Maroney's benching

[ScrewDrvr]

The issue isn't logic. The issue is your apparent inability to grasp a simple point.

irony right there folks


Your "simple point" is nothing but a useless strawman argument that doesn't even hold any water in the first place.
It doesn't matter that AP has 7 fumbles, he produces more then enough to make up for it. It doesnt matter if Brady throws a INT, hes done more then enough to make up for it.

Maroney doesn't. End of discussion.

 

[PatsFan24]

How about 305 carries for 1300+ yards, and 17td's? Yeah,t hats what I thought. Dont ever disrespect AP by comparing him to Maroney.



Ill say it again: As soon as Maroney puts up the numbers that AP does, he can get a pass for a fumble.

Until then, hes a below average running back that has been fumbling the ball at the worst times. And frankly its laughable that he is being compared to AP.

I know its hard for some of you to understand this logic, but read slowly, sound out the words, then think befor you post.

I clearly stated that I was not trying to compare the two because I knew that you were going to say I was, but you decided to say it anyways. You missed the whole point....again. Take your own advice and read slowly before saying I am doing something that I clearly said I was not doing.

 

[the assman]

Did anyone see the comments by Maroney a few weeks ago about his fumbles? He said it was just a case of him "being lazy". I'm surprised no one else has mentioned it. My first reaction was WTF?? you cost us the Colts game because you were being ****en lazy??????

 

[nashvillepatsfan]

Did anyone see the comments by Maroney a few weeks ago about his fumbles? He said it was just a case of him "being lazy". I'm surprised no one else has mentioned it. My first reaction was WTF?? you cost us the Colts game because you were being ****en lazy??????

Do you have a link to those comments, or are you just here to troll?

 

[Boots Electric]

How about 305 carries for 1300+ yards, and 17td's? Yeah,t hats what I thought. Dont ever disrespect AP by comparing him to Maroney.



Ill say it again: As soon as Maroney puts up the numbers that AP does, he can get a pass for a fumble.

Until then, hes a below average running back that has been fumbling the ball at the worst times. And frankly its laughable that he is being compared to AP.

I know its hard for some of you to understand this logic, but read slowly, sound out the words, then think befor you post.

So, Peterson should get a pass after tonight's fumble that cost his team the win and potentially a first round bye? Just because he puts up some good stats?

Brady's turnovers have killed this team at times. So has the defense. And the O-line. And Faulk. And Morris. You don't dwell on it. You simple move on. Peterson's fumbles have cost his team victories.

It's amazing that when Maroney is producing (which he has done for most of his career in New England) then haters stay away, but one turnover which did not cost them anything, they go ape-sh!t crazy and want to kill him.

 

[Boots Electric]

Did anyone see the comments by Maroney a few weeks ago about his fumbles? He said it was just a case of him "being lazy". I'm surprised no one else has mentioned it. My first reaction was WTF?? you cost us the Colts game because you were being ****en lazy??????

If memory serves me correct, the fumble did not cost the Patriots anything. Colts punted after that turnover, Welker returned to about the Colts 5 I believe and the Patriots still scored.

 

[Deus Irae]

irony right there folks


Your "simple point" is nothing but a useless strawman argument that doesn't even hold any water in the first place.
It doesn't matter that AP has 7 fumbles, he produces more then enough to make up for it. It doesnt matter if Brady throws a INT, hes done more then enough to make up for it.

Maroney doesn't. End of discussion.

And you continue to miss the point. Calling a strawman when none exists is an interesting approach, though.

However, since you want to focus on production, let's take a look at AP's "production" of late, shall we, and we'll use the last 6 games, since it's been that long since AP has run for 100 yards:

82 (3.4 ypc)
85 (3.4 ypc)
19 (1.5 ypc)
97 (3.7 ypc)
35 (2.9 ypc)
94 (3.9 ypc)

412 yards in 124 attempts a 3.32 ypc. Maroney has 379 yards during that same stretch, on 100 attempts, for a 3.79 ypc, even though he was held out of most of the Jacksonville game, and has ypcs of 3.5, 4.3,3.2, 4.3, 3.5, and 4.4.

Well, I'm sure that AP's touchdown numbers are through the roof, right?

6 for Peterson. Maroney has 5.

3 fumbles for Peterson. 3 fumbles for Maroney.

Goodness, gracious... I wish all "strawmen" were made of such solid material.

 

[moosekill]

And you continue to miss the point. Calling a strawman when none exists is an interesting approach, though.

However, since you want to focus on production, let's take a look at AP's "production" of late, shall we, and we'll use the last 6 games, since it's been that long since AP has run for 100 yards:

82 (3.4 ypc)
85 (3.4 ypc)
19 (1.5 ypc)
97 (3.7 ypc)
35 (2.9 ypc)
94 (3.9 ypc)

412 yards in 124 attempts a 3.32 ypc. Maroney has 379 yards during that same stretch, on 100 attempts, for a 3.79 ypc, even though he was held out of most of the Jacksonville game, and has ypcs of 3.5, 4.3,3.2, 4.3, 3.5, and 4.4.

Well, I'm sure that AP's touchdown numbers are through the roof, right?

6 for Peterson. Maroney has 5.

3 fumbles for Peterson. 3 fumbles for Maroney.

Goodness, gracious... I wish all "strawmen" were made of such solid material.

Quote all the numbers you want, in the end do you think Maroney has had a fumbling problem the last 5 games or so? BB obviously did, and sat him for a reason. Hopefully that will do it, and Maroney will protect the ball better, and keep running like he has been.

 

[RayClay]

Hate to ruin a pointless argument, but it really doesn't matter who or when fumbles occur. What matters, in this case, is running erect in short yardage situations, allowing the defense to stand you up and strip the ball.

If Peterson's doing it (don't know) hw would need to change too.

Faulk changed whatever he was doing, though it was a different problem. That's it. If what you're doing is likely to cause fumbles, you need to change it period.

 

[goheels22002]

Quote all the numbers you want, in the end do you think Maroney has had a fumbling problem the last 5 games or so? BB obviously did, and sat him for a reason. Hopefully that will do it, and Maroney will protect the ball better, and keep running like he has been.

No question that Maroney fumbles more than he should.

I do not think the second half had anything to do with that, however. Fred Taylor needed carries and live action after a layoff. Up 28-7, he gets his first carry of the game and did a nice job eating clock. Why add more hits to Maroney and Faulk at the end of a long season after they'd clinched the AFC East? It was great seeing Morris and Taylor in there and producing. BB has two backfields going into the playoffs which means the opposition DLines and LBs will get fresh legs banging at them all game long.

The 36 runs/25 passes ratio added up to a big win against a physical Jax defense. How nice would that be against the 1st round opponent?

 

[RobertWeathers]

Maroney is now a hero of mine? I defend the over-the-top nonsense that is spewed here at times, but I do so with a level head. Just like you were proven wrong in your whole Moss trend argument, you will be proven wrong here when Maroney continues his career without a high fumbling rate.
.

How was I proven wrong? According to who? You? Moss was underperforming for 4 consecutive games. BB sends him home and since that time he has played well. Your claim would be that It's just a slight tick in production. I say he was frustrated and that impacted his play and BB gave him a kick in the pants. But use whatever ammo you got. It won't work.

I like how I am accused of being in denial of my "heroes", yet I am simply arguing against your flawed logic. I never said Maroney is an amazing RB or shouldn't be criticized. I never said it's OK for Maroney to fumble, especially at the goalline. I never said Maroney should not work on protecting the football. However you are arguing that Maroney is NOW fumble prone and that the 3-4 games this year that he fumbled in prove it so. .

Bull. You are completely incapable of criticizing a athlete's performance. That is just who you are. You must be a defense attorney.

I am pointing out to you that in fact this is probably an anomaly that will go away and that when you take into account ALL of the facts, we shouldn't worry about Maroney fumbling in the FUTURE. The handful of games you so desperately want to use as proof of future predictions is ridiculous.

116 carries. 4 fumbles. He has a fumbling problem and needs to work on his ball security and stop running upright. Defenses have caught onto it. Peterson has the same problem. So did Eric ****erson. So did Franco Harris. So did Tony Dorsett. So did Payton early in his career. Common theme you ask? They all ran relatively upright. Difference here is that their production outweighs the risk and their respective teams needed their production to win on a consistient basis. Maroney does not have that luxury in this offense or on this team.

You must work for a living, right? Let me ask you a simple question. If a co-worker's job performance was exemplary for many years, but for 2 quarters in a row it was substandard, what would you do?

Maroney is a risk right now. If he goes 100 or so carries w/o fumbling, that is great and my concerns will subside.

 

[PatsWickedPissah]

Quote all the numbers you want, in the end do you think Maroney has had a fumbling problem the last 5 games or so? BB obviously did, and sat him for a reason. Hopefully that will do it, and Maroney will protect the ball better, and keep running like he has been.

Yes, Maroney has a ball integrity problem. That's why BB didn't have him return in the game. Help Maroney focus on the problem and think about it. Otherwise I think the plan against the Jags was to rotate RBs, each for an offensive series or X number of carries. I think it's being properly addressed, and given that Maroney practises well, he'll play if not start again Sunday.

 

[emoney_33]

How was I proven wrong? According to who? You? Moss was underperforming for 4 consecutive games. BB sends him home and since that time he has played well. Your claim would be that It's just a slight tick in production. I say he was frustrated and that impacted his play and BB gave him a kick in the pants. But use whatever ammo you got. It won't work.

Do you make up history? He played terrible the exact game after being sent home. You claimed it was a worrisome "trend". I pointed out it was a bad stretch and all the facts and evidence points to Moss being just fine.

If you can actually recall your argument was that it was a worrisome trend because Moss had been "declining" for 4 games. ANY logical thinking objective analysis would have brought you to the conclusion that it was probably just an abberation that he would come out of. You wanted to fight tooth and nail about the 4 game "trend". And now you want to say he got some kick in the pants?

I suppose Brady is once again lying when before this game he talked about missing significant practice time for those past 4 weeks. He talked about how incredibly important that practice time was as there are usually 25+ new plays to go over. He talked about how bad that was for the offense where his first time actually running those new plays was IN GAME.

Bull. You are completely incapable of criticizing a athlete's performance. That is just who you are. You must be a defense attorney.

I've no problem with criticizing performances. I have a problem with stupid nitpicking and giant assumptions. I also have a problem with tiny sample sizes somehow being a trend that proves a much larger body of evidence wrong. You are completely incapable of removing bias from your "objective" analysis.

116 carries. 4 fumbles. He has a fumbling problem and needs to work on his ball security and stop running upright. Defenses have caught onto it. Peterson has the same problem. So did Eric ****erson. So did Franco Harris. So did Tony Dorsett. So did Payton early in his career. Common theme you ask? They all ran relatively upright. Difference here is that their production outweighs the risk and their respective teams needed their production to win on a consistient basis. Maroney does not have that luxury in this offense or on this team.

Yea so his 400+ carries in the pros prior to the last 116 are completely meaningless and he all of a sudden started running upright 116 carries ago, right? I'm confident that whatever part Maroney has in his 4 fumbles this season will easily be fixed, considering the historical data that says Maroney is GOOD with ball security. Peterson was fumbling from the get go. But yea again nice job to ignore all historical data and only point to the tiny sample size that benefits your ridiculous bias and assumptions.

You must work for a living, right? Let me ask you a simple question. If a co-worker's job performance was exemplary for many years, but for 2 quarters in a row it was substandard, what would you do?

Completely terrible analogy.

Maroney is a risk right now. If he goes 100 or so carries w/o fumbling, that is great and my concerns will subside.

He is not a "risk" right now, and your concerns are knee-jerk "what have you done for me lately" that fills this board for the last few years.

 

[bradydaman29]

Adrian Peterson just fumbled in overtime of the Vikings game. He should be benched now, right?

Maybe the Vikings could trade him and still salvage a 7th round pick in return.

Maroney is no AP!!

 

[RobertWeathers]

Do you make up history? He played terrible the exact game after being sent home. You claimed it was a worrisome "trend". I pointed out it was a bad stretch and all the facts and evidence points to Moss being just fine. .

And did not offer a level of production that at the time, the team needed from him. Of course you disagree. Typical.

If you can actually recall your argument was that it was a worrisome trend because Moss had been "declining" for 4 games. ANY logical thinking objective analysis would have brought you to the conclusion that it was probably just an abberation that he would come out of. You wanted to fight tooth and nail about the 4 game "trend". And now you want to say he got some kick in the pants? .

He played substandard to what the team needed from him.

I suppose Brady is once again lying when before this game he talked about missing significant practice time for those past 4 weeks. He talked about how incredibly important that practice time was as there are usually 25+ new plays to go over. He talked about how bad that was for the offense where his first time actually running those new plays was IN GAME. .

I agree with his statement. Doesn't exonerate Moss' performance.

I've no problem with criticizing performances. I have a problem with stupid nitpicking and giant assumptions. I also have a problem with tiny sample sizes somehow being a trend that proves a much larger body of evidence wrong. You are completely incapable of removing bias from your "objective" analysis. .

You have a huge problem offering criticism based on performance. Go back and read your posts.

Yea so his 400+ carries in the pros prior to the last 116 are completely meaningless and he all of a sudden started running upright 116 carries ago, right? I'm confident that whatever part Maroney has in his 4 fumbles this season will easily be fixed, considering the historical data that says Maroney is GOOD with ball security. Peterson was fumbling from the get go. But yea again nice job to ignore all historical data and only point to the tiny sample size that benefits your ridiculous bias and assumptions. .

He has always run upright. I guess you just don't watch the games. History shows that upright RBs fumble more often than runners who lower their shoulder pads and are level to the ground. Another trend that you refuse to acknowledge.

Completely terrible analogy. .

A typical non-answer from you for which this entire board is accustomed to.

He is not a "risk" right now, and your concerns are knee-jerk "what have you done for me lately" that fills this board for the last few years.

BB and Ivan Fears disagree. Suggestion: Watch the games.

 

[emoney_33]

And did not offer a level of production that at the time, the team needed from him. Of course you disagree. Typical.

I never claimed his production was perfect, simply that his funk wasn't a worrisome trend and that all receivers have bad stretches.

You have a huge problem offering criticism based on performance. Go back and read your posts.

Maroney needs to do a better job of holding on to the ball in the playoffs, come hell or high water. I'm confident that he will.

He has always run upright. I guess you just don't watch the games. History shows that upright RBs fumble. Another trend that you refuse to acknowledge.

So in college and his first 3 years as a pro (OK we'll call it 2 since 2008 was injury year) he rarely ever fumbled, yet we should throw all that out because of his last 100 carries? Yes those 3-4 games are all that matters, and Maroney's history be damned...?

A typical non-answer from you for which this entire board is accustomed to.

Your analogy makes no sense, why would I answer it? I wouldn't care what my co-worker does if it doesn't effect me though. I also wouldn't fire an employee if he wasn't doing his best work in his last month or 2 even though I have years of data saying he has done good work.

BB and Ivan Fears disagree. Suggestion: Watch the games.

I guess BB told you he is worried about Maroney's fumbling right? Oh no you are just better than us all and know for a fact why BB does everything he does.

I watch every Patriots game, and I enjoy watching every Patriots game. I don't use my enjoyment of watching the game conflict with facts though. If I want to know something I will look at the facts, if I need to see something again I'll rewatch with an eye on it. But during the game, I'm watching as a FAN, rooting on my team, not with a biased critical eye just waiting to come complain here like some people.

Don't tell me to "watch the games". It you who needs to watch them without your bias against certain players.

 

[RobertWeathers]

So in college and his first 3 years as a pro (OK we'll call it 2 since 2008 was injury year) he rarely ever fumbled, yet we should throw all that out because of his last 100 carries? Yes those 3-4 games are all that matters, and Maroney's history be damned...?.

Depends on the player, emoney_33. if its a RB that is CRITICAL to this offense, you play him-including Adrian Peterson. IMO Maroney is not a critical piece to this offense.

Your analogy makes no sense, why would I answer it? I wouldn't care what my co-worker does if it doesn't effect me though. I also wouldn't fire an employee if he wasn't doing his best work in his last month or 2 even though I have years of data saying he has done good work. ...

I said 2 quarters. Thats 6 months. big difference. if the employee is not critical to the org (as is the case with Maroney in the offense), you manage the risk.Its a perfect analogy. You just don't get it.

I guess BB told you he is worried about Maroney's fumbling right? Oh no you are just better than us all and know for a fact why BB does everything he does. ...

everytime Maroney has put the ball on the ground, BB has put him on the bench for pretty much the remainder of the game or stopped calling his number. Do you disagree?

I watch every Patriots game, and I enjoy watching every Patriots game. I don't use my enjoyment of watching the game conflict with facts though. If I want to know something I will look at the facts, if I need to see something again I'll rewatch with an eye on it. But during the game, I'm watching as a FAN, rooting on my team, not with a biased critical eye just waiting to come complain here like some people. :...

Oh yea. I can't wait to complain and see players for the Pats fail so I can blast them on patsfan.com. get off your soapbox.

Don't tell me to "watch the games". It you who needs to watch them without your bias against certain players.

As long as you keep accusing me of bias and knee-jerk reactions, I will tell you to watch the games b/c based on your observations and insight, Moss was performing just fine after indy and Maroney doesn't currently have a fumbling problem.

 

[emoney_33]

Depends on the player, emoney_33. if its a RB that is CRITICAL to this offense, you play him-including Adrian Peterson. IMO Maroney is not a critical piece to this offense.

So when BB continues to play Maroney you will admit to being wrong or knowing more than BB?

I said 2 quarters. Thats 6 months. big difference. if the employee is not critical to the org (as is the case with Maroney in the offense), you manage the risk.Its a perfect analogy. You just don't get it.

Maroney fumbled in 4 games, that's FOUR GAMES. Also note that a fumble is only one part of the entire picture of not only Maroney himself but his contribution to the bottom line. That is not equivalent to 6 months of an employee slacking off or doing poor for whatever reason. Again it was a terrible analogy, now let it go. That's why I didn't answer it in the first place.

everytime Maroney has put the ball on the ground, BB has put him on the bench for pretty much the remainder of the game or stopped calling his number. Do you disagree?

Disagree? The fact is you are wrong. This is the type of stuff I mean. Yet you tell me to "watch the games".

Indy, after the fumble we stopped them and Welker returned the punt to the 7. We scored in 2 plays and Maroney was back in on the next drive.

Jets, after the fumble, pick 6 by Bodden. Maroney was back in on the next drive.

NO, after the fumble, Maroney fumbles Ellis and Welker recovers. Few plays later Maroney is back in and then a couple plays after gets a goalline TD.

As long as you keep accusing me of bias and knee-jerk reactions, I will tell you to watch the games b/c based on your observations and insight, Moss was performing just fine after indy and Maroney doesn't currently have a fumbling problem.

Again you twist words and stick to your bias. I never claimed Moss was "performing fine". I said Moss had a stretch of games where his production was down, but it's nothing to worry about and it happens. This is the NFL, if you expect Moss to be perfect that's your problem. As it turns out my attitude to not be worried was correct. Your worried trend crap turned out to be stupid. Did you really expect Moss to continue "trending downward"? I mean get real.

Maroney has fumbled too much lately, but again I am not worried that it is a sign of long term future struggles. I'm confident he'll be fine in the ball security department as he has proven to be throughout his career.

But yea you can go ahead and watch the games and tell me again how after each fumble BB benched Maroney for the game . Now that is classic

 

[ScrewDrvr]

And you continue to miss the point. Calling a strawman when none exists is an interesting approach, though.

However, since you want to focus on production, let's take a look at AP's "production" of late, shall we, and we'll use the last 6 games, since it's been that long since AP has run for 100 yards:

82 (3.4 ypc)
85 (3.4 ypc)
19 (1.5 ypc)
97 (3.7 ypc)
35 (2.9 ypc)
94 (3.9 ypc)

412 yards in 124 attempts a 3.32 ypc. Maroney has 379 yards during that same stretch, on 100 attempts, for a 3.79 ypc, even though he was held out of most of the Jacksonville game, and has ypcs of 3.5, 4.3,3.2, 4.3, 3.5, and 4.4.

Well, I'm sure that AP's touchdown numbers are through the roof, right?

6 for Peterson. Maroney has 5.

3 fumbles for Peterson. 3 fumbles for Maroney.

Goodness, gracious... I wish all "strawmen" were made of such solid material.

"A straw man argument is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.[1] To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by substituting a superficially similar proposition (the "straw man"), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.[1][2]"


the strawman argument is you and whoever else saying that AP fumbles and should be benched and if Brady throws a INT he should be benched. So dont try and say it wasnt, because its right there in black and white and ill surely call you out on it.


good job cherry picking some stats, how about you use the entire season as your stats.

oops, there goes your entire argument. Stop comparing AP to Maroney, you look more and more stupid every time you post.

 

[ScrewDrvr]

So, Peterson should get a pass after tonight's fumble that cost his team the win and potentially a first round bye? Just because he puts up some good stats?

Brady's turnovers have killed this team at times. So has the defense. And the O-line. And Faulk. And Morris. You don't dwell on it. You simple move on. Peterson's fumbles have cost his team victories.

It's amazing that when Maroney is producing (which he has done for most of his career in New England) then haters stay away, but one turnover which did not cost them anything, they go ape-sh!t crazy and want to kill him.

yes he gets a pass, because hes obviously made up for it many times over. I dont understand whats so hard to understand about it.

Just like the stupid strawman argument someone else brought up, you wouldn't bench Brady even if he threw an INT to lose the game.