New England Patriots Forums - PatsFans.com  Patriots Fan Messageboard

New England Patriots Forums - PatsFans.com Patriots Fan Messageboard (http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/)
-   PatsFans.com - Patriots Fan Forum (http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/patsfans-com-patriots-fan-forum.html)
-   -   FYI: Faulk Didn't Take Any Carries From BJGE or Ridley (http://www.patsfans.com/new-england-patriots/messageboard/10/839065-fyi-faulk-didnt-take-any-carries-bjge-ridley.html)

Ian 10-31-2011 12:48 AM

FYI: Faulk Didn't Take Any Carries From BJGE or Ridley
 
I love reading the people complaining about Faulk on here and on Twitter. Just an FYI, he only carried the ball six times today with a 5.3avg. I could understand the argument if he ran it 13 or 14 times with a 1.8 yards per carry average, but they were playing from behind for most of the game against a defense that was really tough to do much against today. Nobody was running the ball.

Some of you have probably seen the stats database I created on here, which requires me entering in each play in order to be able to break it down by quarter, down, etc. Prior to today, they usually run 60-70 offensive snaps (excluding penalties), and ran only around 50, nearly twenty less than they normally run.

Pittsburgh simply did a great job keeping Brady off the field, and it was that coupled with the fact they kept finding themselves in long situations that made it tough to get anything going today. Not to mention the fact they didn't go to the no-huddle to prevent Pittsburgh from being able to substitute, which did work out for them on their one touchdown drive.

Needless to say it was the other issues that cost this team a shot at a win today - not Faulk being out there. I know we have a tendency to build guys up and then tear them down, but it wouldn't be a bad idea to lay off him. Plus according to most reports Ridley's still battling a hamstring issue and Green-Ellis' toe is still bothering him. So with both of those guys still ailing, it's nice to have someone to give them some depth and experience.

I know everyone's irritated, but honestly...#33 is the least of their problems right now.

Joker 10-31-2011 01:28 AM

Re: FYI: Faulk Didn't Take Any Carries From BJGE or Ridley
 
They played a poor game. They had twenty minutes of possession time.They didn't adjust to the Pittsburgh game plan. They were terrible on 3rd down. Four or five of these in a row and yeah, this team is deeply flawed.Going beserk with the doom and gloom because they lost on the road for only their second loss, against five victories is ridiculous. If everyperson going nutso is so dyam sure of all this negative crap, then use your incredible analytical powers and tell me tomorrow's big winners on the stock market, the Power Ball numbers,where to find Sasquatch, the Tooth Fairy, Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny.

Get this through your thick skulls...the main objective right now is to get enough wins to make the playoffs. Stop talking about Super Bowls,why the Pats can't win the Super Bowl, if they don't go to the Super Bowl heads must roll and all the rest of this kneejerk nursery school crap. The other team gets paid to coach and play too.Sometimes you get the bull, sometimes you get the horns. This team isn't anywhere near being a finished product yet.

TommyBrady12 10-31-2011 02:35 AM

Re: FYI: Faulk Didn't Take Any Carries From BJGE or Ridley
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Ian (Post 2766259)
I love reading the people complaining about Faulk on here and on Twitter. Just an FYI, he only carried the ball six times today with a 5.3avg. I could understand the argument if he ran it 13 or 14 times with a 1.8 yards per carry average, but they were playing from behind for most of the game against a defense that was really tough to do much against today. Nobody was running the ball.

Some of you have probably seen the stats database I created on here, which requires me entering in each play in order to be able to break it down by quarter, down, etc. Prior to today, they usually run 60-70 offensive snaps (excluding penalties), and ran only around 50, nearly twenty less than they normally run.

Pittsburgh simply did a great job keeping Brady off the field, and it was that coupled with the fact they kept finding themselves in long situations that made
it tough to get anything going today. Not to mention the fact they didn't go to the no-huddle to prevent Pittsburgh from being able to substitute, which did work out for them on their one touchdown drive.


Needless to say it was the other issues that cost this team a shot at a win today - not Faulk being out there. I know we have a tendency to build guys up and then tear them down, but it wouldn't be a bad idea to lay off him. Plus according to most reports Ridley's still battling a hamstring issue and Green-Ellis' toe is still bothering him. So with both of those guys still ailing, it's nice to have someone to give them some depth and experience.

I know everyone's irritated, but honestly...#33 is the least of their problems right now.

It's not that...he's taking a roster spot away from Bodden. Someone else is going to get cut now for Marcus cannon.

DarrylS 10-31-2011 05:24 AM

Re: FYI: Faulk Didn't Take Any Carries From BJGE or Ridley
 
OTOH we have had success with #42 as our lead back, why mess with success??

It is not about whether I like or dislike a player, but he has been away from the game for a while now and has only had one session of contact drills..

kpreh 10-31-2011 06:38 AM

Re: FYI: Faulk Didn't Take Any Carries From BJGE or Ridley
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Joker (Post 2766291)
They played a poor game. They had twenty minutes of possession time.They didn't adjust to the Pittsburgh game plan. They were terrible on 3rd down. Four or five of these in a row and yeah, this team is deeply flawed.Going beserk with the doom and gloom because they lost on the road for only their second loss, against five victories is ridiculous. If everyperson going nutso is so dyam sure of all this negative crap, then use your incredible analytical powers and tell me tomorrow's big winners on the stock market, the Power Ball numbers,where to find Sasquatch, the Tooth Fairy, Santa Claus and the Easter Bunny.

Get this through your thick skulls...the main objective right now is to get enough wins to make the playoffs. Stop talking about Super Bowls,why the Pats can't win the Super Bowl, if they don't go to the Super Bowl heads must roll and all the rest of this kneejerk nursery school crap. The other team gets paid to coach and play too.Sometimes you get the bull, sometimes you get the horns. This team isn't anywhere near being a finished product yet.


Stop talking logic :D More then half of the posts here on gameday are infuriating at best--it wouldn't be so bad if it was constructive criticism but it's not, any child can type in the "coach sucks-Brady sucks-defense sucks"-the team is struggling we all know that, but geez count your blessings we could be phins or colts fans, we have won games and the odds are in our favor that we will be watching our team in the playoffs(what happens after that we will see).

IcyPatriot 10-31-2011 06:58 AM

Re: FYI: Faulk Didn't Take Any Carries From BJGE or Ridley
 
My only criticism of the offense yesterday is one that has perplexed me for a few years now. On these games where the opponent is very successful at jamming our WR's I still think we should have some 3 back sets to vary the offense a bit - they need to be dressed on game day for the opponent to think it's an option. 3 back sets used with the no huddle when the defense is weak for it should be on the play sheet.

These 1 back sets - does it really matter what play you called when the opponent is successfully jamming your receivers at the line? I'd love to see some 3 back sets running or passing with Vollmer/Solder and Gronk out in front of them. Other than that in Bill I trust - the defense is still a work in progress and the Steelers are extremely talented so it's hard to cry about this game this early in the season.

PatsChamp88 10-31-2011 07:40 AM

Re: FYI: Faulk Didn't Take Any Carries From BJGE or Ridley
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by TommyBrady12 (Post 2766373)
It's not that...he's taking a roster spot away from Bodden. Someone else is going to get cut now for Marcus cannon.

Based on that logic we will probably release Brady for Cannon...

BlueThunder 10-31-2011 07:50 AM

Re: FYI: Faulk Didn't Take Any Carries From BJGE or Ridley
 
If Pats look this bad AT HOME with a quiet crowd when their O is on the field ( 4 false starts cost Pats 20 yds) and their D gives up those 3rd and 12 and 3rd and 15 for first downs, then it will be time to worry having to go into the swamp the following week....

upstater1 10-31-2011 08:06 AM

Re: FYI: Faulk Didn't Take Any Carries From BJGE or Ridley
 
I think there is some room for criticism.

But it was on only one play. The 3rd and long before the Ghost field goal when Faulk picked up 12 yards or so looked like a TD had Ridley been carrying the ball. Faulk had one guy to beat.

TBradyOwnsYou 10-31-2011 10:48 AM

Re: FYI: Faulk Didn't Take Any Carries From BJGE or Ridley
 
My issue with Faulk would be where he was pushed away from the end zone (a la the infamous 4th and 2). I just have to think Lawfirm gets that extra couple of inches of push to get in to the end zone. Yes, he was going E-W and it's much harder to turn it on N-S, but I have to think that a younger, stronger Lawfirm gets the push to get in.
But yes, I agree it was the least of our worries yesterday.


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:38 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2013, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2

© Copyright 2000-2012. PatsFans.com Is a Partner of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties.
The opinions posted in this forum do not necessarily reflect the opinions of our staff at PatsFans.com or USA Today.
We are not affiliated with the New England Patriots™ or the NFL™. The Photo Used In the header was taken by Ian Logue.

This site is owned and operated by I&K Internet Design Enterprises, LLC


1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 398 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 410 411 412 413 414 415 416 417 418 419 420 421 422 423 424 425 426 427 428 429 430 431 432 433 434 435 436 437 438 439 440 441 442 443 444 445 446 447 448 449 450 451 452 453 454 455 456 457 458 459 460 461 462 463 464 465 466 467 468 469 470 471 472 473 474 475 476 477 478 479 480 481 482 483 484 485 486 487 488 489 490 491 492 493 494 495 496 497 498 499 500 501 502 503 504 505 506 507 508 509 510 511 512 513 514 515 516 517 518 519 520 521 522 523 524 525 526 527 528 529 530 531 532 533 534 535 536 537 538 539 540 541 542 543 544 545 546 547 548 549 550 551 552 553 554 555 556 557 558 559 560 561 562 563 564 565 566