Bedard: Part of me Wouldn't Be Surprised if They Cut Vereen

[Greg A. Bedard]

re: Bedard: "Part of me wouldn't Be Surprised if Vereen Cut"

Hey boys....I would say the headline "Bedard suggests Vereen could be cut" is inaccurate. I think a better one would be that I wouldn't be shocked if he was cut.

Anybody suggesting that I was saying that purely for clicks? Please. I said it on Twitter, with no link.

Now, if I actually wrote that anywhere besides a place where roughly 8 percent of our readers are, then you've got me.

I just see a lot of redundancy at RB and was thinking out loud. I mostly brought up Vereen because I would want Woody on my team. Vereen hasn't shown me much yet, especially in the toughness area.

BTW, I have Vereen on my roster, but not Woodhead. Vereen is on a lot of special teams, and Woodhead is not if Demps -- or other combinations of players -- are the KO returners. Of course, we're all missing a huge part of all this: the medicals on an iffy players, including Vereen.

Road to 53: Vol. 2 - Extra Points - Boston.com

Cheers

 

[BelichickFan]

re: Bedard: "Part of me wouldn't Be Surprised if Vereen Cut"

Hey boys....I would say the headline "Bedard suggests Vereen could be cut" is inaccurate. I think a better one would be that I wouldn't be shocked if he was cut.

That's how it came across - didn't like this thread subject.

The reality is that with Vereen, Woodhead, Demps, I'm not sure it makes sense to keep all three of those and only one bigger back - and even if they keep Bolden, three smaller ones still may not make sense.

I'd be shocked if they cut Vereen, though, I would think they almost certainly could trade him; not for the #2 they used but something to make up for the lack of later picks they currently are missing.

Even before the tweet my feeling was "I wouldn't be shocked if Vereen were traded for a couple of lowish picks" which I'm guess is similar to your line of thinking.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

re: Bedard: "Part of me wouldn't Be Surprised if Vereen Cut"

Welcome to the board, Greg.

 

[Vataha]

re: Bedard: "Part of me wouldn't Be Surprised if Vereen Cut"

If you wouldn't be surprised, it means you think it's quite possible, or a good chance.

Saying that someone probably makes the final 53 means you think the chance of them being cut is slim.

The two are more different than they are alike. I was just trying to figure out your view, which appears to be pretty wide at this time. Whatever works for you.

My view is:

The Pats had depth issues last year with DB's and Safties.

I'm thinking the priority is on the Defensive side as opposed to the RB's.
RB's are a dime a dozen and DB's and Safeties were an issue last year.

Woodhead or Moore (Dennard makes the 53)

Woodhead was picked up off of the scrap heap as was Moore.

 

[Deus Irae]

re: Bedard: "Part of me wouldn't Be Surprised if Vereen Cut"

Hey boys....I would say the headline "Bedard suggests Vereen could be cut" is inaccurate. I think a better one would be that I wouldn't be shocked if he was cut.

Anybody suggesting that I was saying that purely for clicks? Please. I said it on Twitter, with no link.

Now, if I actually wrote that anywhere besides a place where roughly 8 percent of our readers are, then you've got me.

I just see a lot of redundancy at RB and was thinking out loud. I mostly brought up Vereen because I would want Woody on my team. Vereen hasn't shown me much yet, especially in the toughness area.

BTW, I have Vereen on my roster, but not Woodhead. Vereen is on a lot of special teams, and Woodhead is not if Demps -- or other combinations of players -- are the KO returners. Of course, we're all missing a huge part of all this: the medicals on an iffy players, including Vereen.

Road to 53: Vol. 2 - Extra Points - Boston.com

Cheers

Interesting that you seem to have the battle being between Woodhead and Vereen. I've been looking at it as Bolden v. Vereen, with Bolden a long shot to make the roster if the team only carries 4 RBs. I've got Demps as all but a lock due to the circumstances.

Ridley
Woodhead
Demps
Vereen
Bolden

 

[Ring 6]

re: Bedard: "Part of me wouldn't Be Surprised if Vereen Cut"

Hey boys....I would say the headline "Bedard suggests Vereen could be cut" is inaccurate. I think a better one would be that I wouldn't be shocked if he was cut.

Anybody suggesting that I was saying that purely for clicks? Please. I said it on Twitter, with no link.

Now, if I actually wrote that anywhere besides a place where roughly 8 percent of our readers are, then you've got me.

I just see a lot of redundancy at RB and was thinking out loud. I mostly brought up Vereen because I would want Woody on my team. Vereen hasn't shown me much yet, especially in the toughness area.

BTW, I have Vereen on my roster, but not Woodhead. Vereen is on a lot of special teams, and Woodhead is not if Demps -- or other combinations of players -- are the KO returners. Of course, we're all missing a huge part of all this: the medicals on an iffy players, including Vereen.

Road to 53: Vol. 2 - Extra Points - Boston.com

Cheers

Why wouldn't you keep both?
They may both be a good fit in the same role, but the reports I have read have Vereen challenging Ridley for the RB1 spot as well.
4 RBs is normal, so even if Demps is consider more than a KR, there is no reason all 3 aren't kept.

 

[Ring 6]

re: Bedard: "Part of me wouldn't Be Surprised if Vereen Cut"

Interesting that you seem to have the battle being between Woodhead and Vereen. I've been looking at it as Bolden v. Vereen.

Oh, I didn't realize he was saying keep Bolden and cut Vereen. OK, I guess there is nothing to see here.

 

[mayoclinic]

Re: Bedard suggests Vereen could be cut

Hey boys....I would say the headline "Bedard suggests Vereen could be cut" is inaccurate. I think a better one would be that I wouldn't be shocked if he was cut.

Anybody suggesting that I was saying that purely for clicks? Please. I said it on Twitter, with no link.

Now, if I actually wrote that anywhere besides a place where roughly 8 percent of our readers are, then you've got me.

Assuming you're really Greg Bedard, love your stuff. You've added a lot to the coverage of the team. Keep it coming.

I just see a lot of redundancy at RB and was thinking out loud. I mostly brought up Vereen because I would want Woody on my team. Vereen hasn't shown me much yet, especially in the toughness area.

I can understand the toughness questions with Vereen, but to the best of my knowledge there's been no suggestion that he has been "dogging it". Obviously, after 4 years of Laurence Maroney lack of toughness is the last thing many people want to see in a Pats RB; but there were reports when he was drafted that Ivan Fears viewed Vereen as an "anti-Maroney" kind of player, so it's interesting that he hasn't showed much in that area so far.

I've had huge hopes for Vereen, but I fully understand that not everyone turns out as you hope they will. But I still would be surprised to see the Pats pull the plug on Vereen this soon, especially with Woodhead in a contract year.

BTW, I have Vereen on my roster, but not Woodhead. Vereen is on a lot of special teams, and Woodhead is not if Demps -- or other combinations of players -- are the KO returners. Of course, we're all missing a huge part of all this: the medicals on an iffy players, including Vereen.

Road to 53: Vol. 2 - Extra Points - Boston.com

Cheers

I understand the redundancy, but I don't see the need to not carry all 4 guys.

 

[shmessy]

re: Bedard: "Part of me wouldn't Be Surprised if Vereen Cut"

Hey boys....I would say the headline "Bedard suggests Vereen could be cut" is inaccurate. I think a better one would be that I wouldn't be shocked if he was cut.

Anybody suggesting that I was saying that purely for clicks? Please. I said it on Twitter, with no link.

Now, if I actually wrote that anywhere besides a place where roughly 8 percent of our readers are, then you've got me.

I just see a lot of redundancy at RB and was thinking out loud. I mostly brought up Vereen because I would want Woody on my team. Vereen hasn't shown me much yet, especially in the toughness area.

BTW, I have Vereen on my roster, but not Woodhead. Vereen is on a lot of special teams, and Woodhead is not if Demps -- or other combinations of players -- are the KO returners. Of course, we're all missing a huge part of all this: the medicals on an iffy players, including Vereen.

Road to 53: Vol. 2 - Extra Points - Boston.com

Cheers

You're right, Greg. Just edited that thread title.

Roughly 8% of Boston.com's readership might look at that Twitter feed, but I'm guesssing somewhere north of 40% here do.

BTW, next time you see Joe "This is a Red Sox Town" Sullivan in the lunchroom, tell him the Pats own the region!

 

[shmessy]

re: Bedard: "Part of me wouldn't Be Surprised if Vereen Cut"

BTW, I think they need to keep both Vereen and Woodhead. Ridley has just one sparingly used year under his belt. Both Vereen and Woodhead would be snapped up immediately (possibly by a division foe).

Throw Kettani on the PS, he'll clear waivers, McDaniels wants a FB in the offense, and he can be called in once Vereen gets his next scheduled injury later in the season.

 

[PATSYLICIOUS]

re: Bedard: "Part of me wouldn't Be Surprised if Vereen Cut"

I'm hoping all 5 are kept, or at worst case Bolden to PS and he can be brought up in case of an injury rash like BJGE in '08. I think cutting Woodhead is a major risk, leaving Ridley as the only back with any relevant experience and even that is limited. Demps and Vereen have a lot of potential to be huge weapons for us IMO. I wouldn't want to see either go this soon.

 

[12ClutchFactor]

re: Bedard: "Part of me wouldn't Be Surprised if Vereen Cut"

Assuming you're really Greg Bedard, love your stuff. You've added a lot to the coverage of the team. Keep it coming.

This. Agree with "MayoClinic" here. ^ If it really is you, appreciate your work, you're doing a fine job.

 

[PP2]

Re: Bedard suggests Vereen could be cut

Hey boys....I would say the headline "Bedard suggests Vereen could be cut" is inaccurate. I think a better one would be that I wouldn't be shocked if he was cut.

Anybody suggesting that I was saying that purely for clicks? Please. I said it on Twitter, with no link.

Now, if I actually wrote that anywhere besides a place where roughly 8 percent of our readers are, then you've got me.

I just see a lot of redundancy at RB and was thinking out loud. I mostly brought up Vereen because I would want Woody on my team. Vereen hasn't shown me much yet, especially in the toughness area.

BTW, I have Vereen on my roster, but not Woodhead. Vereen is on a lot of special teams, and Woodhead is not if Demps -- or other combinations of players -- are the KO returners. Of course, we're all missing a huge part of all this: the medicals on an iffy players, including Vereen.

Road to 53: Vol. 2 - Extra Points - Boston.com

Cheers

With all due respect, you knew exactly what reactions you were bound to get by bringing up the notion that Vereen could be cut.

Curious: what else would "I would not be surprised..." translate to, if not a suggestion or implication? Even if I titled the thread "Bedard not shocked if Vereen cut," it still is suggestive because it implies you had a reason not to be shocked.

 

[ATippett56]

re: Bedard: "Part of me wouldn't Be Surprised if Vereen Cut"

I would trade Danny Woodhead for a quality backup swing tackle, if one is to be had. Short of the aforementioned scenario, I sincerely doubt the New England Patriots would cut Danny Woodhead.

 

[condon84]

Re: Bedard suggests Vereen could be cut

BB doesn't care where you were picked. Woodhead is a much better option than Vereen. The question is whether Demps and Bolden are better options that Vereen.

 

[Avenger]

Re: Bedard: "Part of me wouldn't Be Surprised if Vereen Cut"

I think Vereen is possibly the most complete back, has shown some promise running this pre-season, and also in the screen game, which is being brought back into focus this year. Coming out of college he was looked at as one of the better pass blockers as well, so it would be good to see what he could do at this level.

 

[Greg A. Bedard]

Re: Bedard: Wouldn't Be Shocked if Vereen Cut

If you really think that before I tweet something that I'm thinking about what the reaction will be, then that's false.

On Twitter, I really view it like I'm having a conversation with my readers, as if we're at a bar or something. I say what's on my mind, and whatever the reaction is, it is. I don't worry about it.

I personally would love to keep all five, and I would if it were my team. But look at other places you would cut. I don't see it at WR. TE would be the spot, but $400k is a lot of cake to eat on Shiancoe. The offensive line is about as thin as you can make it.

The secondary is pretty set, although I don't know what they think between Cole and Dennard. Figure it's one or the other. The linebackers, they love those guys for special teams. The defense line is not real heavy, and I have heard they really like Francis.

So where do you cut?

Start compiling a 46-man active roster. Then look hard at the special team units against the Buccaneers. That has always been one of the biggest tip-offs to eventual roster spots. I touted Jeff Tarpinian as a guy headed to the 53-man roster last year. Why? Because he was all over special teams, and he did end up making the final roster.

That doesn't work every time, but just wanted to give you an idea of how I go about doing those things.

 

[shmessy]

Re: Bedard: "Part of Me Wouldn't Be Surprised if Vereen Cut"

d%#*!@t, can't Connolly or Wendell learn to long-snap?

Long snappers are like third nipples.

 

[Silver Blue&Red]

Re: Bedard: "Part of Me Wouldn't Be Surprised if Vereen Cut"

If a RB is cut, I think Vereen is a likely suspect. Woody , not a chance...V-E-R-S-A-T-I-T-Y.

 

[shmessy]

Re: Bedard: "Part of Me Wouldn't Be Surprised if Vereen Cut"

...V-E-R-S-A-T-I-T-Y.

Is that the new Buxom Female Wrestling League?