Pats Running Backs

[supafly]

OOOH Well look at you with your fancy statistics and spreadsheets, I'm just so envious of your advanced saber metric prowess. Sorry I don't have a super computer keeping track of these things professor Einstein, not all of us are NASA rocket scientists.

























homer simpson being sarcastic.wmv - YouTube

Fixed for accuracy. Why do people continue to claim that Ridley has these terrible fumbling issues? He lost ONE fumble last season. The one in the postseason. That's it.

With all due respect to both of you, I think there is an argument that could be made that you are both correct in some fashion.

In regards to Ryno--I too have stuck up for Ridley and his "fumbling issues." You are correct in stating that he only lost ONE fumble, and that the perceived issue may be way overblown. Kudos for pointing that out, as many tend to already worry about what may amount to nothing out of the ordinary.

On the other hand though, I can also see where TyronePoole is coming from too, since Ridley actually did fumble twice in consecutive games, although one went out of bounds; and at that point in the season, those games are important.

It should be noted in fairness that on one of those fumbles (not sure if it was the one that went OOB, or the one that he lost) he did get lit up like a Xmas tree, and it isn't out of the realm of possibility to think that just about anyone would have probably lost the ball there.

No disrespect intended for chiming in, I just thought maybe you'd both like to hear that you were probably correct on some level, and that it may make you feel better that no one was really 'wrong' is this case.

 

[TyronePoole]

hah, I appreciate it but I was being totally non serious with that post.

 

[supafly]

While we're on the topic of Ridley, it's great news to see in Bedard's OTA observations from last week that he still looks like our most explosive back.

IIRC, only DeMarco Murray from DAL had a higher ypc for a rookie RB last year, so that is indeed something to build on moving forward.

I think that the RBBC will be much improved from last year, with the addition of a healthy Vereen, improvement from both Vereen and Ridley during their 2nd yr here, the addition of Addai (if he makes the team) as a proven vet with good blitz pickup capabilities, and the return of an injury free Danny Woodhead.

As much as I did like BJGE and always pulled for him, he did lack explosiveness. Whether that was due to his foot injury or not, we'll be able to tell maybe a bit more this yr watching him in CIN; but I am excited for the improvement of the running game.

I believe it's all about the effectiveness of the run vs adding too many more carries. On top of that the return of JMcD should help with the predictability too, as we should return to more screens again.

 

[supafly]

hah, I appreciate it but I was being totally non serious with that post.

I know buddy, I didn't even realize until after I had posted when I saw the big empty area where the .wmv was at the end.

I thought that maybe I could spare a pissing match, since you both had a point and were right on some level

Eff it, I'll leave it up anyway.

 

[mayoclinic]

The Globe's Zuri Berry looks at the RB situation:

Who will lead the Patriots at RB? - Extra Points - Boston.com

 

[mgteich]

He mentions the number of WR's affecting the number of running backs we keep, but makes no mention of TE's or FB's.

The number of WR's (including special teamers) is likely to be the same 6 as we usually carry. We are likely to carry one more TE than last year, and perhaps a fullback. This is what will reduce the RB number to 4 from the 5 of the past two years. Of course, the 5th "RB" is now the h-back or the fullback.

The Globe's Zuri Berry looks at the RB situation:

Who will lead the Patriots at RB? - Extra Points - Boston.com

 

[Ring 6]

He mentions the number of WR's affecting the number of running backs we keep, but makes no mention of TE's or FB's.

The number of WR's (including special teamers) is likely to be the same 6 as we usually carry. We are likely to carry one more TE than last year, and perhaps a fullback. This is what will reduce the RB number to 4 from the 5 of the past two years. Of course, the 5th "RB" is now the h-back or the fullback.

A WR spot could be lost to a TE spot also.

 

[mgteich]

Agreed.

OFFENSE (25)
3 QB
5 RB/FB
6 WR
3 TE
9 OL
This is one over. Perhaps, Larsen can make the team as the 10th LB (with 6 DL's & 9 DB's.

A WR spot could be lost to a TE spot also.

 

[patsfan13]

Agreed.

OFFENSE (25)
3 QB
5 RB/FB
6 WR
3 TE
9 OL
This is one over. Perhaps, Larsen can make the team as the 10th LB (with 6 DL's & 9 DB's.

There is the possibility that we end up with 2 QB depending on Mallett's development (or lack thereof).

 

[supafly]

There is the possibility that we end up with 2 QB depending on Mallett's development (or lack thereof).

It would take a helluva trade to pry Hoyer from here right now, at least in my opinion. More importantly, no one is going to part with what it would take, even if it were a mid round pick (which will never happen at this juncture). I have a feeling that the team is more than happy with having Hoyer in the fold for the price they have on him, and they seem to have invested a lot into him up to this point.

As far as Mallett's progression, I don't think you can even think about letting him go yet. I would assume (being the key word) that there was some type of thinking in place that would allow him to learn from Brady and Hoyer for a couple of years, while developing during some live game reps in preseason.

I see no reason to think about dumping a player with that kind of potential at this point in his career. Not in a complex offense like this one. I think it may take awhile to fully determine Mallett's potential fit here, but not in the 2nd season after a lockout during his rookie year.

 

[mayoclinic]

Some encouraging observations on Shane Vereen from yesterday's OTA:

Keeping in mind that we’re still more than three months away from the regular-season opener, second-year running back Shane Vereen worked with the No, 1 offense in a hurry-up offensive set.

It Is What It Is » Notes from Patriots’ Thursday OTA session

One interesting sign during the two-minute work was the presence of second-year running back Shane Vereen. He opened the drill as the lone setback and caught passes from Brady on each of the first two plays. He occupied the role normally filled by Danny Woodhead throughout the drill and did not look out of place.

Official Patriots Football Weekly Blog | From the Hart: OTA observations

Nothing to get carried away about, but encouraging nonetheless.

 

[mgteich]

This is all good news.

There are many potential roles for Vereen, depending on many factors. One of these roles should be 3rd round back, or backup 3rd round back. If Woodhead were to be injured during a game, someone needs to be able to run the 3rd down plays meant for Woodhead. Vareen should be that player. Alternately, 3rd down back could be one of Vereen's primary roles, along with being one of our returners.

Some encouraging observations on Shane Vereen from yesterday's OTA:



It Is What It Is » Notes from Patriots’ Thursday OTA session



Official Patriots Football Weekly Blog | From the Hart: OTA observations

Nothing to get carried away about, but encouraging nonetheless.

 

[mayoclinic]

This is all good news.

There are many potential roles for Vereen, depending on many factors. One of these roles should be 3rd round back, or backup 3rd round back. If Woodhead were to be injured during a game, someone needs to be able to run the 3rd down plays meant for Woodhead. Vareen should be that player. Alternately, 3rd down back could be one of Vereen's primary roles, along with being one of our returners.

Personally, I'm hoping for a little bit more than for Vereen to be the backup 3rd down back. What I'm hoping is that all of this work will help Vereen be able to provide 3rd down back versatility, blocking and pass-receiving ability on 1st and 2nd downs. Now THAT would be a major difference for the offense.

 

[patfanken]

Just a thought that might make Joseph Addai a little nervous. I was thinking about the RB skill sets, and the thing I see missing is that big RB who gets you the tough third and short/GL yardage. That doesn't describe Vareen, Woodhead OR Addai. Even Ridley is a question mark. However the Pats DO have a RB who's skill set and experience fit that role. Eric Katani. Katani was a skilled running FB, who excelled running inside the tackles while at Navy.

So if the Pats decide to keep 5 RBs, Woodhead, Ridley, Vareen, Kattani, and the winner between Larsen and Fiammetta, would give the Pats 3 true RBs, a FB, and a specialized hybrid. It also allows the Pats to at least postulate keeping just 4 RBs with Katrani being the SY/GL RB/FB, Woodhead the true 3rd down back, and Vareen and Ridley the 3 down RB's A little less depth, but not horrid for a passing team

Its easy to dismiss Kettani, who has spent more time at sea than on the football field the past few years, but I don't see anyone else on the roster who can possibly do that specialized role. He's my long shot, surprise keeper

BTW- I know its a long way off, but keeping 5 RBs, regardless of configuration, will be a strong indicator the Pats are going try, at least, to bring more to the running game. Keeping 4 would likely mean, nothing much changes.

 

[mayoclinic]

Just a thought that might make Joseph Addai a little nervous. I was thinking about the RB skill sets, and the thing I see missing is that big RB who gets you the tough third and short/GL yardage. That doesn't describe Vareen, Woodhead OR Addai. Even Ridley is a question mark. However the Pats DO have a RB who's skill set and experience fit that role. Eric Katani. Katani was a skilled running FB, who excelled running inside the tackles while at Navy.

So if the Pats decide to keep 5 RBs, Woodhead, Ridley, Vareen, Kattani, and the winner between Larsen and Fiammetta, would give the Pats 3 true RBs, a FB, and a specialized hybrid. It also allows the Pats to at least postulate keeping just 4 RBs with Katrani being the SY/GL RB/FB, Woodhead the true 3rd down back, and Vareen and Ridley the 3 down RB's A little less depth, but not horrid for a passing team

Its easy to dismiss Kettani, who has spent more time at sea than on the football field the past few years, but I don't see anyone else on the roster who can possibly do that specialized role. He's my long shot, surprise keeper

BTW- I know its a long way off, but keeping 5 RBs, regardless of configuration, will be a strong indicator the Pats are going try, at least, to bring more to the running game. Keeping 4 would likely mean, nothing much changes.

Is it worth keeping Kettani just for that role? And could someone like Spencer Larsen also play that role, while contributing on STs, as a fullback, as a receiving threat, and even as depth at LB?

 

[BlueThunder]

Is it worth keeping Kettani just for that role? And could someone like Spencer Larsen also play that role, while contributing on STs, as a fullback, as a receiving threat, and even as depth at LB?

As much as I like Kettani, I agree with this assessment. Slide Eric to the PS for emegency duty. Larsen seems to have more versatility and could pound it in on GL situations or lead block for Vereen.

 

[ausbacker]

Personally, I'm hoping for a little bit more than for Vereen to be the backup 3rd down back. What I'm hoping is that all of this work will help Vereen be able to provide 3rd down back versatility, blocking and pass-receiving ability on 1st and 2nd downs. Now THAT would be a major difference for the offense.

I don't know about you but I'd prefer if Vereen became the Patriots Matt Forté. RB committee is nice and I've no doubt it will be utilised but gee it would be nice to see a rushing/pass catching beast in the backfield whose name isn't Hernandez.


Open note to the world (not you Mayo) - guys, would it trouble some of you to learn the proper names of OUR players at all? They deserve that respect.

 

[mayoclinic]

As much as I like Kettani, I agree with this assessment. Slide Eric to the PS for emegency duty. Larsen seems to have more versatility and could pound it in on GL situations or lead block for Vereen.

It should be noted that Josh McDaniels coached both Spencer Larsen and Peyton Hillis at fullback in 2009. Larsen, a convert from the ILB position, was reportedly the lead blocking fullback for Knowshon Moreno (who has similar versatility to Shane Vereen)that year, when Moreno had his best statistical season:

The Continuing Story of Spencer Larsen - BroncoTalk

I don't know the details, but it's possible that Josh McD viewed Larsen's development as one of the reasons that allowed him to trade Hillis to Cleveland in 2010. We all know how Hillis developed as a bruising back/receiving threat. I don't know if Larsen has that kind of athleticism, but I'm sure Josh McDaniels has some ideas as to how to use him. The fact that the Pats signed Larsen for 2 years could also be significant. Some 2 back short yardage sets with Vereen and Larsen in the backfield could be very interesting - Larsen could be used as a short yardage back, as a blocking fullback, or either player could be used as a receiving option.

 

[patfanken]

It should be noted that Josh McDaniels coached both Spencer Larsen and Peyton Hillis at fullback in 2009. Larsen, a convert from the ILB position, was reportedly the lead blocking fullback for Knowshon Moreno (who has similar versatility to Shane Vereen)that year, when Moreno had his best statistical season:

The Continuing Story of Spencer Larsen - BroncoTalk

I don't know the details, but it's possible that Josh McD viewed Larsen's development as one of the reasons that allowed him to trade Hillis to Cleveland in 2010. We all know how Hillis developed as a bruising back/receiving threat. I don't know if Larsen has that kind of athleticism, but I'm sure Josh McDaniels has some ideas as to how to use him. The fact that the Pats signed Larsen for 2 years could also be significant. Some 2 back short yardage sets with Vereen and Larsen in the backfield could be very interesting - Larsen could be used as a short yardage back, as a blocking fullback, or either player could be used as a receiving option.

Desperately trying to figure the reason for all the Spenser Larsen love. Larsen has rushed the ball just 17 times in his NFL career for 3.6 ypc and has ZERO rushing TD's. This is NOT a good resume for someone looking to be the SY/GL RB. On the other hand Kettani (finally got the spelling right on this one) had prolific success rushing the ball at Navy.

Hey for all we know Fiammetta will end up being THE guy, and his rushing stats are even worse that Larsen's. But on the other hand, they both have better NFL stats than Kettani, who doesn't have ANY. But right now he's the ONLY guy on the roster who has the physical stature to be a GL/SY RB AND has had success running the football.

I never liked the Addai signing since he's just a more experienced, less talented and explosive version of Ridely/Vareen. He's insurance in case one of the kids fail. I get that, but if we didn't lose much in Bennie's regular rushing carries, we did lose his best skill which was as a SY/GL, who despite his lack of typical size, was very effective in that role.

Who knows, maybe Ridley could be that guy. Coming out of college that was one of the roles people thought he'd be good at. I'm just Brainstorming here.

BTW- Mayo, who is to say that Kettani might not be a very good Special teams player?

 

[The Gr8est]

Open note to the world (not you Mayo) - guys, would it trouble some of you to learn the proper names of OUR players at all? They deserve that respect.

And to follow up on a similar note, would it trouble some of you to know how prominent players were acquired?

I can understand how some opposing fans may think that Ocho and Haynesworth were FA signees, but I see too many mentions on Pats sites of them as FA mistakes.

They were acquired by trades, bad trades, but trades nevertheless.

They were not FA acquisitions.