BoB does NOT make the final decision about whether the play that is to be executed is a run or a pass - Brady does. Period. If you don't understand that, I can't help you.
I may be dumb, but hopefully not that dumb. The fact that BJGE was on the field for only 22 snaps, the same number of snaps the largely useless Ocho Cinco received (by comparison, Woodhead was on for 36 snaps) is not a product of Brady's desire to audible or not audible out of the play he is given.
Yes, it would have been more accurate to state that BGE runs CONSISTENTLY well only between the tackles. Virtually all of his (rare) negative plays have ahppened when he was attempting to run outside the tackles. His runs for the SB:
- four outside: -1 (first run of the game), 17, 2, 3
- six inside: 4, 4, 4, 7, 5, -1 (his last carry of the game)
For a total of only 10 runs. Just about the same number of runs he had vs. the playoff loss against the Jets.
BGE had TWO negative runs - his first and his last. That last run came with less than 4:00 remaining in the game. The next three Pats plays were the Welker drop, the incompletion to Branch and the punt. On the Pats next possession, they were behind and there was less than a minute left on the clock. You were expecting them to "keep pounding the ball" at that point? Really?
At the four minute mark is when we finally abandoned the run game (and I mean, using a real power back), in my opinion.
They yanked BJGE after the first & 10, and went empty on the next snap against the Giants nickel (3 safety look) who were in MAN coverage (the Welker drop was out of a busted coverage where Rolle lost track of Welker).
This is the ONE time I would have kept BJGE in there to check against this man coverage. The Giants were really cheating.
On the next snap, they go back to the one power formation. I mean, really? On a 3 and 11, you're going to try to fool them with Woodhead in the one back formation? The Giants are again in their nickel man to man, and you can see the safety drop back right at the snap to make this a cover 3, with a single backer to spy the middle. They showed utter disrespect for this formation.
We give the ball back with too much time on the clock, and gave the Giants a big fat chance to grab back the lead.
Whether or not this is the fault of the defense is another story that I don't want to get into, at this point. That would take up a whole new thread.
I am of the opinion that if we had kept using the Ace in the one back formation with a real power back, we would have kept going by forcing the Giants to stay away from their 3 safety package.
Both BGE and Woody were still trying to run the ball during the Pats penultimate drive (and both were also catching passes). How does that demonstrate anyone being "unhappy"? WRT Ridley, he had 87 carries for 441 yards, carries that included 5 breakaway runs (about 6%) totaling over 120 yards, numerous negative plays and two fumbles (due primarily to the way he habitually carries the ball into contact). How could using Ridley have hurt? Gee, I dunno.
By comparison- we could look at Brandon Jacobs who had a few negative plays and one fumble in the game, and what do the Giants do? Send him right back out to keep playing. That's called having balls and playing with confidence it's saying "just keep on playing, we're confident we'll find a way to win no matter what happens." Giving Ridley zero reps is scarcely playing confident, its saying "You're not playing sonny boy because we're scared ****less you may fumble again."