Are you making a big deal about the Ridley fumble?

patfanken said:

The entire Ridley fumbling issue is just nothing but a media created load of crap right from the beginning.

Click to expand...

Yeah, the player getting benched multiple times because of his fumbling is just a media fabrication.

“Really for him, I happy for him, I really am. It sucks for me to be in this situation but as a teammate, I have to pat him on the back and just tell him that he did a great job helping us to win this game today.”

Does he feel he’s going to have to win his job back from Vereen?

“Absolutely. Two turnovers, I was out of there the rest of the game. Hey, I’m not going to pout about it, just keep grinding.”

Click to expand...

Ridley: 'Not going to pout' over benching | weei.com

One of the defining images of Stevan Ridley's 2013 season with the New England Patriots came during a Dec. 1 game against the Houston Texans. The running back who led the team in snaps played the year before watched from the sideline in street clothes, clutching a football throughout.

Click to expand...

“For me, I don’t let anything break me, man. I really don’t. I knew what I did to get there,” Ridley said in the 1-on-1 interview. “It wasn’t like Coach Bill [Belichick] just up and decided to bench me for the game. There was a reason for him doing what he did. He’s one of the best coaches to coach this sport, and I respect whatever he puts me through.

Click to expand...

Ridley: “It was nothing more than what it was, but of course, when I’m on the sideline because I’m fumbling people are going to notice I have a ball in my hands.

Click to expand...

New England Patriots' Stevan Ridley stays strong after benching - espnBoston

im not worried, I've already moved past riddley as a patriot. hes gone next year. people saying that it "wasn't a fumble" I honestly don't care if he was down, After last year where he lost the starting job because he couldn't hold on to the ball, the only time the ball should be coming out of his hands after getting possesion of it, is when he tosses it to the ref, or spikes it after a touchdown.

This kid has serious issues with holding on to the ball, so seeing it hit the ground, even if he was technically down at the moment it got stripped, just means he barely dodged a bullet.

100% faith in him.

He will have 250 + carries and amass 1,100 yards but will fumble most likely 2-3 times, which is normal for a RB but will be absolutely killed for it.

I'm not saying it wasn't an issue last year, because it was. He didn't even have 200 carries yet fumbled a lot (don't know the exact #).

I just hate when people say fumbling was an issue in 2012 as well. He had 4 fumbles, only 2 lost in the 2012 season on 280 carries. Almost 300 carries and only 4 fumbles. I will take that. I'd like it down to 2-3 but if a RB gets 200+ carries, they will eventually fumble.

QBs, not Brady , will throw INTs if they rack up enough attempts.

I'm not condoning Ridley's fumbling because it was a problem last season, but it was not in 2012. I think confidence is a HUGE part of it too. Ridley was taken out immediately after the Week 1 fumble in Buffalo and from there, his head was effed imo.

BB should run him 20+ times Week 1 vs. Miami and lets see what happens. If he gets his confidence and comfort back, we have a real talent here

Ivan said:

He was down and a player stripped him if the ball, it happens all the time and is not a fumble, if he fumbles then it will become an issue, I don't see one with this.

Click to expand...

Then why was Ridley charged with a turnover?

If the Refs decide a game changing play like that, you put yourself in that situation.

Its concerning.

We know that BB will not put up with it no matter how great Ridley runs.

Triumph said:

Then why was Ridley charged with a turnover?

If the Refs decide a game changing play like that, you put yourself in that situation.

Click to expand...

First off there wasn't any turnover whatsoever.

The refs charged the play as a fumble but recovered by NE, no turnover.

Say the Eagles did recover, if BB had challenged, imo I saw a clear knee on the ground before the ball is coming loose, no fumble.

Refs had a tough angle it was quick in real time therefore they let the play continue.

joepatsfan said:

First off there wasn't any turnover whatsoever.

The refs charged the play as a fumble but recovered by NE, no turnover.

Say the Eagles did recover, if BB had challenged, imo I saw a clear knee on the ground before the ball is coming loose, no fumble.

Refs had a tough angle it was quick in real time therefore they let the play continue.

Click to expand...

ESPN charged him with a fumble.

2nd and 3 at PHI 12(11:38) S.Ridley right tackle to PHI 10 for 2 yards (E.Wolff). FUMBLES (E.Wolff), recovered by NE-J.Develin at PHI 10. J.Develin to PHI 10 for no gain (E.Wolff).

Click to expand...

Philadelphia Eagles vs. New England Patriots - Box Score - August 15, 2014 - ESPN

chasa said:

im not worried, I've already moved past riddley as a patriot. hes gone next year. people saying that it "wasn't a fumble" I honestly don't care if he was down, After last year where he lost the starting job because he couldn't hold on to the ball, the only time the ball should be coming out of his hands after getting possesion of it, is when he tosses it to the ref, or spikes it after a touchdown.

This kid has serious issues with holding on to the ball, so seeing it hit the ground, even if he was technically down at the moment it got stripped, just means he barely dodged a bullet.

Click to expand...

If you had that disposition always, then you would have cut Faulk before he became a vital cog in three Lombardi drives. Belichick is a great C-O-A-C-H and as such he helps his players become better players.

Isn't that what coaches do?

Ridley is full of heart man, 4 fumbles in a season for a rb is not atrocious.

I think he is his own worst critic and you can see he cares when he's mad at himself on the sideline.

A lot of his fumbles are unorthodox and seem like bad luck.

I have full faith in Ridley and I'm not even gunna think twice about it.

Bring on the 2014 regular season already!

BelichickFan said:

Note how Belichick otften takes Ridley out when he fumbles. makes it more than a media creation.

Click to expand...

Actually,BF I don't think BB was being punitive with Ridley last night. Rather its more likely that he was pulled after that 2nd drive like most of the starters were. But the mediots took that coincidence and spun it into something negative....as usual.

patfanken said:

Actually,BF I don't think BB was being punitive with Ridley last night.

Click to expand...

I was referring to ladt year - and the year before not this preseason. However when asked about this past game Bill said its never good to put the ball on the ground so he noticed.

He is carrying the ball higher so far, but he still holds it out too far when making moves, like a lot of RBs.

Triumph said:

Then why was Ridley charged with a turnover?

If the Refs decide a game changing play like that, you put yourself in that situation.

Click to expand...

He wasn't

joepatsfan said:

First off there wasn't any turnover whatsoever.

The refs charged the play as a fumble but recovered by NE, no turnover.

Say the Eagles did recover, if BB had challenged, imo I saw a clear knee on the ground before the ball is coming loose, no fumble.

Refs had a tough angle it was quick in real time therefore they let the play continue.

Click to expand...

Bb wouldn't have had to challenge because all turnovers are reviewed
That's why the argument of dint subject yourself to a bad call is moot

AndyJohnson said:

Bb wouldn't have had to challenge because all turnovers are reviewed
That's why the argument of dint subject yourself to a bad call is moot

Click to expand...

Good point, my mad.

Point is, it wasn't a turnover that's what I do know

Triumph said:

ESPN charged him with a fumble.



http://espn.go.com/nfl/boxscore?gameId=400554678

Click to expand...

I legit stated above that he was charged with a fumble.

You previously said turnover though, which it was not. The ball wasn't turned over to the opposition, just recovered by Develin.

And again, he was down anyway

Nope.

I'm not concerned at this point. Ridley is the number one back and has been running hard in the preseason; he could be primed to have a big year for two reasons: proving that he can take care of the ball after last season and this is a contract year for him. I doubt he'll be back here next year, but he'll definitely want to make a statement for the rest of the year.

Ridley has 8 fumbles in his 3 year career. AP has 27 in 6 years.

Ridley will be fine.

AndyJohnson said:

He wasn't

Click to expand...

He was charged with a fumble.

16 carries and a cloud of fumble.