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

Well I do hope Stork is not out for long. He needs every rep he can get. Boyce has made most of the practices this year so missing a few wouldn't be too concerning. Hopefully both are minor things.

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...

Sanders or the way Sanders played wasn't the reason why the Lions were 1-5 in the playoffs lol. That's silly.

Connolly back at back at practice.

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...

I don't think anyone was complaining when Corey Dillon was busting out some long - it's a good thing. What you don't want is an offense that relies too much on the running back like Minnesota or detroit when they had sanders. Your offense should center around your QB.

Deus Irae said:

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



This silly season just got a lot sillier.

Click to expand...

No. Although the Lions had a pretty good OL at times, they were not a good team. Without Barry, they wouldn't have sniffed the playoffs. I think Barry could have carried them farther if he had less negative plays.

What does Barry Sanders have to do with the Pats 2014 training camp?

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 are confusing overrated (meaning they are rare, and the difference between the norm and not having any or many 40+ runs has little impact on the success of the team) with they are bad.
Sure its great to gain big chunks of yards. And in that fantasy world where it happened several times a game, it would be a key to success.
The point is the absence of those rare long runs is not that big a deal.

condon84 said:

Sanders or the way Sanders played wasn't the reason why the Lions were 1-5 in the playoffs lol. That's silly.

Click to expand...

I agree. As said in a previous post, Barry is why the Lions made it to the playoffs. If he could have minimized the negatively plays, I think he could have carried them farther. I think Adrian Peterson has done more with a significantly worse, more dysfunctional team in a passing era.

Galeb said:

No. Although the Lions had a pretty good OL at times, they were not a good team. Without Barry, they wouldn't have sniffed the playoffs. I think Barry could have carried them farther if he had less negative plays.

Click to expand...

So, yes, you are, in fact, blaming Sanders.



We really need to start drug testing posters.

I miss our training camp swag.

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...

I don't think anyone is really saying long runs are overrated. It depends on the RB.

Blount was overrated to me. was never consistently effective but people loved him for his big play ability.

I want a consistent RB over a boom or bust guy. There's only like 4 RBs who can give you both - AP, McCoy, Charles, and Forte.

Like I would rather have Ridley at running back over a guy like Chris Johnson who legit has half his runs under 3 yards but an give the 80 yard pop any time. Its just not effective. It makes things so hard on the offense.

I would love long runs if the RB was a consistent 5 yards but if we have a Blount or Chris Johnson or CJ Spiller I wouldn't want them as my lead back.

Marshawn Lynch isn't a home run hitter. He's a grinder and I would take him over most

condon84 said:

Sanders or the way Sanders played wasn't the reason why the Lions were 1-5 in the playoffs lol. That's silly.

Click to expand...

It was in the game he ran 13 times for -1 yard and his team lost 16-12.
It was in the 5 of 6 games he rushed for under 70 yards.

Its the same as the Marino argument. If you want to give him credit for 'carrying the team' you have to recognize that the reason they fell short is that he failed to carry them in the post season.
Barry Sanders post season play is not HOF caliber, for whatever reason you wish to explain it with.

AndyJohnson said:

You are confusing overrated (meaning they are rare, and the difference between the norm and not having any or many 40+ runs has little impact on the success of the team) with they are bad.
Sure its great to gain big chunks of yards. And in that fantasy world where it happened several times a game, it would be a key to success.
The point is the absence of those rare long runs is not that big a deal.

Click to expand...

I disagree and that is exactly why Ben Jarvaus-Green-Ellis was let go. Having the ability to threaten with long runs is a very important tool for a RB.

Deus Irae said:

So, yes, you are, in fact, blaming Sanders.



We really need to start drug testing posters.

Click to expand...

Trying to create a vacuum I see. If you look at the first sentence, I acknowledge that without Sanders, the Lions wouldn't have sniffed the playoffs. I genuinely believe that if he had less negative plays, he could have brought them further in the playoffs. It is fine to disagree with that opinion, but don't try to eliminate context and change the facts.

I loved Barry Sanders the player. I genuinely wish he played longer and for a good team. I am simply acknowledging a hole in his game that I think prevented him from CARRYING his team further into the playoffs.

Nunchucks said:

I disagree and that is exactly why Ben Jarvaus-Green-Ellis was let go. Having the ability to threaten with long runs is a very important tool for a RB.

Click to expand...

Then we disagree, however your opinion on why a personnel decision was made should not be used as if it were a fact.

Guys. Training camp has started. 2014 has started. It's not the off season any more. This is the training camp thread. WTF are we arguing about a player who retired 15 years ago? At least do us a favor and take it to a new thread? Please....

Nunchucks said:

I disagree and that is exactly why Ben Jarvaus-Green-Ellis was let go. Having the ability to threaten with long runs is a very important tool for a RB.

Click to expand...

If that's the case, why the hell is Ridley still here?

You're wrong on why BJGE is gone. Ridley came in and showed promise and BB gave him the backfield. More talent and cheaper. That's why BJGE is gone.

So are we saying Dillon sucked then? Because he really wasn't a threat for big runs either.

It's pretty simple: runs that average 4 YPC are good. Runs that go for 40+ and a score are good. You ultimately want to have both in your running back(s) during the season. It's not one or the other. It's not an either/or scenario. Argument over.

joepatsfan said:

If that's the case, why the hell is Ridley still here?

You're wrong on why BJGE is gone. Ridley came in and showed promise and BB gave him the backfield. More talent and cheaper. That's why BJGE is gone.

So are we saying Dillon sucked then? Because he really wasn't a threat for big runs either.

Click to expand...

Ridley is a better RB than Ben and he is certainly more explosive. Ridley just has not been a threat to rip off long runs, I do not understand why people make that out to me thinking he sucks.

Dillion was a beast and he could rip off the long runs.

Galeb said:

Trying to create a vacuum I see. If you look at the first sentence, I acknowledge that without Sanders, the Lions wouldn't have sniffed the playoffs. I genuinely believe that if he had less negative plays, he could have brought them further in the playoffs. It is fine to disagree with that opinion, but don't try to eliminate context and change the facts.

I loved Barry Sanders the player. I genuinely wish he played longer and for a good team. I am simply acknowledging a hole in his game that I think prevented him from CARRYING his team further into the playoffs.

Click to expand...

Sanders was the best player on those teams.
I think your point was that a player whose total package is a lot of short or negative runs plus a lot of long runs is not as valuable when he doesn't break the long run.

Now, you could make the argument that never having a good QB made it easier to defend Sanders, but if you look at what he did, its not impressive.

6 playoff games, 1 win in which he was awesome (27-169)
In the 5 losses, these were his numbers

rushes-yards-long
12-69-47
11-44-23
13--1-7
10-40-9
18-65-15

That is 5 games of rushing 64 times for 217 yards, and a 3.4 average, and if we apply your consideration of the long run aspect, and take away the 47 yarder on his other 63 carries in those 5 losses he averaged 2.7 ypc.
This is the heart of what you allude to. Lets call the 47 yarder an single handed TD. Is one TD in 5 games enough to overshadow 2.7 ypc and an average of only 34 yards per game otherwise?