Is this why Ridley didn't start?

[Deus Irae]

Discipline is one thing, but you don't bench your best runner and one of your best offensive weapons before a divisional game.

Why on Earth not?

That's the second dumbest disciplinary decision that I've seen (with the Welker benching to start the 2010 Divisional game being the first).

Sending players home for being a few minutes late during a snowstorm was much more stupid than sitting Ridley was (assuming that's what happened with Ridley).

 

[ahmed]

Do you want to win the first half, or do you want to win the game?

Your second to last sentence is an inadvertant stumble onto the truth.

You cannot possibly think that Ridley was held out in the first half so he could be unleashed in the second half?

 

[Snake Eyes]

1) Taunting is against the rules and punishable by a 15 yard penalty.

2) No, this type of behavior is NOT what Bill wants on his team. He has run his teams demanding a certain set of behavior for a dozen years. That way of running the team has had a modicum of success.

It's not taunting, you're making the defender expend more energy, you want the opposition to expend as much energy as possible.

 

[mosi]

I finally watched the game and the Pats just sucked without Ridley. They are a completely different team with him as opposed to without him.

 

[Gronk]

If this is the rule that BB has dictated to his team (and this goes regardless of whether Ridley sat for the "taunting" or for some other internal reason like being late for meeting/practice), then of course he has to stand by it. Anybody who's ever had any kind of job understands the fallout from unenforced rules. Whether a rule that has potential to cost you a win - when winning is your business - is another argument. As has been mentioned a more competent team might have piled up a more substantial lead while the Pats drives died after 3 plays for almost an entire half.

I'm not sure what they're allowed to fine players, but that would seem to be a better course of action. Hit them where it counts for THEM, not for the team. And make it count, god knows fines don't always correlate to refined behavior.

 

[CelticPatriot]

He got benched for wearing a onesie. Tbh I'd cut him for such an offence.

 

[hovis]

It's not so much about the taunting/celebrating, in fact Bill tells his guys to celebrate. The point with Ryan and Ridley is that you don't **** around, you score the TD first. Anyone remember this play?

Leon Lett Super Bowl XXVII - YouTube

 

[cmasspatsfan]

If this is the rule that BB has dictated to his team (and this goes regardless of whether Ridley sat for the "taunting" or for some other internal reason like being late for meeting/practice), then of course he has to stand by it. Anybody who's ever had any kind of job understands the fallout from unenforced rules. Whether a rule that has potential to cost you a win - when winning is your business - is another argument. As has been mentioned a more competent team might have piled up a more substantial lead while the Pats drives died after 3 plays for almost an entire half.

I'm not sure what they're allowed to fine players, but that would seem to be a better course of action. Hit them where it counts for THEM, not for the team. And make it count, god knows fines don't always correlate to refined behavior.

I think he does it to show that the team is first and no one's above the team, sucks for us and probably sucks for the other players busting their ass but it does get his point across.

 

[ausbacker]

The Patriots use of Stevan Ridley can be summed up in one word (on my behalf): befuddling.

 

[Kontradiction]

Why on Earth not?

I'm not sure if this is sarcasm or not, but I'll answer it anyway. I'm fine with in-house fines and other discipline of that nature, but Ridley is by far our most effective runner and we were looking at a game where it was possible to go .500 in the division before the bye. This is a team with weapons in the passing game that are either learning on the fly or are recovering/playing with injuries. The team could have used all the weapons that it could get. Instead, Ridley is (apparently, unless it was just coincidence) benched for the start of the game due to high stepping into the end zone the week before, Brady is trying to find his groove with an injured throwing hand, and the offense can't advance the ball, putting them in a 17-3 halftime hole. Ridley then comes out, breaks off some decent runs, and the offense is on the move and not looking back for the rest of game.

ending players home for being a few minutes late during a snowstorm was much more stupid than sitting Ridley was (assuming that's what happened with Ridley).

I had forgotten about that idiotic instance of discipline.

 

[Deus Irae]

I'm not sure if this is sarcasm or not, but I'll answer it anyway. I'm fine with in-house fines and other discipline of that nature, but Ridley is by far our most effective runner and we were looking at a game where it was possible to go .500 in the division before the bye. This is a team with weapons in the passing game that are either learning on the fly or are recovering/playing with injuries. The team could have used all the weapons that it could get. Instead, Ridley is (apparently, unless it was just coincidence) benched for the start of the game due to high stepping into the end zone the week before, Brady is trying to find his groove with an injured throwing hand, and the offense can't advance the ball, putting them in a 17-3 halftime hole. Ridley then comes out, breaks off some decent runs, and the offense is on the move and not looking back for the rest of game.

Regular season

RBBC





This was not a problem. This wasn't benching players in the playoffs for off-the-field stuff, and it wasn't sending guys home instead of having them practice because they were a few minutes late in a snow storm.


As for the Brady thing, come on with that. They were in a hole because he tossed a pick on his first pass of the game, not because Ridley didn't make the team's first run of the game.

 

[reflexblue]

Stevan Ridley 17-yard touchdown run - NFL Videos

Seems silly for that

He and other pats players have done that before. Its hard to believe BB sat him for that, its very minor.

 

[Kontradiction]

Regular season

RBBC

Understand that, but Blount was ripping off 4.6 ypc and Bolden was at 2.8. Ridley, on the other hand, was breaking off 5.6 and was able to have a huge hand in wearing out the Dolphins defense. Most of Blount's success came after Ridley was inserted. Here were his runs to start the game, for example...

2, 4, -2, 0 = 1 YPC

This was not a problem. As for the Brady thing, come on. They were in a hole because he tossed a pick on his first pass of the game.

It was a problem because the Dolphins didn't have a running threat to respect until Ridley was in the game. The Patriots were in a 7-0 hole because of Brady's INT. They were in a 17-3 hole because the Patriots went 3 and out on two of four of their first half drives and were only able to pick up five first downs in the first half, four of which came after Ridley was inserted.

 

[Deus Irae]

Understand that

That should be the end of the story. Instead, we've got people getting worked up over something that should be a non-issue, even if there was a punishment involved.

It was a problem because the Dolphins didn't have a running threat to respect until Ridley was in the game. The Patriots were in a 7-0 hole because of Brady's INT. They were in a 17-3 hole because the Patriots went 3 and out on two of four of their first half drives and were only able to pick up five first downs in the first half, four of which came after Ridley was inserted.

They were in a 17-3 hole because Tom Brady tossed a pick on his first pass and the line struggled early. It wasn't because Ridley wasn't in the game.

The second drive was a 3-and-out because penetration killed the 2nd down run and Brady couldn't convert the 3rd and 8.

As for the 3rd drive, the RBs got the team a 1st down, and then set up a 3rd and 2. The drive ended because Brady was sacked on that 3rd and 2.

Ridley was in on the 4th drive.

In other words
Brady pick
failed run on 2nd down, due to RB getting hit in backfield
Sack
Ridley in

were the 4 drives.

Blount had only 4 runs before Ridley entered the game, and Bolden had 2 runs for 10 yards at that point.

The griping about Ridley is senseless.

 

[moosekill]

Discipline is one thing, but you don't bench your best runner and one of your best offensive weapons before a divisional game. That's the second dumbest disciplinary decision that I've seen (with the Welker benching to start the 2010 Divisional game being the first).

If BB did this, than obviously, the widely proclaimed, best football coach in the NFL does bench his best runner.

Unless of course you somehow are inferring that you are a better coach than he?

Hell, didn't you ever watch Hoosiers?

 

[ivanvamp]

1) Taunting is against the rules and punishable by a 15 yard penalty.

2) No, this type of behavior is NOT what Bill wants on his team. He has run his teams demanding a certain set of behavior for a dozen years. That way of running the team has had a modicum of success.

If that was a taunt, it was as mild a taunt as I've ever seen. All he did was slow down a little.

 

[Ring 6]

Logan Ryan was also held out. He also engaged in taunting. From there I don't think it's too much to assume that the two incidents/resulting disciplines are somehow related.

Not really. Just because Ryansat for grabbing his crotch does not mean that Ridley sat because of high stepping. Thats my point, people make an assumption then pass judgment as if that assumption is correct.
The two do not by any means need to both be for the same type of reason.

 

[PP2]

Not really. Just because Ryansat for grabbing his crotch does not mean that Ridley sat because of high stepping. Thats my point, people make an assumption then pass judgment as if that assumption is correct.
The two do not by any means need to both be for the same type of reason.

Still doesn't stop me from speculating.

 

[Ring 6]

Still doesn't stop me from speculating.

Well you can speculate about anything.
I'm just saying its much more likely it was due to something more severe than that, since it has happened before without the player being sat.

 

[Kontradiction]

That should be the end of the story. Instead, we've got people getting worked up over something that should be a non-issue, even if there was a punishment involved.



They were in a 17-3 hole because Tom Brady tossed a pick on his first pass and the line struggled early. It wasn't because Ridley wasn't in the game.

The second drive was a 3-and-out because penetration killed the 2nd down run and Brady couldn't convert the 3rd and 8.

As for the 3rd drive, the RBs got the team a 1st down, and then set up a 3rd and 2. The drive ended because Brady was sacked on that 3rd and 2.

Ridley was in on the 4th drive.

In other words
Brady pick
failed run on 2nd down, due to RB getting hit in backfield
Sack
Ridley in

were the 4 drives.

Blount had only 4 runs before Ridley entered the game, and Bolden had 2 runs for 10 yards at that point.

The griping about Ridley is senseless.

Just for the record, I'm not blaming those drives stalling fully on Ridley being out of the starting line-up. I've noted the OL and WR's were awful to start and told people to shut up about Brady as he showed he's still Brady when those two units work in harmony. I'm simply noting the numbers and what transpired after he entered the line-up. I just don't like the decision to bench one of your best players seemingly because he high-stepped into the end zone the week before (unless it was coincidence that Ryan was benched as well).

If BB did this, than obviously, the widely proclaimed, best football coach in the NFL does bench his best runner.

Unless of course you somehow are inferring that you are a better coach than he?

Hell, didn't you ever watch Hoosiers?