gone next year, and sees greater value in Gray, I could see entertaining trade offers to get some value for him while he can. While I would be surprised if he were released outright, BB surprises with some regularity. Predicting the annual surprises is a challenging game, which is what Reiss is attempting here. By definition, a surprise is a move that most of us are not anticipating.


http://itiswhatitis.weei.com/sports...triots-skill-position-players-in-preseason-2/

That break down is kind of meaningless without looking at other seasons to give it context.

 

[Rob0729]

One team would be successful and a team that Ridley wants to play for.

Also, Ridley gets paid more hitting the market.

Ridley has no say in the matter. Is he really going to sit out the season in a contract year because the Pats traded him to a team he doesn't want to play for?

Yes, Ridley would want to be cut if he is not going to play for the Patriots because it is in his best interest. It is in the Pats' best interest to trade him and get draft pick compensation and control where he goes (like avoid him running to Denver to help them). As long as the Pats can find a trade partner, the Pats have all the power in this circumstance.

I still don't see Ridley getting cut and I think Reiss may have been smoking something while writing this article.

 

[Ring 6]

Doesn't Ridley have to agree to go to said team?

Its in Ridleys best interest to hit the open market and time is on his side with final cutdown looming.

No he does not have to approve a trade.

 

[Deus Irae]

Reiss just lost any credibility he had

Ridley's "fumbling issues" are incredibly over-exaggerated

Bill Belichick doesn't seem to agree with the idea that 'Ridley's "fumbling issues" are incredibly over-exaggerated'. Perhaps you and Shmessy can sit the coach down and set him straight.

 

[Mack Herron]

That break down is kind of meaningless without looking at other seasons to give it context.

All I am saying is that BB had a problem with Ridley's ball security last season as evidenced by multiple benchings. It resurfaced this season.

 

[makoute]

Ridley looked good on his carries in the last preseason game. When the first team offense was on the field, seems like they were more interested in passing the ball. Over the course of the game, they only ran the ball 27 times (disregarding Brady's sneak and Jimmy G's kneels).

James White hasn't shown anything at all, and Jonas Grey has looked like practice squad material. Vereen isn't a between-the-numbers runner. If anything, Brandon Bolden has had more impressive runs than anyone else this preseason.

Cutting Ridley seems pointless since, in addition to him being a very good running back whose fumbling issues are overblown, there's no value at all from jettisoning him on the last year of his rookie contract.

I think Grey has shown very well with the opportunities that was given to him.

 

[makoute]

All I am saying is that BB had a problem with Ridley's ball security last season as evidenced by multiple benchings. It resurfaced this season.

True, and seeing how every time Riddley fumbles, he gets benched for a good period of time, then there might be some merits to him being cut or traded.

 

[primetime]

Bill Belichick doesn't seem to agree with the idea that 'Ridley's "fumbling issues" are incredibly over-exaggerated'. Perhaps you and Shmessy can sit the coach down and set him straight.

Blount fumbled at a higher rate than Ridley did last season. I would think you of all posters would avoid the appeal to Belichick. Ridley also got benched for showboating, leading me to wonder if Belichick just doesn't like the kid.

 

[patfanken]

See this is what happens when an excellent REPORTER, starts viewing himself as an expert analyst. Now it becomes all about being the guy who can tell you later "I told you so". Of course with the mediots, no one EVER takes ownership of the myriad times they are completely wrong.

I hope to God Reiss hasn't finally crossed the line from being one of the best beat REPORTERS in country to being just another ego maniacal mediot who thinks he's suddenly smarter than the professionals, and the only thing that's important is how many clicks you can generat e and how many TV gigs you can get by being "provocative".

 

[primetime]

See this is what happens when an excellent REPORTER, starts viewing himself as an expert analyst. Now it becomes all about being the guy who can tell you later "I told you so". Of course with the mediots, there is NEVER takes ownership of the myriad times they are completely wrong.

I hope to God Reiss hasn't finally crossed the line from being one of the best beat REPORTERS in country to being just another ego maniacal mediot who thinks he's suddenly smarter than the professionals.

Whoa, the vitriol. I don't think he claimed to be an expert, and he almost always does a mea culpa when he's wrong - unlike every other talking head in sports media. To be a sports reporter, some degree of analysis is part of your job... especially because it gets people talking. Like we're doing right now.

 

[Deus Irae]

Blount fumbled at a higher rate than Ridley did last season. I would think you of all posters would avoid the appeal to Belichick. Ridley also got benched for showboating, leading me to wonder if Belichick just doesn't like the kid.

1.) Blount did not fumble at a higher rate than Ridley last year. It's the other way around

2.) You're misunderstanding the point of mentioning Belichick. Focus on the second sentence of that post, not the first.

 

[patchick]

See this is what happens when an excellent REPORTER, starts viewing himself as an expert analyst. Now it becomes all about being the guy who can tell you later "I told you so". Of course with the mediots, there is NEVER takes ownership of the myriad times they are completely wrong.

I hope to God Reiss hasn't finally crossed the line from being one of the best beat REPORTERS in country to being just another ego maniacal mediot who thinks he's suddenly smarter than the professionals.

I disagree with Reiss on this one, but I can't slam him for posting a roster projection! It's what every beat reporter (and most fans) do this time of year. Besides, he's not wrong...yet.

 

[Ring 6]

All I am saying is that BB had a problem with Ridley's ball security last season as evidenced by multiple benchings. It resurfaced this season.

How did it resurface this season?
What point are you trying to make with preseason carries? Again, it is meaningless by itself.

 

[BelichickFan]

Like most I don't see it. The ONLY explanation I can see is if they don't plan on re-signing him and think they can get the same production out of someone signed for longer.

Now, I like Ridley more than Gray but to use Gray as an example. In the unlikely event they think Gray is as, or almost as, good as Ridley they may prefer to keep Gray who is signed through 2015 and won't be a UFA until, I believe, 2017 (he's a RFA in 2016).

If they think Gray is as good, why cut him when you can get at least 2 cheap years instead of one. Of course I think Ridley is better and I am confident they do to. But in all roster discussions, how long a guy is signed at a good cost has to be factored in.

 

[BlueThunder]

I had originally thought a Finch/White but decided on Finch due to his ST skill. White , to me, has been unimpressive so far this preseason. If BB sees something in White that fans don't, he'll be on the roster.

Finch would never be the lone RB unless, as someone said, the play was to him. Brady can always check out of a play at the line if he doesn't like what he sees.

I guess it's a matter of what Finch brings over what White brings. White's draft position probably gives him the edge as a 4th rd pick vs a FA makes BB look bad if his 4th rounder can't beat out a FA.

JMHO

 

[primetime]

1.) Blount did not fumble at a higher rate than Ridley last year. It's the other way around

2.) You're misunderstanding the point of mentioning Belichick.

Blount fumbled on 1.9% of his carries, Ridley on 1.7% of his. Though on a per-touch basis (since Ridley fumbled on a reception), Ridley's is slightly higher (2.1% to 1.9%) but it's not a significant difference. Both of them still fumbled at a rate higher than the average bear, though... then again, Blount's gone, so you may have a point.

 

[Ring 6]

Like most I don't see it. The ONLY explanation I can see is if they don't plan on re-signing him and think they can get the same production out of someone signed for longer.

Now, I like Ridley more than Gray but to use Gray as an example. In the unlikely event they think Gray is as, or almost as, good as Ridley they may prefer to keep Gray who is signed through 2015 and won't be a UFA until, I believe, 2017 (he's a RFA in 2016).

If they think Gray is as good, why cut him when you can get at least 2 cheap years instead of one. Of course I think Ridley is better and I am confident they do to. But in all roster discussions, how long a guy is signed at a good cost has to be factored in.

Yeah, there is no logic in this prediction.

 

[patfanken]

Whoa, the vitriol. I don't think he claimed to be an expert, and he almost always does a mea culpa when he's wrong - unlike every other talking head in sports media. To be a sports reporter, some degree of analysis is part of your job... especially because it gets people talking. Like we're doing right now.

Its not vitriol, PT, its fear. Fear that he has gone to the "dark side" The very qualities you mention are the things I have always liked about Mike Reiss. They are what set him apart from the rest of the self aggrandizing media pukes.

In this illogical stab at "stirring the pot", his reasoning is all wrong, starting with the amount of time Ridley played the other night, to trying to take credit for seeing the Kelly cut coming early on. These are NOT the usual types of observations one expects from Reiss. Thus the fear on my part that the chase for TV time, and the competition for notoriety has finally gotten to him.\

I can only hope that you are right, and this is only a blip on the horizon, and my fears are just that, only fears.