Danny Woodhead or Leon Washington?

[Brady6]

Vereen was the Woodhead replacement. Others have said this, but it has not sunk in, somehow. I wish we could have kept Danny for depth, but I can't fault thinking that the younger, faster, more versatile player was the one to keep, if it was an either-or situation, provided you were comfortable with the injury risk.

I am a big Vereen fan I picked him as my breakout candidate in the preseason but he is not actually faster or more versatile than Woodhead. Danny is actually significantly faster than Vereen and at least as versatile. That said I think the team had a progression plan which was Ridley replaced Green-Ellis in 2012 and Vereen replaced Woodhead in 2013, short term that decision may favor Woodhead but for the long term outlook of this team in the next 2-5 years the odds favor Vereen to be a better player at ages 24-29 than Woodhead at ages 29-34.

I miss little Danny I would have like to see him stick, if it really did come down to him or Washington it was a bad decision but I don't think that was the case I think they let Woodhead walk because that was predetermined in April 2011 when they drafted Vereen, the Washington move was more of a reactive move to Demps not working out.

 

[cstjohn17]

Can we admit this was a really dumb move now?

Honestly this one bothers me way more than the Welker decision. We made Woody a household name and let him go for chump change. I'm normally on board with Belichick & Co. but I think they outsmarted themselves here.

This seems premature, can we let Vereen play one more game, get hurt and then go on the IR before we have this discussion?

Considering Washington is in the hot tub, Woodhead by a mile.

 

[Sicilian]

From my understanding of the NFL, when a team wants to keep a player, they generally do it.

The Pats probably want to keep Mallett as a backup and developmental QB for Brady's eventual retirement. If he goes into free agency and gets an offer from a team where he gets to the be the starting QB, do you think he's coming back to be Brady's backup? Doesn't matter two licks what the Patriots want in that scenario.

 

[Rob0729]

From my understanding of the NFL, when a team wants to keep a player, they generally do it. Again, we'll have to file this one under "only they know for sure", as much as we'd like to pretend we do.



I don't think I was alone in believing it to be a mistake the day it happened.

Don't get me wrong, I love Vereen. On the other hand, if someone says "you can have 2 Darren Sproles on the team for less than $2.5 million" I'm not sure why anyone would pass that up. RBs get injured and skill guys with that kind of talent and drive don't grow on trees.

I disagree with your first point. Most players want to go where they are going to get the most playing time. I don't see a player like Woodhead would want to take slightly more money to stay in New England to play 10 snaps a game when he can go San Diego for slightly less money and play 3-5 time the snaps. Players want to play. I bet if the Pats didn't have Vereen, Woodhead would still be here.

BTW, your second point backs up my first point. There are few guys like Vereen or Woodhead in the league. Woodhead knows that. That is why he probably didn't stay here because he knew there were teams who would give him a primary role rather than a back up role here. He was in demand. I don't think you will see many players in their prime take a reduced role to stay with a team if other teams will give them a primary role.

 

[mgteich]

1) The discussion for months was whether Woodhead would have any interest in staying, or whether he would sign somewhere else where he would get more reps and be more important to the offense.

2) Vereen was expected to see many more reps this year.

3) Personally, I might have kept Woodhead and continued Vereen in his minor role. However, this was unlikely to happen.

4) We can question the acquisition of KR Washington. This was the acquisition of a 5th RB or possibly a 4th if Bolden didn't stay. As 5th RB and KR, Washington was a fine acquisition.

5) in hindsight, we obviously would rather have kept Woodhead if we knew that Vereen was going to be injured.

6) And we did keep depth at KR and RB. Blount and Bolden have provided that.

BOTTOM LINE
I don't think that Woodhead wanted to stay a reduced role. He wanted an increased role elsewhere.

Saying that we SHOULD have kept Woodhead is somewhat similar to saying that we SHOULD have re-signed Thomas instead of letting him go to be a starter elsewhere. Perhaps, just perhaps, an unrestricted free agent actually gets to have input with regard to whether he stays or goes.

 

[chasa]

As a kick returner? Washington by a mile.

You know we have an RB named Vereen ready to come back, right?

Washington can't even return to the field, let alone Return kicks.

He's right now the biggest waste of money on the roster.

 

[JMC00]

i agree god forbid we keep a guy whos shows up to play every week... even in the super bowl when nothing was working he showed up... the most underated statistic is games played and vereen has showed he cant stay healthy.... but hey bb loves those injured guys ie. vereen, dowliing, amendola just to name a few.. but ask this question woodhead or bolden?

2011- Buried behind BJGE, Ridley and Woodhead and essentially got the rookie redshirt.
2012- Missed the first 3 games of the season but then played in the 15 other games
2013- Breaks his wrist on the first play but plays through it and finishes with 21 touches for 159 yards

But ya let's call him injury prone.

 

[tobias funke]

I disagree with your first point. Most players want to go where they are going to get the most money.

Fixed for accuracy. Don't forget that just because it's about money doesn't mean that that's all it's about. Many players want more money because they view it as respect. I think many of us believe that played a huge part in the Welker situation.

I'm not saying Woody left for more money or not, but again you make assumptions that I have a hard time making. You assume Woody left because he wanted to, and you even suggest that he may have taken less money to do so. While both of those things could be true, I honestly have a hard time believing either of them, sorry.

 

[Brady6]

Pick know we think that as fans we think we could resign any player if we wanted to but unless we were going to franchise Woodhead there is really no way to guarantee his return. If you look at it from Danny Woodhead's perspective he has already been targeted more times in 9 games than he was all last season, he has nearly as many carries and is on pace for the most snaps of his career by a 3 figures. So if the Chargers said come here and be a featured player why would he want to return to the Patriots and share reps? The thought that Belichick just strolls out picks any player he wants and drags them back to his cave is flawed.

 

[SHOWTIME15]

More like vereen or danny woodhead. They are both essentially the same and bring a very similar skill set. One was under contract, one wasn't.

 

[mgteich]

Woodhead didn't leave for more money. He left for similar money and a likely larger role in the offense. There was ZERO question that Vereen would be expected to take lots of Woodhead's reps.

There is an ongoing belief on message boards that all players would choose the patriots over other teams, and certainly so if the money is equal. As I said in the previous post, sometimes a player actually makes a decision.

And just BTW, Woodhead signed a contract where his TOTAL future career money (compensation plus endorsementscould be much higher than if he stayed as Vereen's backup.

Fixed for accuracy. Don't forget that just because it's about money doesn't mean that that's all it's about. Many players want more money because they view it as respect. I think many of us believe that played a huge part in the Welker situation.

I'm not saying Woody left for more money or not, but again you make assumptions that I have a hard time making. You assume Woody left because he wanted to, and you even suggest that he may have taken less money to do so. While both of those things could be true, I honestly have a hard time believing either of them, sorry.

 

[Rob0729]

Fixed for accuracy. Don't forget that just because it's about money doesn't mean that that's all it's about. Many players want more money because they view it as respect. I think many of us believe that played a huge part in the Welker situation.

I'm not saying Woody left for more money or not, but again you make assumptions that I have a hard time making. You assume Woody left because he wanted to, and you even suggest that he may have taken less money to do so. While both of those things could be true, I honestly have a hard time believing either of them, sorry.

Money is only a big factor when you are talking about big money. Woodhead was never the type of player who was going to get millions more to go one place over another. Woodhead was looking as a few $100k difference even if the Pats overpaid for him.

How is it a hard time to make my assumption. Woodhead is a star down in San Diego now. If he stayed here and Vereen stayed healthy, he would he a guy who had a handful of touches. That isn't worth an extra few $100k to stay. In fact, he will likely make that up in endorsement deals.

Woodhead got a two year, $3.5 million deal. I don't know if two years, $4 million would have been enough to make him stay and get a much reduced role. If it was a $4 million a year deal, then he would stay.

Danny Woodhead will be only 30 when his current contract ends. He is still able to get one more decent deal in his career. Taking a few hundred thousand to stay here in a reduced role might actually cost him money in the long term. If he plays like he is playing this year through next year, he will get a good deal in 2015. He wouldn't get nearly as good a deal in 2015 as Vereen's back up.

 

[tobias funke]

I can agree with the possibility that Woodhead wanted the playing time. The Chargers definitely came through if they promised it to him.

I still doubt that it would have cost the Patriots very much more to keep him on the team, though it's possible the Chargers would have gone higher if they had to. They clearly recognized his value.

 

[PatsFan2]

Can we admit this was a really dumb move now?

Honestly this one bothers me way more than the Welker decision. We made Woody a household name and let him go for chump change. I'm normally on board with Belichick & Co. but I think they outsmarted themselves here.

Not one of BB better moves The Chin Face or face Phillip Rivers appreciates him. I am sure if we had Woodhead Brady wouldn't be telling our young WR's to catch the dam ball. Is Leon Washington still breathing?

 

[Pessimistic Pete]

No, the right move is letting of proven productive players and replacing with guys who don't play.

I'm surprised we didn't trade McCourty and pick up Bob Sanders.

 

[IcyPatriot]

Can we admit this was a really dumb move now?

Honestly this one bothers me way more than the Welker decision. We made Woody a household name and let him go for chump change. I'm normally on board with Belichick & Co. but I think they outsmarted themselves here.

Hated losing Woodhead ... saw the rational but still hated it ...

Woodhead was mini Faulk.

 

[jmt57]

I think it goes beyond just playing time, to job security being the overriding factor in Woodhead's decision. I don't think it is as simple as saying that the club did not re-sign him; the player has an equal or even greater role in this situation.

It was no secret that the Patriots were leaning towards planning on having Vereen take over Woodhead's role as the 3rd down RB. Don't forget that NFL contracts are not guaranteed.

If Vereen had re-signed with the Patriots, he would have been running the risk that the club saw enough value in him to use a second roster spot on a 3rd down RB rather than on another player possessing a different skill set.

Should that have happened he is now way behind other players that have been with a club all off-season, through OTAs and training camp, learning the playbook and getting timing down with their teammates.

Finding another team to play for is much easier in March than it is in September. It may have been a situation where Woodhead felt he had better job security signing with San Diego. At the time the Chargers were somewhat dissatisfied with Ryan Matthews; the other backs on the roster were the ancient Ronnie Brown, Curtis Brinkley, and FB LeRon McClain.

 

[jsull87]

Even tho i am a big fan of Woodhead i think this comparison is unfair due to the Injury.

If Woodhead got hurt 1st week and Washington was running around returning kicks to an ok level we'd all be saying what a good move it was.

The FO don't have a crystal ball to predict injuries. IMO the decision was made that Washington would offer more in ST and could do some 3rd down work but most of Woodhead's snaps would be given to Vereen.

I think that's a pretty solid decision as i am sure it was assumed Washington would be our #1 kickoff returner and maybe even push edelman for punts.

 

[patsderoer]

Hated losing Woodhead ... saw the rational but still hated it ...

Woodhead was mini Faulk.

Sam Mc Guffie = Woodhead 2.0

Sam McGuffie top 10 wideout 2013 nfl draft 4.3 speed - YouTube

Mc Guffie is available

 

[TruthSeeker]

Obviously Woodhead. It's not even debatable considering Washington has contributed the same amount to the Pats as Bobo the fun monkey has (hint: nothing).

Yeah, But Bobo is a great special teams gunner and can rush the passer.