2 weeks to prepare and we get 3 running plays

KontradictioN said:

The Vereen pick still doesn't make a lick of sense to me.

Click to expand...

Absolutely no sense, especially since Woodhead was one of the best 3rd down backs in 2010, and towards the end of the season he looks like he's back.

patsinthesnow said:

Absolutely no sense, especially since Woodhead was one of the best 3rd down backs in 2010, and towards the end of the season he looks like he's back.

Click to expand...

I disagree, at least in theory. I think Vereen if he lives up to expectations can be far more than a 3rd down/change of pace RB. He can be a lead back. If he ever lives up to his potential, he could be a lead back.

Now, so far, he has obviously been a huge disapointment, but with injuries and a lockout I am giving him a pass this year. He might be fighting with Ridley, BJGE, or whoever is here for the starting role next year if he rebounds.

In hindsight so far the pick makes no sense because he hasn't given anything other than some pretty good runs in garbage time in a game. That said he still has a chance to redeem himself.

Rob0729 said:

I disagree, at least in theory. I think Vereen if he lives up to expectations can be far more than a 3rd down/change of pace RB. He can be a lead back. If he ever lives up to his potential, he could be a lead back.

Now, so far, he has obviously been a huge disapointment, but with injuries and a lockout I am giving him a pass this year. He might be fighting with Ridley, BJGE, or whoever is here for the starting role next year if he rebounds.

In hindsight so far the pick makes no sense because he hasn't given anything other than some pretty good runs in garbage time in a game. That said he still has a chance to redeem himself.

Click to expand...

I hope he pans out, maybe instead of the Vereen pick making no sense it was taking two RBs. He did have like 30 reps at the combine at his small size, he's iron man. Even if BJGE walks next year I don't see him getting much time above Ridley/Woodhead.

I think Vareen was drafted with next year in mind I truly believe the Patriots plan on letting BJGE walk with or without compensation.
If was land a third or 4th for him in a agreed trade I believe that would be used to move up for some difference makers, at wide receiver I see Lloyd coming in and I'd love to snatch Quick at 31, Meachem is also a guy i think who can at least stretch the field and dictate coverage, back to the original post.
Unfortunately the Patriots with BB really don't put alot of stock in running the football in big games they put it all on Brady and I think their confidence in him is so great that they forget he can be human and when the burden is constantly on him, he can make mistakes, Ridley not getting a look is inexplainable.
Vareen better be ready for primetime next season because I doubt we have the Lawfirm at the salary he will rightfully command and expect.

Rob0729 said:

I disagree, at least in theory. I think Vereen if he lives up to expectations can be far more than a 3rd down/change of pace RB. He can be a lead back. If he ever lives up to his potential, he could be a lead back.

Now, so far, he has obviously been a huge disapointment, but with injuries and a lockout I am giving him a pass this year. He might be fighting with Ridley, BJGE, or whoever is here for the starting role next year if he rebounds.

In hindsight so far the pick makes no sense because he hasn't given anything other than some pretty good runs in garbage time in a game. That said he still has a chance to redeem himself.

Click to expand...

The lockout excuse is overblown. I didn't see Ridley having any trouble cracking the line-up. We didn't need two running backs. We needed one. Again, the Vereen pick made absolutely no sense.

Why activate Ridley and not use him?

KontradictioN said:

The lockout excuse is overblown. I didn't see Ridley having any trouble cracking the line-up. We didn't need two running backs. We needed one. Again, the Vereen pick made absolutely no sense.

Click to expand...

Vereen was injured for a large chunk of the preseason and start of the regular season. That might have played into the reason he didn't perform this year.

The Pats only had two RBs on the roster when they drafted, they did need two. Maybe not as high as they drafted them, but this team has used at least four RBs extensively over the last few seasons.

Get used to 3 runs per game if McDaniels is back to stay.

Dagg said:

Shotgun inside draw
Bunch toss sweep
Single back dive

I posted in a redskins thread last week about running more and we didnt do it and we lost again. Play action doesnt work when you only run 10 times you learn that in JV football. Ok so we did 2 reveses that were decent but wow our running game needs a new look badly. Until this happens its going to be more of that same against teams like the Giants and Ravens. All the chips are on Tom and a mistake or 2 (saftey and welker) and its over the margin is just to thin.

McDaniels being back doesnt give me a warm fuzzy for next year...

Again very disappointing run game week in and week out.

Maybe we need a real fullback?

Click to expand...

Lousaka Polite is a real fullback..

BTW, you forgot about the two reverses they ran.

BJGE was horrible last night, I was angry every time he ran the ball and went nowhere except once. That's one reason to abandon the running game. I think the Pats need to consider drafting and RB similar to AP.

ayjackson said:

Get used to 3 runs per game if McDaniels is back to stay.

Click to expand...

Offensive game plan the Pats had for the Super Bowl was not good.

I blame Obrien and BillB for this. Only play I liked was the double reverse run..

Never liked Obrien as the OC.

Patricia needs to go as well.

Would've been great if we got spagnulo as DC...

ayjackson said:

Get used to 3 runs per game if McDaniels is back to stay.

Click to expand...

Yes, get ready for everyone spreading the myth that McDaniels doesn't run the ball.

In 2005, the Pats ran the ball 42.55% of the time, in 2006 they ran it 46.15% of the time, in 2007 they ran it 42.13% of the time, and in 2008 they ran it 46.85%. Not incredibly high percentages, but clearly not the lowest in the league.

The only year Charlie Weis ran it significantly more was in 2004 when they ran it nealt 51% of the time. Most of the years in the Belichick era, the Pats have run the ball between 42 and 47% of the time and really didn't have to do with the coordinator.

In fact, the lowest percentages of running plays in a single season came in 2002 when the Pats ran the ball 39.6% of the time UNDER CHARLIE WEIS.

DaBruinz said:

Lousaka Polite is a real fullback..

BTW, you forgot about the two reverses they ran.

Click to expand...

I know your not defending the FB position, but to piggy back on your post. I thought a FB might be the answer to get the running game going. Now I realize how wrong this line of thinking is. Waiting for the FB to clear the hole is asking for trouble with our blocking schemes. Extra T or a motion blocker works for us, but last night it was obvious the FB is dead in our offense. Well unless he's used as a HB.

LivinLovin&Breathin_Brady said:

BJGE was horrible last night, I was angry every time he ran the ball and went nowhere except once. That's one reason to abandon the running game. I think the Pats need to consider drafting and RB similar to AP.

Click to expand...

I agree 100%

draft adrian peterson.

RhodyPatriot said:

I'm with you.

The Patriots lack balance on offense.

Some stats

Yesterday - 41 pass/19 run time of possession 22:55 = loss

SB 42 - 48 pass/16 run time of possession 29:33 = loss

SB 39 - 33 pass/28 run time of possession 31:37 = win

SB 38 - 48 pass/35 run time of possession 38:58 = win

SB 36 - 27 pass/25 run time of possession 26:30 = win

Until they get back to basics and return to a balanced offense where it is NOT all about Tom Brady and his arm this team will not win another Super Bowl.

Click to expand...

I'm not agreeing or disagreeing, but to be fair about ToP, both teams had 8 legit drives in the game.
one of ours was 8 seconds, ending in a safety
another was 1:18, ending in a pick.

those 2 lost drives could've brought us up from 23 min to 30 min ToP.

not counting the final drive we probably ran the ball about 40%

The title of this thread sums it up.
We should have run more-period

Maybe they would've ran more if Ridley and Vereen didn't suck. Good lord, a 2nd they traded up for and a 3rd round pick on RBs and they don't do **** in meaningful games.

The Lawfirm is great at what he does but he's not winning any games if it rests on his shoulders. Who exactly do you people expect them to dump another 10-15 carries on?

Rob0729 said:

In fact, the lowest percentages of running plays in a single season came in 2002 when the Pats ran the ball 39.6% of the time UNDER CHARLIE WEIS.

Click to expand...

And how well did they do in 2002?

MSU said:

Maybe they would've ran more if Ridley and Vereen didn't suck. Good lord, a 2nd they traded up for and a 3rd round pick on RBs and they don't do **** in meaningful games.

The Lawfirm is great at what he does but he's not winning any games if it rests on his shoulders. Who exactly do you people expect them to dump another 10-15 carries on?

Click to expand...

What makes you think Ridley sucks?

How is it possible for Vereen to suck while he's on the bench essentially being redshirted?

JackBauer said:

I'm just grateful we drafted two running backs and elected not to use either of them. Especially when your #1 receiving target is down a leg.

Click to expand...

Hey at least they weren't cut, just ask the WR corps. If you are a college WR and drafted by the Pats, you might as well start the death march to the gallows(days to being cut). So far Slater and Edelman survived because of special teams play, else, chop chop

Bethel, PK Sam, Chad Jackson, Tate, Price.....