Why does everyone assume that Faulk makes the team?

[frankiesfly]

So are you gonna post the results of your lists from '02 til now so we can see how unaccurate you've been?

 

[danny88]

I'll put it this way, should Faulk be on the team this year, and probably the next? Yes. Do I think NE could find a better option in this years draft? Yes.

Honestly I'm always worried when Faulk has the ball since he has fumbled during key moments of games. I also think he is starting to become less effective as a KR, and seems to be loosing some of his speed. I like Faulk, and would keep him on the team, but I think the FO should seriously consider a guy like Lorenzo Booker in the 3rd-5th round area. Booker has the same WR catching ability as Faulk, is taller, and has better cutback/footwork. Booker could gain about 10-15 pounds and be a very dangerous duel threat 3rd down back. Booker is also very effective on KR's/PR's, and is a threat to take it the distance every time he touches the ball.

I would rather draft Faulk's replacement now so he can learn under Faulk, than wait for him to either retire or decline to the point of release.

Oh, and Booker hasn't recorded one fumble his ENTIRE college career.

I agree, Booker ran a 4.5 40 at his pro day (not that it matters much). I think the 40 1/2 inch vertical on top of all the things you listed is impressive.

 

[T-ShirtDynasty]

Let me guess your so called list has Caldwell as a lock, lol.

Caldwell's a lock.

 

[JoePats]

Caldwell's a lock.

Definatley. Probably all the WRs are a lock w/ CJ on the PUP. Only way someone is not a lock is if CJ is 100% for all of training camp which is highly unlikely.

 

[Terry Glenn is a cowgirl]

It would be downright insane to cut Faulk. He is a hard working, self less team player. And he is very valuable to our offense. He is also really quick and when I have seen him run right out of the shot gun, straight up the middle he has usually gotten very good gains. Its a shame we dont try it more.

And as for the fumble stuff. ABSOLUTE BULL****.

Corey Dillon(10 year pro): 28 career fumbles. 7 fumbles in 3 years with Pats(2004-2006)

Kevin Faulk(8 year pro): 11 career fumbles. 1 fumble in past 3 years with the Patriots.

How much will it take to get some of you dumb ****s to learn he is hardly fumble prone. Dillon fumbles more and a lot of people consider Dillon to be one who rarely puts the ball on the ground. Ben Watson fumbles like crazy but I dont see as many people jumping all over his ass about it. The insane part is that Faulk has fumbled a lot less than other RB's of his age. Maybe the large, bolded and underlined stats will get some people to read.

LAYOFF
THE
CRYSTAL
METH!!!!

THE
HARMFUL
SIDE-EFFECTS
WILL
BLOW
HOLES
IN
YOUR
BRAIN
THAT
ARE
PERMANENT!!!!

Oh, and Kevin Faulk for prez!

 

[Terry Glenn is a cowgirl]

I wonder what Mills will do next year...

 

[Kdo5]

LAYOFF
THE
CRYSTAL
METH!!!!

THE
HARMFUL
SIDE-EFFECTS
WILL
BLOW
HOLES
IN
YOUR
BRAIN
THAT
ARE
PERMANENT!!!!

Oh, and Kevin Faulk for prez!

Oh whats the use.

 

[Mogamedogz]

I dont see Faulk going anywhere... He is a great 3rd down back, one of the better ones in the game when he is playing in the Pats system. I cant imagine they would cut him unless he shows up to camp looking out of shape, or like he has lost a step.

 

[SamBam39]

Seems insane the way anyone can post any kind of crazy thought, and they will always get a bunch of replies some people for it and some people against it, no matter how nuts the idea is, and each side will be obnoxiously positive they are right.

for one thing, nobody can be absolutely positive that anyone will make a roster, aside from the few obvious sure bets like brady. BB has shown a number of times he has the ability to stun us all and suddenly cut a veteran we were sure was untouchable.

secondly though, there is no reason to doubt faulk should make the roster, he has played well, isn't making a fortune, and provides valuable depth. Speculating he could get cut is just day-dreaming. It's like guessing that Caldwell could get cut. What's the point? If they do, it will surprise most people, but that's ponly because it's so very unlikely.

 

[Fanfrom1960]

Seems insane the way anyone can post any kind of crazy thought, and they will always get a bunch of replies some people for it and some people against it, no matter how nuts the idea is, and each side will be obnoxiously positive they are right.

for one thing, nobody can be absolutely positive that anyone will make a roster, aside from the few obvious sure bets like brady. BB has shown a number of times he has the ability to stun us all and suddenly cut a veteran we were sure was untouchable.

secondly though, there is no reason to doubt faulk should make the roster, he has played well, isn't making a fortune, and provides valuable depth. Speculating he could get cut is just day-dreaming. It's like guessing that Caldwell could get cut. What's the point? If they do, it will surprise most people, but that's ponly because it's so very unlikely.

Ah, the voice of reason. God bless.

 

[DaBruinz]

It would be downright insane to cut Faulk. He is a hard working, self less team player. And he is very valuable to our offense. He is also really quick and when I have seen him run right out of the shot gun, straight up the middle he has usually gotten very good gains. Its a shame we dont try it more.

And as for the fumble stuff. ABSOLUTE BULL****.

Corey Dillon(10 year pro): 28 career fumbles. 7 fumbles in 3 years with Pats(2004-2006)

Kevin Faulk(8 year pro): 11 career fumbles. 1 fumble in past 3 years with the Patriots.

How much will it take to get some of you dumb ****s to learn he is hardly fumble prone. Dillon fumbles more and a lot of people consider Dillon to be one who rarely puts the ball on the ground. Ben Watson fumbles like crazy but I dont see as many people jumping all over his ass about it. The insane part is that Faulk has fumbled a lot less than other RB's of his age. Maybe the large, bolded and underlined stats will get some people to read.

KDO-
You are wrong. All you are mentioning is the fumbles Faulk had RUSHING the football. Faulks has also fumbled after recemptions as well.

Please refer to the Stat Sheet that Promisedland did up.

 

[Terry Glenn is a cowgirl]

Oh whats the use.

Hehehehe... I just thought I'd get in a word edge wise.

I like the use of the huge typeset.

OK.

I would actually like Faulk alot more, but it seems like (in my mind anyways) he is a "cooler" of some sort.

 

[PatsFan24]

Dillion had far more carries than Faulk....

 

[skaIownsIyou]

faulk has the experience as a patriot and was a key weapon during the post season...i'd be disapointed to see him not making the team after stepping down into the back up role when dillon came in, and further more, become the 3rd string/3rd down back, behind dillon and maroney, he's worked with brady for years now, and i hope that'll continue for years to come...

 

[MDPATSFAN]

First of all, that is no big deal. Even Fumbler Faulk averages over 50 touches per fumble, so 20 touches without a fumble is hardly reason to have a parade.

Secondly, apples and apples, dude - I compared only the easily accessible regular season numbers for both players, and I daresay it was a fair amount of work. If you wish to see the numbers including playoffs, I suggest you do the work yourself. That way you could actually contribute something to this thread instead of asking someone who already did contribute some facts to do more.

Actually this was discussed extensively prior to last season and you fumbled by using incomplete/incorrect data. Additionally, the ball security stat is normally expressed in fumbles per touch.

Prior to 2006 he averaged a fumble every 40 touches which was UNSAT....Last summer he told us he was working hard on ball security and he averaged a fumble every 70 touches as well as being massively clutch at times during the season.

It appears to me that he worked hard at improving his ball security problem and he deserves some credit for it. I'm just sayin.....

 

[Amnorix]

Fumble-itis.

More like injury-itis. He's proven he's not durable enough to handle 10+ touches/game.

The fumble-itis hasn't been an issue for a few years now, although I admit that I have a "flashback of nerves" every once in a while when he has the ball in a really key point in the game.

 

[PromisedLand]

Actually this was discussed extensively prior to last season and you fumbled by using incomplete/incorrect data. Additionally, the ball security stat is normally expressed in fumbles per touch.

Prior to 2006 he averaged a fumble every 40 touches which was UNSAT....Last summer he told us he was working hard on ball security and he averaged a fumble every 70 touches as well as being massively clutch at times during the season.

It appears to me that he worked hard at improving his ball security problem and he deserves some credit for it. I'm just sayin.....

My stats were expressed in fumbles per touch - did you actually read the file I attached? Please show me where my data is "incomplete/incorrect". All you do is come here and make accusations - you don't add any information yourself. And I fail to see how the fact that this was discussed here before (what wasn't?) is relevant.

 

[Amnorix]

As for cutting Faullk, forget it. I remember in one of the Pats books I read (errr....Holley's?) that Faulk is, by Patriots internal metrics, one of the MOST productive players on the team. Basically, when he has the ball, or is on the field, very good things typically happen.

As much as we all like him, the Pats coaches, and their metrics, like him even more.

1 year too early better than 1 year too late mostly relates to performance relative to pay. Per Miguel's page, Faulk has the 9th highest cap number on the team this year, at $3.2M, or about 3% of our total cap. Unless the Pats are seriously squeezed for salary cap space, I don't see them cutting him.

 

[Brady'sButtBoy]

Where do you get the idea that Faulk is only on the field 4 plays a game?

Sir, you just about make my point about the legend of Faulk being greater than the fact. I get the "idea" from Faulk's stats. Quick, guess how many times Faulk carried the ball this year - 80? 100? Try 25. Add 43 receptions (a very respectable total for a RB) and bingo, you get about four touches per game not counting punts - as I put forth in my original response (on page 6 i believe, please take a second and go back and read it). Maroney's presence obviously cut into Faulk's carries and one could argue that with Dillon gone that Faulk will go back up to the 50ish carries he had in '04 and '05, when he was essentially Dillon's backup and the 3rd down back. But apparently BB doesn't feel comfortable depending on Faulk to backup Maroney, he forked out several million for Morris to do that. And BB was auditioning punt returners late last year as well.

I didn't even bring fumbles into my assessment of the logic of cutting Faulk, I didn't really need it.

As for SamBam's weary post about how this thread is just "daydreaming," I ask, exactly what do you think this whole site is based upon? I also prefer informed responses but you sound like you see patsfans.com as a training ground for future GM's. Only in your daydreams!

 

[Brady'sButtBoy]

I can't resist - how many of the folks mocking the stater of this thread also were insisting right after the season that there was no way Dillon would be cut. There were an awful lot of posters who said that would never happen either.