Ridley talks the talk...

[patsinthesnow]

As surprising as Blount has been, care to explain to me how the more powerful and dynamic runner is suited to the role of back up? Ridley is a better RB than Blount. That's not to discredit Blount because he's been very good of late.

Blount's career ypc is higher and Blount's one good starting season = Ridley's one good starting season.

Moreno has 1,522 total yards and 12 TDs this year. I don't think anyone is ready to annoint him as a great back.

I view Ridley and Blount as near equals. They are both one dimensional backs that are above average runners in different ways. The edge goes to Blount in my book, as the bigger the game, the harder Ridley fumbles. (Panthers, Broncos, Ravens AFCCG)

 

[Deus Irae]

It's pretty easy to understand actually. He was productive running behind BJGE in his rookie year. He has a very good sophomore year. His running has not diminished in his third year. He experienced his problem area a lot and been benched for it.

It's not that I disagree with your overall point of needing both runners, so please don't think that's where I was going. It's just that the stats really don't estabish either of them as the better runner. Blount's rookie numbers match up more than adequately against Ridley's year 2 numbers (Ridley's rookie numbers are from fewer than 100 carries). Career-wise, Blount actually has the statistical edge in some of the important categories. In fact, if you're just going to use the stats, here you go for their careers:

Rushes

Ridley 543
Blount 555


Yards

Ridley 2403
Blount 2522


TDs

Ridley 20
Blount 18


YPA

Ridley 4.4
Blount 4.5


Fumbles

Ridley 9
Blount 11


Runs of 20+

Ridley 13
Blount 18


Runs of 40+

Ridley 1
Blount 5

Blount's career long is 54 yards, compared to Ridley's 41.


As for my position on who's better, I believe I've stated before that Ridley's the team's best pure running RB, although my memory could be off on that. Ridley is more elusive inside the tackles, more creative and needs less time to get moving and up to 100%. Blount is more powerful, which allows him to shake off harder hits and to move piles more easily. Both are very poor in the pass game, and neither are pass blockers. I'd argue Ridley is the better pure RB (I tend to give shiftiness in between the tackles a bump when evaluating), but I'd also argue that it's close, and it's a matter of tailoring strengths to opponents and game plan.

 

[Kdo5]

It's not that I disagree with your overall point of needing both runners, so please don't think that's where I was going. It's just that the stats really don't estabish either of them as the better runner. Blount's rookie numbers match up more than adequately against Ridley's year 2 numbers (Ridley's rookie numbers are from fewer than 100 carries). Career-wise, Blount actually has the statistical edge in some of the important categories. In fact, if you're just going to use the stats, here you go for their careers:

Rushes

Ridley 543
Blount 555


Yards

Ridley 2403
Blount 2522


TDs

Ridley 20
Blount 18


YPA

Ridley 4.4
Blount 4.5


Fumbles

Ridley 9
Blount 11


Runs of 20+

Ridley 13
Blount 18


Runs of 40+

Ridley 1
Blount 5

Blount's career long is 54 yards, compared to Ridley's 41.


As for my position on who's better, I believe I've stated before that Ridley's the team's best pure running RB, although my memory could be off on that. Ridley is more elusive inside the tackles, more creative and needs less time to get moving and up to 100%. Blount is more powerful, which allows him to shake off harder hits and to move piles more easily. Both are very poor in the pass game, and neither are pass blockers. I'd argue Ridley is the better pure RB (I tend to give shiftiness in between the tackles a bump when evaluating), but I'd also argue that it's close, and it's a matter of tailoring strengths to opponents and game plan.

Fair enough, Deus. I'd say the stats mostly point to them being even. Blount can break away more easily than Ridley for sure. Still I don't think that is a defining stat meaning Blount has the edge when most of the other stats lean (slightly) Ridleys way. The stats for the most part say they are equally effective. I just think it's largely irrelevant to argue who is better when their production is hardly different.

 

[shmessy]

Honestly, I just don't get this argument. Ridley's the best back because he had a good rookie season? The problem with using that as a metric is this:

In his rookie season, Blount had over 1000 yards and averaged 5 yards per carry.

It was his SECOND season.

His rookie season, he surprised everyone and outperformed expectations to set up his increased carries for his sophomore season.

 

[UK_Pat37]

I don't know why some seem to think Ridley is less explosive. If anything I think his vision, burst and the ability to push the pile is what separates him from Blount. I don't see Blount push the pile as much.

I think patsfanken raved about it for ages. Blount just didn't seem to be falling forwards and hitting the same holes Ridley did. Lately Blount has improved VASTLY and guys like us criticising him are eating humble pie.

I think Ridley is the more dynamic if the two personally and without the benchings I'm pretty adamant that he'd have 1K again this year too. We need to stand by him. Faulk had far worse problems than he has.

 

[MassPats38]

I don't know why some seem to think Ridley is less explosive. If anything I think his vision, burst and the ability to push the pile is what separates him from Blount. I don't see Blount push the pile as much.

I think patsfanken raved about it for ages. Blount just didn't seem to be falling forwards and hitting the same holes Ridley did. Lately Blount has improved VASTLY and guys like us criticising him are eating humble pie.

I think Ridley is the more dynamic if the two personally and without the benchings I'm pretty adamant that he'd have 1K again this year too. We need to stand by him. Faulk had far worse problems than he has.

If memory serves, the cure for Faulk was to take him out of the primary RB role (making him the 3rd down back most remember fondly). That wouldn't work for Ridley. BB had indicated, I believe in Faulk's retirement announcement, that Faulk spent a lot of time training to protect the ball. My hope is Ridley, in talking the talk, has taken that specific lesson to heart.

The maddening thing with Ridley is the lesson that "fumbling is bad" should not be a revelation in year 3. In his first year, he was used sparingly and allowed to work into the NFL in practice and the occasional game rep. He did fumble that year, so I am virtually certain he heard about ball control specifically after that game. Last year should have made that problem abundantly clear, and he should have been working his tail off to fix the problem. If anyone doubts that Panthers fumble was huge, consider the team would not have to travel to Denver in the post-season if he didn't cough the ball up on the goal line in Carolina (and yes, he is not alone in laying the blame for that outcome, but he can certainly claim at least some of it).

I believe Blount and Ridley offer different features, and can be an excellent tandem for game plans. I don't believe Ridley moves the pile more than Blount, but he can definitely bounce outside and make better cuts while still running with power. He is great with stronger but slower defensive linemen. None of that happens while he is coughing up the ball, so I hope he has taken the problem to heart. It seems so, but it is tough to break learned behavior.

 

[varjao]

I'd trade Ridley for a 4th in a second if there's an offer.

Keep Blount, Bolden for depth, go for a proven RB on the market and draft a prospect.

Take a look at the free agents for 2014.

» Over the Cap- 2014 NFL Free Agent Running Backs

 

[shmessy]

I'd trade Ridley for a 4th in a second if there's an offer.

Keep Blount, Bolden for depth, go for a proven RB on the market and draft a prospect.

Take a look at the free agents for 2014.

» Over the Cap- 2014 NFL Free Agent Running Backs

A 4th???

It's too close to Christmas for me to type my honest reaction that one.

 

[chasa]

A 4th???

It's too close to Christmas for me to type my honest reaction that one.

hes not worth a 1 or a 2, and a 3rd is borderline since running backs are the easiest thing to plug into a unit.

 

[Deus Irae]

It was his SECOND season.

His rookie season, he surprised everyone and outperformed expectations to set up his increased carries for his sophomore season.

"Rookie" was a wording mistake on my part, since it should have said sophomore. I corrected it in a later post.

 

[PATS16N0]

I'd trade Ridley for a 4th in a second if there's an offer.

Keep Blount, Bolden for depth, go for a proven RB on the market and draft a prospect.

Take a look at the free agents for 2014.

» Over the Cap- 2014 NFL Free Agent Running Backs

This post makes me sad and, for a split second, affected me physically with a churn of the stomach.

Ridley is one of the better backs in the league and still mostly pure potential.

 

[RIpats88]

Ridleys problems seem to be technique...he does that spin move leaving the ball open to hits, or holding the ball nonchalantly by his side.

if he can grasp on tight with both hands and just run forward I think he can fix his problems. and if he can, thats a scary weapon to have.

 

[Deus Irae]

Ridleys problems seem to be technique...he does that spin move leaving the ball open to hits, or holding the ball nonchalantly by his side.

if he can grasp on tight with both hands and just run forward I think he can fix his problems. and if he can, thats a scary weapon to have.

He needs to learn how to use, and protect, his head, too, or he'll be out of the league in a hurry.

 

[varjao]

Ridley is one of the better backs in the league and still mostly pure potential.

You're drunk.

 

[shmessy]

You're drunk.

This isn't the ESPN forum, kid.

 

[woolster22]

Re: Re: Ridley talks the talk...

You're drunk.

Name me ten backs he is undoubtedly worse than.

 

[woolster22]

Re: Re: Ridley talks the talk...

Ridleys problems seem to be technique...he does that spin move leaving the ball open to hits, or holding the ball nonchalantly by his side.

if he can grasp on tight with both hands and just run forward I think he can fix his problems. and if he can, thats a scary weapon to have.

Problem with that is he is not at his best when strictly running north/south. He has excellent vision for creases and pretty impressive cutting ability. He is at his best in garbage within the first five yards, and his lack of top end speed is evident at the second level. He may not run away from the field in space, but he is excellent at seeing where the space will be and generally does a respectable job of getting himself there. He doesn't need to lose the spin move, he needs to hold the ball high and tight while performing it.

The kid has talent, and he has one major correctable flaw. His problems with ball security pale in comparison to many retired former players at the early stage in their career. Faulk and Jefferson (remember one terrible game for Jefferson where he got knocked out on the last of a few fumbles and parcells was standing over him like he wanted to out down a race horse).

 

[Deus Irae]

Name me ten backs he is undoubtedly worse than.

Seriously?

Top of my head, NFC:


McCoy
Murray
Morris
Forte
Lacy
Bush
Peterson
Williams
Sproles
Martin
Lynch
Gore

 

[ausbacker]

Seriously?

Top of my head, NFC:


McCoy
Murray
Morris
Forte
Lacy
Bush
Peterson
Williams
Sproles
Martin
Lynch
Gore

You can take Sproles, Williams, Lacy, Morris and Murray off that list immediately. The question was undoubtedly not comparable players. Ridley is not undoubtedly worse than most of that NFC list.

 

[woolster22]

Re: Re: Ridley talks the talk...

Seriously?

Top of my head, NFC:


McCoy
Murray
Morris
Forte
Lacy
Bush
Peterson
Williams
Sproles
Martin
Lynch
Gore

I'd argue half those based on career downside vs upside and price tag. When was the last time Murray was healthy all season (Ridley had the concussion but I'm struggling with finding another injury...)? Forte is expensive and closer to pasture than prime, along with lynch and Gore. McCoy is a better (at the moment) version of Vereen. Lynch fumbles far too often to even consider being a part of this team (coaching emphasis). I don't know what Morris has done this year, but he has an offense that will help avert attention. I want inarguably better backs. Of hand, no stats I already cut your list in half.