***THE OFFICIAL 2014 New England Patriots training camp thread***

Nunchucks said:

Yeah, Barry Sanders sucked.

Click to expand...

Barry Sanders averaged 5 yards per carry and is deservedly in the hall of fame. That said, if he could have minimized negative plays, perhaps the Lions wouldn't have been 1-5 in the playoffs when Sanders started.

BelichickFan said:

I guess 5 yard completions are better than 60 yard TDs too. We wouldn't want to score, now, would we ? Grinding out the tough yards is nice but I can't believe people here think big plays from the running game are over rated.

Click to expand...

Big plays from the running game are certainly nice to have. That said, consistently getting good chunks of yards and minimizing negative players are far more important in the running game. If you can't understand this simple concept, perhaps you would be better served watching a less complicated game.

Galeb said:

Big plays from the running game are certainly nice to have. That said, consistently getting good chunks of yards and minimizing negative players are far more important in the running game. If you can't understand this simple concept, perhaps you would be better served watching a less complicated game.

Click to expand...

When we are talking about a difference of 4 YPC versus 4.3 YPC, I would take the long running plays and the slightly fewer YPC average. Thanks

Galeb said:

The running game isn't about big plays. It is about consistently getting decent yardage and setting up second/third and short, and also getting the first on third and short. A high YPC with few long runs is far superior than a mediocre YPC with lots of big runs.

Click to expand...

To add to this, a running game that consistently gains good chunks of yards keeps the clock running and opens up the passing game when the defense starts flooding the box.

Nunchucks said:

When we are talking about a difference of 4 YPC versus 4.3 YPC, I would take the long running plays and the slightly fewer YPC average. Thanks

Click to expand...

Think about it though. Sure, the long plays are good, but if you get a lot long runs and your YPC is 4.0, you have a lot of much smaller runs than if you got few long runs with a 4.0 YPC.

You are thinking about this from a fantasy football perspective rather than one that focuses on winning. Think about what a coach is trying to accomplish when he runs the ball. From that perspective, it is obvious which type of back is superior.

Galeb said:

Think about it though. Sure, the long plays are good, but if you get a lot long runs and your YPC is 4.0, you have a lot of much smaller runs than if you got few long runs with a 4.0 YPC.

You are thinking about this from a fantasy football perspective rather than one that focuses on winning. Think about what a coach is trying to accomplish when he runs the ball. From that perspective, it is obvious which type of back is superior.

Click to expand...

No, I really am not. Long runs are back breakers for a defense. Obviously, you want to see productive runs all the time, but some players are able to be productive AND break long runs for TDs.

You are acting like it is one or the other, that simply is not the case.

Galeb said:

The running game isn't about big plays. It is about consistently getting decent yardage and setting up second/third and short, and also getting the first on third and short. A high YPC with few long runs is far superior than a mediocre YPC with lots of big runs.

Click to expand...

It speaks to the quality of the blocking on the offensive line. To have two running backs with different styles hit 4.0+ YPC or better is a testament to the line and Dante Scarnecchia. In 2013, it seemed like the line did a better job run blocking than pass blocking. But there were an awful lot of coverage sacks last year when Brady got nailed while his receivers sorted out what they were doing.

So far, the three rookie linemen are getting pretty decent reviews in camp. I look forward to seeing them in pre-season action. Stork and Garoppolo are struggling on snaps, but that is both of their faults. Word on Stork's blocking ability is good so far, but he left early yesterday with some kind of injury - http://www.nepatriotslife.com/2014/07/training-camp-report-practice-recap-wrs.html

BelichickFan said:

I guess 5 yard completions are better than 60 yard TDs too. We wouldn't want to score, now, would we ? Grinding out the tough yards is nice but I can't believe people here think big plays from the running game are over rated.

Click to expand...

You don't understand. All of our players are either the greatest players in the world or the ****tiest players in the world. They either have zero holes in their perfect game or their game has every hole in the world and don't belong on even a pee-wee field. There is literally no in between. Ever.

That said, whomever is arguing that big plays from a RB or any skill position player, for that matter, is anything but a good thing is developmentally disabled. Ultimately, though, you want both from a RB. Steady gains are great. There's nothing wrong with a RB breaking off 4+ yards a pop. But you also want the RB to be able to hit a home run from time to time and, as has been said, Ridley simply didn't provide that last year (granted he was benched a lot because apparently someone put butter on the football when he was in the game). Hopefully, this season, the Pats will have a stable of running backs that can do both. I actually liked the White pick during the draft when others were panning it because he was elusive. Not the fastest guy in the field, but he was capable of hitting the home run in college. Hopefully that translates to the NFL.

I think people were arguing about 2 different things when each is presenting its thoughts about the run game. Ideally your RB gets you 4 yards EVERY time he runs. I think everyone here would take that over any other RB in the NFL. However the original thought was kind of saying (I think) "If all Ridley does is offers consistency without big plays and with fumbling he is not a good option".

I think there is a fairness to that. I would say if Ridley could get consistently good runs like he is doing now ALONG with long runs (so I guess that would probably bring his average up to 5 YPA+) then the fumbles could be more forgivable. This would be because not only are you making consistently good runs but you occasionally make some game changing positive plays to offset some game changing negative plays.

Edit: Also no need to go insulting people even in a passive aggressive manor as it will only cause someone to dig in deeper and stop any meaningful exchange.

Nunchucks said:

No, I really am not. Long runs are back breakers for a defense. Obviously, you want to see productive runs all the time, but some players are able to be productive AND break long runs for TDs.

You are acting like it is one or the other, that simply is not the case.

Click to expand...

If you read what I actually wrote, you would realize that I am not saying there is anything wrong with long runs or that you can't have good YPC and a lot of long runs. I simply said that many long runs are not nearly as important as consistently getting good chunks of yards while minimizing negative plays. Obviously it is better to have a good YPC AND a lot of long runs. Either way though, you must realize that several long runs inflate YPC. I think a YPC after discarding the 10 or 20 longest runs would be an interesting stat.

Barry Sandbags was a player that had a good YPC and many long runs but he also had a lot runs with no gain or a loss of yards. In contrast, Adrian Peterson has a high YPC a decent number of long runs yet has very few rushes for no gain or a loss. He even seems to have taken care of his early fumbling problem as well.

Long runs are nice, but they are definitely over-rated by fantasy football peeps.

goheels22002 said:

It speaks to the quality of the blocking on the offensive line. To have two running backs with different styles hit 4.0+ YPC or better is a testament to the line and Dante Scarnecchia. In 2013, it seemed like the line did a better job run blocking than pass blocking. But there were an awful lot of coverage sacks last year when Brady got nailed while his receivers sorted out what they were doing.

So far, the three rookie linemen are getting pretty decent reviews in camp. I look forward to seeing them in pre-season action. Stork and Garoppolo are struggling on snaps, but that is both of their faults. Word on Stork's blocking ability is good so far, but he left early yesterday with some kind of injury - http://www.nepatriotslife.com/2014/07/training-camp-report-practice-recap-wrs.html

Click to expand...

Blocking definitely has to be taken into consideration. Yards before and after contact is a very telling stat when evaluating running backs.

Totally agree with kontradiction and bobdigital in their last 2 posts, that's exactly what I think.

We are not asking too much, every NFL game a RB make a break for some good 40 yards. Obviously I don't want a RB with big runs and mediocre in the trenches with flawed stats. But If Ridley could make some runs at the exchange of no gains here and there he would still be productive. That's why we use this mathematical tool called average.

I don't think long runs are overrated, neither the deep threat WR. I don't think you build a roster with that I mind too, with an emphasis on these plays, but these are necessary plays we have been lacking for a long time. Good average numbers are good and guarantee you a playoff spot, from that point on you need a little more.

varjao said:

Totally agree with kontradiction and bobdigital in their last 2 posts, that's exactly what I think.

We are not asking too much, every NFL game a RB make a break for some good 40 yards. Obviously I don't want a RB with big runs and mediocre in the trenches with flawed stats. But If Ridley could make some runs at the exchange of no gains here and there he would still be productive. That's why we use this mathematical tool called average.

I don't think long runs are overrated, neither the deep threat WR. I don't think you build a roster with that I mind too, with an emphasis on these plays, but these are necessary plays we have been lacking for a long time. Good average numbers are good and guarantee you a playoff spot, from that point on you need a little more.

Click to expand...

A solid running game with a QB good at faking a hand-offs can really open up some easy long completions.

varjao said:

Totally agree with kontradiction and bobdigital in their last 2 posts, that's exactly what I think.

We are not asking too much, every NFL game a RB make a break for some good 40 yards. Obviously I don't want a RB with big runs and mediocre in the trenches with flawed stats. But If Ridley could make some runs at the exchange of no gains here and there he would still be productive. That's why we use this mathematical tool called average.

I don't think long runs are overrated, neither the deep threat WR. I don't think you build a roster with that I mind too, with an emphasis on these plays, but these are necessary plays we have been lacking for a long time. Good average numbers are good and guarantee you a playoff spot, from that point on you need a little more.

Click to expand...

Teams will let RBs take their 4 YPC between the 20s without moving the safety down and then stiffen up in the red zone. If a RB is a real threat to break long runs, then teams will move the safety down between the 20s and that is when play-action really works.

Galeb said:

Blocking definitely has to be taken into consideration. Yards before and after contact is a very telling stat when evaluating running backs.

Click to expand...

That is usually a good stat but can also be misleading at times. A good line with force defenders to take bad angles. So even though the RB deserves credit the OL can be the reason he faces more single arm attempts and less head on attempts. That aside it is still one of my fav stats. I just wanted to point out it is still imperfect like all stats are.

Also anyone have a tweeter feed for how practice is going?

Galeb said:

Barry Sanders averaged 5 yards per carry and is deservedly in the hall of fame. That said, if he could have minimized negative plays, perhaps the Lions wouldn't have been 1-5 in the playoffs when Sanders started.

Click to expand...

Wait.... are you really trying to blame the Lions' playoff woes on Barry Sanders?



This silly season just got a lot sillier.

@MikeReiss: Other absences at today's Patriots practice: TE Michael Hoomanawamui, LB Chris White, WR Josh Boyce (via @LeeSchechter).

patsinthesnow said:

@MikeReiss: Other absences at today's Patriots practice: TE Michael Hoomanawamui, LB Chris White, WR Josh Boyce (via @LeeSchechter).

Click to expand...

Hmm. Any word on what happened to Boyce?

Stork not practicing...

KontradictioN said:

Hmm. Any word on what happened to Boyce?

Click to expand...

All that's on twitter thus far:

@MikeGiardi: Josh Boyce, who's spent time with the trainer every day, is not here at start of practice #patriotstalk