Kevin Faulk

[Captain Cliche]

Did I miss the game when this stereotype emerged?

It's asinine.

Troy Brown makes that catch. Deon Branch makes that catch. Mike Vrabel does not drop balls in the endzone. Tedy Bruschi does not drop key interceptions.

This team is filled with clutch players that rise to the occasion...Kevin Faulk is not one of them. He has a history of coughing the ball up at the worst possible time....just like Drew...it's a back breaker. That is why Drew is no longer with the team and is no longer starting for the Cowboys.

Perceived or not many posters here say they wince when Kevin Faulk has the ball and you always expect Bledsoe to make that key interception at crunch time.

Now I realize why other teams will overpay for our players. Statistics do not show presence or lack of clutchness. Deon Branch may not be a top teir #1, but he makes that catch....and shows up big in big games.

 

[pats1]

Troy Brown makes that catch. Deon Branch makes that catch. Mike Vrabel does not drop balls in the endzone. Tedy Bruschi does not drop key interceptions.

This team is filled with clutch players that rise to the occasion...Kevin Faulk is not one of them. He has a history of coughing the ball up at the worst possible time....just like Drew...it's a back breaker. That is why Drew is no longer with the team and is no longer starting for the Cowboys.

Perceived or not many posters here say they wince when Kevin Faulk has the ball and you always expect Bledsoe to make that key interception at crunch time.

Now I realize why other teams will overpay for our players. Statistics do not show presence or lack of clutchness. Deon Branch may not be a top teir #1, but he makes that catch....and shows up big in big games.

How many freakin' times do we have to say this?

BE SPECIFIC!!!

"He has a history of coughing the ball up at the worst moments."

And don't just use his fumble rate, because "statistics do not show presence or lack of clutchness."

 

[pats1]

He heh. I remember that. You were definately ahead of the power curve, though it isn't so much Faulk bashing as saying, "Enough is enough."

Most of us were willing to give Faulk more chances because of what he'd done for us. It's plain to see now that putting guys on the field because of what they did in the past is not an especially good idea. (Some may disagree and tell us ad nauseum how good Faulk USED TO BE.

I no longer care how good he used to be. Disliked his play in hte playoffs last year, hate it now. The people who are hanging on now will see the light. Right now they are just playing the Lawyer-Milloy-is-the-heart-and-soul-of-the-defense=and=we-need-him because-of what-he-did-for-us game we all played back in 2003.

Most of us played it again with Ted Washington.

And some more with Adam Vinatieri.

And a couple doing it with Faulk.

Fact is not only do we not need him, we are better off without him.

Support your argument! Explain WHY the Patriots are strangely "better off without him!"

Last year's playoffs?

Against Jacksonville, Faulk only had 6 carries AND STILL lead the team in rushing! (Dillon had 17 carries, too!) Faulk, with 4 receptions, was only second behind Watson and his spectacular catch-and-run.

Against Denver, Faulk was third on the team in receptions.

But, of course, the memories of some don't seem to extend far past his fumble.

A mistake? Sure! Tom BRADY threw 2 interceptions. Troy BROWN had a fumble. Ellis Hobbs had a fumble.

Do Brady and Brown deserve the Drew treatment as well?

Why are you hating his play now? For one of many, MANY inaccurate Brady throws on the night that, because Brady is infallible, had to be Faulk's and only Faulk's fault?

And most importantly - when did this breaking point occur, when suddenly "enough was enough," "the people hanging on saw the light," and "he ran out of chances?"

I just don't get it! Where's the evidence to support "he isn't the player he used to be?!?!"

 

[Murphys95]

Troy Brown makes that catch. Deon Branch makes that catch. Mike Vrabel does not drop balls in the endzone. Tedy Bruschi does not drop key interceptions.

This team is filled with clutch players that rise to the occasion...Kevin Faulk is not one of them.

Selective memory here, eh? (watch me be specific again):

In the 2001 Divisional Playoffs versus Oakland (Snow Bowl) with the score 13-10 late in the game, Troy Brown fumbled the ball on the punt return. Fortunately, it was recovered by the Patriots, who marched downfield to what would become the most amazing "clutch" field goal ever by Adam Vinatieri.

In 2002, the last time the Patriots lost back to back games, Troy Brown fumbled the punt and turned the ball over to the Jets. The score at the time was tied - 17-17 (4th quarter), New England had just stopped New York only to muff the punt. Final Score: 30-17 Jets. Brown fumbled twice in that game and that loss was one of the key reasons the Patriots failed to make the playoffs that year.

FYI - Troy Brown is the man.

It's just not so black & white with me about Faulk. I mentioned earlier in this thread that he is a high-risk, high reward type player. He's not perfect (and I never said so), but his positives outweigh his negatives.

 

[Terry Glenn is a cowgirl]

Bottom line is... he needs to go.

Yesterday!

There HAS to be better alternatives that cost less.

His game last week (ULTRA SPECIFIC) was enough of a cause for it.

He was one of the main causes for last weeks loss. Not the only cause, but one of the main culprits.

Make him use that machine that David Givens used for catching; for the rest of his career here.

 

[pats1]

Bottom line is... he needs to go.

Yesterday!

There HAS to be better alternatives that cost less.

His game last week (ULTRA SPECIFIC) was enough of a cause for it.

He was one of the main causes for last weeks loss. Not the only cause, but one of the main culprits.

Make him use that machine that David Givens used for catching; for the rest of his career here.

The only negative thing that involved Faulk last week was that last play. And to even pin the blame on him for that play is sketchy.

You want a culprit for Sunday's game? Look no further than Mr. 0 touchdown, 4 interception and Mr. Abandon the run in the second half.

 

[primetime]

Maroney has a long way to go to prove he can take over Faulk's role - that double fake reverse screen pass that had Madden in fits - if Maroney catches that pass, and I think he could have, he probably rips off about 15-20 yards there.

If the defender who broke up the play turns around and tackles him which is what would've happened with 95% certainty, Maroney loses a few yards on this play. I commented at the time that it was probably better it was incomplete, and it was a very bad playcall.

 

[ChockBlkr]

Kevin Faulk is the embodiment of what a New England Patriots player is supposed to be - high character, self motivated, unselfish, tough, versatile, studies the game and doesn't complain about not getting the ball or having to return kicks or having to block or being the 3rd running back. All who would question whether or not he should be here I have to ask: who else is out there who fits the description above that could come close to Kevin Faulk?
Nope. No one.
And if you want to find an example of what he brings to this team, there are many, but the one that stands out most in my memory is against the Raiders in 02'. The Raiders were scoring at will, it seemed as if everyone on our team had given up and didn't care. The Raiders had just gone up another touchdown and kicked the ball off to Faulk. I don't know where he got it from, but he dug down deep and he ran that ball as if the game was still within reach (which it really wasn't). He broke tackles, dodged Raiders and practically willed his way to a touchdown with seemingly little help from his teammates. He could have just given up like most everyone else that night but he didn't. Thats not the kind of player he is. No one else I'd rather have.

 

[brady2brown]

Kevin Faulk is the embodiment of what a New England Patriots player is supposed to be - high character, self motivated, unselfish, tough, versatile, studies the game and doesn't complain about not getting the ball or having to return kicks or having to block or being the 3rd running back. All who would question whether or not he should be here I have to ask: who else is out there who fits the description above that could come close to Kevin Faulk?
Nope. No one.
And if you want to find an example of what he brings to this team, there are many, but the one that stands out most in my memory is against the Raiders in 02'. The Raiders were scoring at will, it seemed as if everyone on our team had given up and didn't care. The Raiders had just gone up another touchdown and kicked the ball off to Faulk. I don't know where he got it from, but he dug down deep and he ran that ball as if the game was still within reach (which it really wasn't). He broke tackles, dodged Raiders and practically willed his way to a touchdown with seemingly little help from his teammates. He could have just given up like most everyone else that night but he didn't. Thats not the kind of player he is. No one else I'd rather have.

The play I remember from '02 was in the Packers game. Brady laterals back to Faulk. Faulk drops the easy lob, then stands there with the ball resting against his feet while three Packers run in from ten yards away and recover it. Not exactly my idea of the embodiment of what a New England Player is supposed to be...

 

[pats1]

The play I remember from '02 was in the Packers game. Brady laterals back to Faulk. Faulk drops the easy lob, then stands there with the ball resting against his feet while three Packers run in from ten yards away and recover it. Not exactly my idea of the embodiment of what a New England Player is supposed to be...

Talk about revisionist's history.

The ONLY Patriot on that play who reacted as if it was a fumble was Steve Neal - who suffered a season-ending injury diving for that ball. He was the ONLY one!

So by your logic, the other guys who were likely out there for that play - Brady, Brown, Branch, Light, Compton, Woody, Jones, and Fauria are not "Patriot type players" because they had the EXACT same reaction as Faulk.

Give me a break.

 

[brady2brown]

I don't think it is revisionist history. I think it happened exactly as I stated:

Originally Posted by brady2brown
The play I remember from '02 was in the Packers game. Brady laterals back to Faulk. Faulk drops the easy lob, then stands there with the ball resting against his feet while three Packers run in from ten yards away and recover it.

Does anyone else remember this play?

I wasn't talking about any other Pats who were trying to recover the ball because someone mentioned the 2002 Faulk play that stuck in his mind, and I told him mine. It was about Kevin Faulk, but now that you mention it, I do recall other Patriots trying to get to the ball and Neal getting badly hurt.

But remember it was a screen or halfback option (can't tell which it would have been because Faulk didn't catch the ball). The other Pats were running in the opposite direction setting up blocks etc. and while it would have been nice if they could have gotten to the ball, it would have been far nicer if Kevin had simply reached down and picked it up when he was the only player within yards of the ball. I really don't see how this can be spun into a positive for Faulk, or called revisionist history. It happened as stated. Does anyone else remember this play and verify it or correct it?

Do you remember when you demanded specific examples of bonehead plays by Faulk? Be careful what you ask for. You just might get it

 

[patsfan55]

He heh. I remember that. You were definately ahead of the power curve, though it isn't so much Faulk bashing as saying, "Enough is enough."

Most of us were willing to give Faulk more chances because of what he'd done for us. It's plain to see now that putting guys on the field because of what they did in the past is not an especially good idea. (Some may disagree and tell us ad nauseum how good Faulk USED TO BE.

I no longer care how good he used to be. Disliked his play in hte playoffs last year, hate it now. The people who are hanging on now will see the light. Right now they are just playing the Lawyer-Milloy-is-the-heart-and-soul-of-the-defense=and=we-need-him because-of what-he-did-for-us game we all played back in 2003.

Most of us played it again with Ted Washington.

And some more with Adam Vinatieri.

And a couple doing it with Faulk.

Fact is not only do we not need him, we are better off without him.

thank you

i think i deserve an apology from some
def will not get it though rofl

 

[MDPATSFAN]

Statistically, he is due for another fumble, and it will come as sure as the sun rising each day..... Let's hope it doesn't cut the jugular when it comes.

 

[pats1]

I don't think it is revisionist history. I think it happened exactly as I stated:

Originally Posted by brady2brown
The play I remember from '02 was in the Packers game. Brady laterals back to Faulk. Faulk drops the easy lob, then stands there with the ball resting against his feet while three Packers run in from ten yards away and recover it.

Does anyone else remember this play?

I wasn't talking about any other Pats who were trying to recover the ball because someone mentioned the 2002 Faulk play that stuck in his mind, and I told him mine. It was about Kevin Faulk, but now that you mention it, I do recall other Patriots trying to get to the ball and Neal getting badly hurt.

But remember it was a screen or halfback option (can't tell which it would have been because Faulk didn't catch the ball). The other Pats were running in the opposite direction setting up blocks etc. and while it would have been nice if they could have gotten to the ball, it would have been far nicer if Kevin had simply reached down and picked it up when he was the only player within yards of the ball. I really don't see how this can be spun into a positive for Faulk, or called revisionist history. It happened as stated. Does anyone else remember this play and verify it or correct it?

Do you remember when you demanded specific examples of bonehead plays by Faulk? Be careful what you ask for. You just might get it

Yes - EVERYONE remembers that play.

And EVERYONE remembers that it was ONLY Steve Neal, and a few Packers, who went after the football!

 

[ChockBlkr]

I don't think it is revisionist history. I think it happened exactly as I stated:

Originally Posted by brady2brown
The play I remember from '02 was in the Packers game. Brady laterals back to Faulk. Faulk drops the easy lob, then stands there with the ball resting against his feet while three Packers run in from ten yards away and recover it.

Does anyone else remember this play?

I wasn't talking about any other Pats who were trying to recover the ball because someone mentioned the 2002 Faulk play that stuck in his mind, and I told him mine. It was about Kevin Faulk, but now that you mention it, I do recall other Patriots trying to get to the ball and Neal getting badly hurt.

But remember it was a screen or halfback option (can't tell which it would have been because Faulk didn't catch the ball). The other Pats were running in the opposite direction setting up blocks etc. and while it would have been nice if they could have gotten to the ball, it would have been far nicer if Kevin had simply reached down and picked it up when he was the only player within yards of the ball. I really don't see how this can be spun into a positive for Faulk, or called revisionist history. It happened as stated. Does anyone else remember this play and verify it or correct it?

Do you remember when you demanded specific examples of bonehead plays by Faulk? Be careful what you ask for. You just might get it

From what I remember, it was a screen. The reason that most of the Patriots players didn't run for the ball was it only traveled back about 1/4 yard. In fact the play was challenged and IMO it looked like the replay was inconclusive. Since it was called a fumble on the field, the play stood. The ball wasn't "at his feet" and he was about as close to it by the time everyone started reacting as anyone else. Good heads up - playing to the whistle by the Packers. Bad play by us.

 

[stcjones]

I don't think it is revisionist history. I think it happened exactly as I stated:

Originally Posted by brady2brown
The play I remember from '02 was in the Packers game. Brady laterals back to Faulk. Faulk drops the easy lob, then stands there with the ball resting against his feet while three Packers run in from ten yards away and recover it.

Does anyone else remember this play?

I wasn't talking about any other Pats who were trying to recover the ball because someone mentioned the 2002 Faulk play that stuck in his mind, and I told him mine. It was about Kevin Faulk, but now that you mention it, I do recall other Patriots trying to get to the ball and Neal getting badly hurt.

But remember it was a screen or halfback option (can't tell which it would have been because Faulk didn't catch the ball). The other Pats were running in the opposite direction setting up blocks etc. and while it would have been nice if they could have gotten to the ball, it would have been far nicer if Kevin had simply reached down and picked it up when he was the only player within yards of the ball. I really don't see how this can be spun into a positive for Faulk, or called revisionist history. It happened as stated. Does anyone else remember this play and verify it or correct it?

Do you remember when you demanded specific examples of bonehead plays by Faulk? Be careful what you ask for. You just might get it [/QUOTe


yep...i remember that play......and several others that were just absolute game killers......keep these coming Pats1 needs more specifics......BE SPECIFIC!!!

 

[PaulNEPats]

Just watch the denver game from last year's playoffs as a prime example. Yeah, he wasn't the sole cause for the loss that night (lots of players had a role in that). But that fumble late in the 2nd quarter knocked the wind out of the Pats. It was a huge momentum turner.

 

[pats1]

Just watch the denver game from last year's playoffs as a prime example. Yeah, he wasn't the sole cause for the loss that night (lots of players had a role in that). But that fumble late in the 2nd quarter knocked the wind out of the Pats. It was a huge momentum turner.

If you want to talk about a huge momentum turner during that game, look no further than late in the 3rd quarter.

Pats drive 73 yards to the Denver 5. A touchdown would put the Pats ahead likely going into the 4th quarter.

Brady throws an interception.

Instead, the Pats are down 11 points with 16 minutes to play.

 

[brady2brown]

yep...i remember that play......and several others that were just absolute game killers......keep these coming Pats1 needs more specifics......BE SPECIFIC!!!

Ha! He asks for specifics but when you give them to him he changes the subject so that you are not talking about faulk at all. Probably learned it at an early age:

Mommy: Little Pats1, did you eat those cookies after I told you not to? You're a naughty boy.

Little Pats1: There are serial killers out there and you're worried about cookies? Talk to them. They're naughty. Before you call me naughty you need a specific example.

Mommy: You and the missing cookies is a specific example. You deserve a time out for that.

Little Pats1: Kids eat cookies all the time. After you eat anything you could say it is missing. Tom Brady ate lasagna and now it's missing. Daddy ate a pizza and now it's missing. Daddy missed a day of work when he was sick. Matt Light missed a block. By your logic you are saying that all these people are naughty and deserve a time out.

Mommy: I'm afraid you're going to grow up and be an annoying person when the internet is invented!

 

[Murphys95]

Ha! He asks for specifics but when you give them to him he changes the subject so that you are not talking about faulk at all. Probably learned it at an early age:

Mommy: Little Pats1, did you eat those cookies after I told you not to? You're a naughty boy.

Little Pats1: There are serial killers out there and you're worried about cookies? Talk to them. They're naughty. Before you call me naughty you need a specific example.

Mommy: You and the missing cookies is a specific example. You deserve a time out for that.

Little Pats1: Kids eat cookies all the time. After you eat anything you could say it is missing. Tom Brady ate lasagna and now it's missing. Daddy ate a pizza and now it's missing. Daddy missed a day of work when he was sick. Matt Light missed a block. By your logic you are saying that all these people are naughty and deserve a time out.

Mommy: I'm afraid you're going to grow up and be an annoying person when the internet is invented!

You've completely cheapened this discussion by getting personal. From the get-go the argument here is whether or not Faulk's negatives outweigh his positives. By my count, there are a minimum of 7 specific positives listed and 3 specific negatives. No need to resort to ridicule here, just back your argument with facts.

Lastly, the way I see it - no game has been won soley because of Faulk, and no game has been lost soley because of Faulk.

I want him to do well - you can continue to root against him if you choose to do so.