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

Nunchucks said:

I do not get how you can compare Dillon with Ridley, they are very different backs. One is HoF caliber and the other got benched.

Click to expand...

Where did I compare them? And Dillon got benched too, for Rudi Johnson.

Nunchucks said:

Sorry, I did not do the actual math for an example...but, I am sure that there is a reasonable number of runs for a decent amount mixed in with long runs that would come out to be somewhere in the 4.5 YPC area...wouldn't you think?

Click to expand...

I don't understand what you are getting at.
What are you trying to prove?
This line of argument is saying that 20 carries for 90 yards with one 80 yarder compares favorably to 20 for 90 without the long run.
Clearly those are very different types of production. If you are happy with your RB handing you a TD a game and doing nothing else, then #1 is better, but I tend to think #2 would produce a more effective offense.

My point, however, was that long runs are rare,and they are really additive to an effective offense not a key component. You make get a a few a year if you are lucky, but a few plays a year isn't a big factor in the overall success of a team.

AndyJohnson said:

I don't understand what you are getting at.
What are you trying to prove?
This line of argument is saying that 20 carries for 90 yards with one 80 yarder compares favorably to 20 for 90 without the long run.
Clearly those are very different types of production. If you are happy with your RB handing you a TD a game and doing nothing else, then #1 is better, but I tend to think #2 would produce a more effective offense.

My point, however, was that long runs are rare,and they are really additive to an effective offense not a key component. You make get a a few a year if you are lucky, but a few plays a year isn't a big factor in the overall success of a team.

Click to expand...

You said that long runs are overrated....they are not.

Browner said of KT


“KT’s got routes at the line of scrimmage that are unmatchable,” he said. “Some guys aren’t as quick as that dude, so it’s been competitive going against that guy. And it’s only going to make me better."

Nunchucks said:

You said that long runs are overrated....they are not.

Click to expand...

No, they really are. Long runs are not necessary to have a dominant offense. Long runs are additive to an effective offense not a key component. Long runs are not a big factor in the overall success of a team.
That is why they are overrated. Do you dispute any of that?

Deus Irae said:

If getting manhandled by physical receivers leads to him not being able to get the job done and hold on to passes, he's going to have a wonderful life playing flag football, but his NFL career is going to be a lot shorter than he'd like.

Click to expand...

You are discounting the talent, skillset, and physicality that Browner has. He is not your everyday corner.

IIRC, KT has not gone up against such a physical corner, and this should be an excellent learning opportunity for him.

Just to touch on the Ridley/Blount thing....

I wasn't going to do every game from last year, but I did look at the first 4 and last 4, and I did some counting based upon the play-by-play at Profootballreference.com. In those 8 games, Ridley had 90 attempts and Blount had 93. According to my count, which could be off by a couple, Ridley had 50 carries of 3 yards or fewer in his 90 attempts, while Blount had 48 carries of 3 years or fewer in his 93 attempts.

I did the tally quickly, and I counted short runs as short runs even if they were TDs. I also counted runs that were part of personal foul penalties, but didn't count runs on plays that were called back due to other penalties.

The bottom line was that, for the bookend 8 games, Blount and Ridley were pretty close when it came to short gains v. longer gains, percentage-wise.

AndyJohnson said:

No, they really are. Long runs are not necessary to have a dominant offense. Long runs are additive to an effective offense not a key component. Long runs are not a big factor in the overall success of a team.
That is why they are overrated. Do you dispute any of that?

Click to expand...

Right, we saw a 2007 team that never ran the ball....so, I guess you do not need a running game at all. Nor do you need a deep passing game, if you have a good defense and a good short passing game....what exactly is your point? There are multiple ways to win football games.

I do not know why you would say that having a guy who can break long runs is overrated, you might as well say any one facet of a game is overrated.

I do know this, if you have a guy who can score a TD outside of the 20 yard line, that is points on the board from outside the redzone, and it is in the redzone where points are hard to come by. Generally, teams will give you the running game in-between the 20s, but what happens when the field shortens?

PP2 said:

You are discounting the talent, skillset, and physicality that Browner has. He is not your everyday corner.

IIRC, KT has not gone up against such a physical corner, and this should be an excellent learning opportunity for him.

Click to expand...

I'm not discounting anything. I didn't say K.T. should be cut tomorrow. I didn't say K.T. should be shot and fed to the dogs. I said that he has to step it up. I doubt that my position is in the minority among the Patriots coaching staff, and I think that K.T. would also agree with that take.

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...

Situational. If you end 4 drives on incompletions or turnovers trying to hit on that 60 yard TD pass would you value it over consistent 5 yard completions that result in scoring 60-80% of the drives?

If you're promising me a score on both plays, sure, give me the 60 yarder as long as its not a game tying score that gives the ball back.

If you're looking at how it'd really setup, the 60 yarder will have a hell of a lot more risk involved in most scenarios and if thats your ultimate goal you're probably going to see a lot of failure on the way to it.

So yes, 9 times out of 10, I'd rather someone I believe I can count on to give 4 yards a play and move the chains over someone who will gain a yard here, yard there, and lose a yard here before finally busting out for a 40 yarder, then going back to 2 yards, 3 yards, 1 yard, etc. even if his average says "6ypc" while my other guy is 4.1ypc. They might both get me the same amount of yards, but I want the guy who results in less drives ending because he can get the "tough yards" even if he doesn't score from the 50.

I want to score more often on more drives than I care about how fast I can score on any particular drive.

joepatsfan said:

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

Click to expand...

I'm saying long runs are overrated. That's why you have a quarterback and a stable of receivers.

Of course, I am in favor of all running backs having a 7 yards a carry average, if that's what it takes to consistently move the chains while breaking lots of long runs. Then you could have Tebow at QB if you want.

Long runs overrated.

2003-4

Antwan Smith and Corey Dillon were grinders. Never broke long ass runs. But what they did was consistently pick up positive yards and keep the chains moving leaving short yards to go for the pass game. They also opened up the play action up beautifully, something Brady used to excel at when we had a run game. That's how I want the offense to go. Make everything easy. Leave Brady with 3rd and 4's where he can line up and break down a defense finding an easy mismatch for a first.

I never compared Ridley and Dillon. I compared the fact that both aren't known for eing home run hitters and can grind it out in the run game.

@Nunchucks name a team who has won the Super Bowl with a long run home run hitting QB...

Either they have no run game or a grinding RB that moves the chains.

joepatsfan said:

@Nunchucks name a team who has won the Super Bowl with a long run home run hitting QB...

Either they have no run game or a grinding RB that moves the chains.

Click to expand...

The Ravens did it two years ago.

joepatsfan said:

Long runs overrated.

2003-4

Antwan Smith and Corey Dillon were grinders. Never broke long ass runs. But what they did was consistently pick up positive yards and keep the chains moving leaving short yards to go for the pass game. They also opened up the play action up beautifully, something Brady used to excel at when we had a run game. That's how I want the offense to go. Make everything easy. Leave Brady with 3rd and 4's where he can line up and break down a defense finding an easy mismatch for a first.

I never compared Ridley and Dillon. I compared the fact that both aren't known for eing home run hitters and can grind it out in the run game.

Click to expand...

You remember the Smith era a bit hazily, I think.

Deus Irae said:

Just to touch on the Ridley/Blount thing....

I wasn't going to do every game from last year, but I did look at the first 4 and last 4, and I did some counting based upon the play-by-play at Profootballreference.com. In those 8 games, Ridley had 90 attempts and Blount had 93. According to my count, which could be off by a couple, Ridley had 50 carries of 3 yards or fewer in his 90 attempts, while Blount had 48 carries of 3 years or fewer in his 93 attempts.

I did the tally quickly, and I counted short runs as short runs even if they were TDs. I also counted runs that were part of personal foul penalties, but didn't count runs on plays that were called back due to other penalties.

The bottom line was that, for the bookend 8 games, Blount and Ridley were pretty close when it came to short gains v. longer gains, percentage-wise.

Click to expand...

The flaw here is you are using games where Blount had 66% of his yardage for the season, and Ridley 49% so you method of selecting games likely skews the numbers as they were for the entire season.
Using a below average crossection of one players games vs an above average of the other is a statistical flaw.

Nunchucks said:

Right, we saw a 2007 team that never ran the ball....so, I guess you do not need a running game at all. Nor do you need a deep passing game, if you have a good defense and a good short passing game....what exactly is your point? There are multiple ways to win football games.

Click to expand...

Right, because one example proves any point.

I do not know why you would say that having a guy who can break long runs is overrated, you might as well say any one facet of a game is overrated.

Click to expand...

Do you understand the meaning of overrated? I don't think you do.

I do know this, if you have a guy who can score a TD outside of the 20 yard line, that is points on the board from outside the redzone, and it is in the redzone where points are hard to come by. Generally, teams will give you the running game in-between the 20s, but what happens when the field shortens?

Click to expand...

We aren't arguing that there is no value in long runs. We are arguing that the value of long runs is overrated.
There is a large difference.
There is a value in blocked kicks. But if you try to argue that blocked kicks are a critical component in winning football games you are overrating blocked kicks. Your responses so far would indicate that you think the reply to this statement should be "Yeah right lets not try to block kicks" which is a complete missing of the point.

dales804 said:

The Ravens did it two years ago.

Click to expand...

. Ray Rice is a grinder. He rarely breaks huge runs, obviously against our crap 2009 D he did but he's a grinder

Why are we talking about ray rice, antuan smith,and Blount in a trainng camp thread? Last time I checked none of those guys are on this team.

PP2 said:

This may be the result of being manhandled by Browner, more than a personal decline.

Click to expand...

He started the day by throwing Browner to the ground and making a catch in the end zone(according to Howe). I don't think we expect him to out-physical an enraged Browner the whole game. Good fighting spirit and I'm sure his team mates, including Browner, will give him some props for that.