Will Ridley be inactive Sunday?

[Bobs My Uncle]

Ridley's fumbled in 3 straight games and certainly cannot be trusted right now. His presence on the field is more hurtful than helpful at the moment. The last thing I want to see is Ridley taking a handoff with the game still being contested. The only way I would want to see him in the game is if the game has already been decided and his inclusion in it is immaterial to the final outcome.

 

[PP2]

I don't see why he would be inactive. Starting and/or playing much is a different issue. If he is to be used in the playoffs, now is the time to figure out if his fumbling issue can be fixed or not. Running the fumbling percentages is nice, but with his sloppy technique his numbers could be significantly higher. I don't find much comfort from a statistical rate as his failures are evident to fans so will be a clear target for other teams.

As for Faulk, I believe BB realized he was used improperly at a time when the Pats had few RB options (the expiring Terry Allen was option 1 his rookie year and he was largely doing kickoff returns, then Faulk was the primary back when he had career highs in carries and fumbles, then Antowain Smith took over as lead RB (as Smith lagged in 2003, Faulk's carries went up but Dillon was brought in)). In his retirement news conference, BB stated "I’d say in my coaching career, nobody has ever worked harder to do the things that he was asked to do, from that season on – in terms of ball security, blitz pickup, having different roles in the game and that changes from week to week." Faulk sat down with BB in early 2000, the beginning of his second year, and discussed what he needed to do to stay as a Patriot.

Faulk stuck around because he was diverse (KR, RB, receiving, blocking) and a hard worker. He worked hard to fix his weaknesses and develop a broad skill set. Ridley is a one-trick pony, so it would appear wise to focus on weakness in that one area. I didn't find it comforting that Ridley in year 3 after 4 fumbles by game 11 declared he wanted to discuss fumbling problems with Faulk. That feels a little late to the party if he has a work ethic and not just talent. I hope he fixes the issue, because he can be huge for the team if he does. He won't do that from the sidelines.

These are exactly my thoughts. It is disconcerting that he still has yet to correct his techniques even after fumbling in the playoffs last season.

I think at this point, punishment in the form of inactivation serves no purpose (as that has already been done) and would not benefit the other RBs since we are now down to four after releasing Washington. But he definitely will not start.

He is definitely heading for a fork in the road and hopefully he understands that and decides to work his ass off so that he can stay in a Patriots uniform.

 

[BlueThunder]

I'm expecting a bib game from Ridley.

Hope he doesn't cry and throw a tantrum....

On a more serious note tho...I thought I read where Josh is still in Stevan's corner. I'm sure he'll have some input into how Ridley is used in the Houston game.

It will be interesting to see how his playing time develops over the next few games. We might be making way too much out of it.

I agree wholeheartedly tho...one more fumble and he may be riding the pine for a long time, but unless they pick up another RB he won't be inactive. Just maybe 4th off the bench in an emergency.

 

[PatsDeb]

I hope not. The fumbles are maddening and they've got to work with Ridley to get it fixed, but he is by far our best every down back and we can't afford to punish him too much. Cutting off your nose to spite your face is not the way to go.

 

[mgteich]

Is Blount healthy? I thought he had a concussion. We need Ridley as a backup. I understand that other teams have runners who fumble as much. On the patriots, this simply isn't acceptable.

If Vereen, Bolden and Blount are healthy, I could see Ridley not getting any reps.

Perhaps we are better with Ridley compared to Bolden. Hpwever, it is not clear that we are better off with a player who fumbles every other game. Does that make up for the additional yards he gains?

 

[patsinthesnow]

This I don't disagree with. I think starting Ridley would be tough and might send the wrong message, so I think he first needs to re- earn the trust of the coaching staff and his teammates. And keep in mind, I've been really vocal in my support for him. Watching the two the last two weeks has been tough and I agree with another post that his fumbles aren't completely careless, he's been the victim of perfect technique on the hits from each defensive player that forced it.

Either way, he's got to fix it. So I'm curious to see how it plays out, but I'm hopeful this is just an ugly blip to the early part of his career.

Well said. It's all a matter of sending the message to Ridley that, "you lost your job to bad play, now earn it back." Thompkins earned playing time back by improving his play.

Also, I think people relegate Bolden to garbage status when in reality he is just a 2nd year RB who's done his job when called upon.

-5ypc on 107 career carries. 0 fumbles so far. (Ridley's fumbled once every 34 this year)
-Bolden has 18 receptions this year in limited playing time. Ridley has 18 receptions throughout his entire career.
-two 25+ yard runs on only 51 attempts this year. Ridley hasn't broken a 25+ yard run all year.

If Ridley is that much better than Bolden, he should win his job back quickly.

 

[Joker]

maybe he should practice cartwheels????

 

[PatsDeb]

maybe he should practice cartwheels????

I never could do a cartwheel when I was a kid. I would end up looking more like the cat...

 

[yukon cornelius]

was the denver fumble bad technique....or a good football play


helmet right on the ball.....in cold weather


as much as he has shown a propensity to fumble, not sure this one is entirely on him.....sometimes football plays happen in football, and a helmet on the ball is a fumble more often than not

 

[50-yard-line]

was the denver fumble bad technique....or a good football play


helmet right on the ball.....in cold weather


as much as he has shown a propensity to fumble, not sure this one is entirely on him.....sometimes football plays happen in football, and a helmet on the ball is a fumble more often than not

The Pittsburgh fumble looked more like an incomplete pass, honestly - Polamalu made a great play. Can't put that one on Ridley.

 

[mgteich]

OK, this board makes its judgements. Belichick makes his. We think the last fumble and perhaps others weren't Ridley's fault. Yet, Ridley was immediately benched. Perhaps, Belichick disagrees.

Perhaps a 2nd year player who has 5 yards a carry for his career and catches a couple of balls a game should be given more reps. Perhaps Bolden can use this time to develop further.

 

[Ian]

was the denver fumble bad technique....or a good football play


helmet right on the ball.....in cold weather


as much as he has shown a propensity to fumble, not sure this one is entirely on him.....sometimes football plays happen in football, and a helmet on the ball is a fumble more often than not

:yeahthat:

 

[Brady6]

If Blount and Bolden fumble with Ridley inactive who gets the carries alongside Vereen? It might help Ridley's learning process to be punished... but I don't think inactivating him helps the team beat the Texans in Week 13. Every game in Nov/Dec is critical.

I don’t want them to make Ridley inactive so I hope that’s not the perception I am letting off, I am actually a huge Ridley fan and I have defended him time and time again. I was simply asking the question because I do foresee a possibility that it could happen, he has fumbled in 3 straight games and if he struggles in practice at all I would not put it past Belichick to shut him down for a week and attempt to rectify the issue.

 

[yukon cornelius]

OK, this board makes its judgements. Belichick makes his. We think the last fumble and perhaps others weren't Ridley's fault. Yet, Ridley was immediately benched. Perhaps, Belichick disagrees.

or he realizes the fumbles are in his head, and doesn't want to put him in a bad situation to make it worse....especially when the game dictates a more passing oriented offense is in play, already down early


we'll see what happens this week....that is more indicative of BB's attitude toward ridley than his "benching"

 

[Kontradiction]

was the denver fumble bad technique....or a good football play


helmet right on the ball.....in cold weather


as much as he has shown a propensity to fumble, not sure this one is entirely on him.....sometimes football plays happen in football, and a helmet on the ball is a fumble more often than not

It's entirely on him. If he had held the ball with both arms, it would not have happened.

 

[Ian]

OK, this board makes its judgements. Belichick makes his. We think the last fumble and perhaps others weren't Ridley's fault. Yet, Ridley was immediately benched. Perhaps, Belichick disagrees.

He was immediately benched because it was returned 60yds for a touchdown, I'm guessing that's the biggest reason. I'm sure after the fact viewing it on film he'll believe it was a good play by Denver, but still feels he needs it to be corrected.

 

[yukon cornelius]

It's entirely on him. If he had held the ball with both arms, it would not have happened.

that's an overly simplistic view

 

[Ian]

It's entirely on him. If he had held the ball with both arms, it would not have happened.

That and if he had his weight forward he may have had a chance to hold on to it. He was standing straight up coming out of that spin move and Woodyard put his helmet right on the ball when he turned around. Bruschi talked about it in his chat the other day as well, although I get the feeling he's not a fan of him

 

[yukon cornelius]

That and if he had his weight forward he may have had a chance to hold on to it. He was standing straight up coming out of that spin move and Woodyard put his helmet right on the ball when he turned around. Bruschi talked about it in his chat the other day as well, although I get the feeling he's not a fan of him

the defense is never a fan of any play that puts the ball on the deck and puts them defending a short field


but ask a defensive player (bruschi) about the ball fumble...and he'll talk about the great play the defense made

 

[Kontradiction]

that's an overly simplistic view

It is what it is. Coaches teach RB's to carry the football like that for a reason, and that reason is that it's the best prevention against a fumble. You don't carry the ball low and away when you hit a pile. You use both arms, then carry high and tight when you're in the open. It's never acceptable for a RB or a ball carrier as a whole to carry low and away.