Ridley

[NEP4Life]

Considering that BJGE never fumbles,I am surprised that they did not ask him to be a mentor to our two new RBs and show them how he himself avoids getting fumbles or forced ones.

Kevin Faulk who came into the league with some of the worst butterfingers has not been nearly as turnover prone the past several years and he might help out as well in teaching.

That's really on Fears and the individual RB. If they're both doing their job, there's no excuse.

 

[Ring 6]

Brady has gone on record many times and said he'll be damned if he loses a game because of a rookies mistakes. Barring injury and certain situations, this is likely the last we've seen of Ridley.

Please show me one of those times that are on record.

 

[strngplyr]

Please show me one of those times that are on record.

Yeah, I'd love to see it as well, it shouldn't be hard to find if he's done it many times.

 

[Ring 6]

Brady's INT cost his team 7 points; Ridley's fumble did not. Brady should take care of what he can control and let his coaching staff take care of what they can.

Don't criticize Brady for something the poster made up and attributed to Brady that he never said.

 

[Ring 6]

Yeah, I'd love to see it as well, it shouldn't be hard to find if he's done it many times.

Apparently he is ON RECORD many times so it should be very easy to find.

 

[Triumph]

I like Ridley. Hes shown a lot of promise for a rookie and the supposed 2nd best RB for LSU in that draft.

But, I dont see a need to fix what isnt broken. The current approach to NE running that ball has yielded 14 wins. BJGE isnt faster than Ridley, but he seems to pick up enough for first downs and hes able to pound it in at the goal line.

 

[RobertWeathers]

I like Ridley. Hes shown a lot of promise for a rookie and the supposed 2nd best RB for LSU in that draft.

But, I dont see a need to fix what isnt broken. The current approach to NE running that ball has yielded 14 wins. BJGE isnt faster than Ridley, but he seems to pick up enough for first downs and hes able to pound it in at the goal line.

Well, its splitting hairs but it means a world of difference in the RB world.

If you go by combine #s, BJGE is straight-line faster than Ridley. 40yd, 20yd and 10yd. However Ridley scored better in the 3-cone, 20yd shuttle, broad & vertical jumps. They are around the same hight but Ridley is 10lbs heavier at 225. I dunna know though. They look the same to me. maybe it's because hes an inch taller..

That kinda-sorta validates what my eyes tell me which is that Ridley is quicker, shiftier and a bit more explosive on his feet that BJGE.

Lots of upside with this kid. He needs to work on ball security now!!

 

[PatsFanSince74]

The question posed is "Is there any doubt he [Ridley] is our best RB?"

If you mean, no doubt in the same way there was no doubt after Curtis Martin put up 1,500 yards in his rookie year? The answer is pretty clearly "Nah." And, yes, I know those were different times and Curtis was asked to play a different role and it was a different team and there was no Brady plus a triumverate of Pro Bowl receivers, but 1,500 yards is 1,500 yards (actually 1,487).

It took me a long time to get "sold" on the Law Firm, but I can see why Belichick likes him.

If you look at the numbers, he just doesn't put the ball on the ground and picks up a lot of First Downs (one every 4.4 carries, or slightly better than the average of the top 10 rushers in the league this year (one every 4.6 carries). His YPA is an "OK" 3.7, but well below the top 10 at 4.6. He scores when they ask him to (once every 16 touches) and at much higher rate than the top ten rushers (once every 29 touches); while the latter could be due to a number of extraneous factors, BJGE sure does know how to get the ball into the end zone. His fumble ratio is silly at "0" and better than the top ten who fumble on average once every 103 touches, with a wide range on that stat from once every 44 touches to once in 273 carries.

So, a solid if unremarkable YPA; moves the chains; gets the ball into the end zone and never fumbles. Too bad we don't have a runner like that...hey, wait...we do!

Ridley, on the other hand, has a lot of promise but is a Work in Progress; unlike Curtis after his first year, who was already a Work of Art. His YPA of 5.1 is great over just 87 touches; as others have observed he seems to be more of a "natural" and/or "dynamic" runner with shoulders squared and great quickness.

He gets the ball under different circumstances than Green Ellis, but has picked up a first down every 4.8 carries, slightly off the average of the top guys and BJGE (4.6 and 4.4). He's scored only once in his 87 attempts, but that's probably mostly a function of when he gets the ball.

We don't want to make too much of one measly fumble in 87 carries, but it does mean that he'd have to go another 119 Regular Season carries without a fumble to be at the average of the top rushers. And, like PJ, my heart was in my throat until that fumble went OB.

So, is there any doubt? Now? This season? Yeah, there's some doubt. Will there be any doubt in another year or so? I doubt it (no pun intended).

Ridley is clearly the back of the future, but for now, I think we've got a pretty great tandem act going on.

 

[Triumph]

Whats wrong with the Pats running game?

Rushing TDs - 5th
Rushing 1st downs - 8th
Fumbles lost - 30th
Stuffed - 31st
% 1st downs on 3rd and short- 4th

Football | NFL | Team Leaders - % First Downs on 3rd - washingtonpost.com

 

[JJDChE]

Whats wrong with the Pats running game?

Rushing TDs - 5th
Rushing 1st downs - 8th
Fumbles lost - 30th
Stuffed - 31st
% 1st downs on 3rd and short- 4th

Football | NFL | Team Leaders - % First Downs on 3rd - washingtonpost.com

Out of 21 players with at least 180 carries, BenJarvus ranks 21st in yards per carry.

 

[IllegalContact]

these guys aren't as fast as the broncos....I think ridley can get outside on them.....especially running to the right

 

[JJDChE]

Last 7 games, BJGE: 2.66 ypc. :ban?:

 

[strngplyr]

Out of 21 players with at least 180 carries, BenJarvus ranks 21st in yards per carry.

Our running game isn't asked to carry the workload of this offense. It exists solely to keep defenses honest. We could probably throw the ball on every down and be just as good as we are, but we have the option to employ the running game and still gain 4ypc on average and we've been very good in goal to go situations running the ball.

We don't need any flashy yards, just enough to make you think "hey are they gonna pass or try to sneak in a run against our light package and gain a quick 5 yards?"

 

[goheels22002]

Whats wrong with the Pats running game?

Rushing TDs - 5th
Rushing 1st downs - 8th
Fumbles lost - 30th
Stuffed - 31st
% 1st downs on 3rd and short- 4th

Football | NFL | Team Leaders - % First Downs on 3rd - washingtonpost.com

Exactly. Just because there is not one big-name back like Arian Foster who accounted for every rushing attempt except one in the Ravens-Texans playoff game, everybody overlooks the Patriots ground game. It's an effective multi-player weapon that averaged over 4 yards per carry and over 100 yards per game in 2011.

I think the Patriots will run the ball a lot against the Ravens who will line up to rush the passer.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Our running game isn't asked to carry the workload of this offense. It exists solely to keep defenses honest. We could probably throw the ball on every down and be just as good as we are, but we have the option to employ the running game and still gain 4ypc on average and we've been very good in goal to go situations running the ball.

We don't need any flashy yards, just enough to make you think "hey are they gonna pass or try to sneak in a run against our light package and gain a quick 5 yards?"

When it comes to the running game, there are four types of teams that employ it.

1. By not being productive with the run, the team loses (see Cowboys in the 90s, Denver this year, early Steeler teams, etc).
2. Teams that have talent in the backfield and can make plays ON THEIR OWN and the playcalling mixes them in to the game planAND BE A THREAT THAT THE DEFENSE RESPECTS, but the team's DNA is to throw the ball.
3. Teams that run the ball and are only successful because of the pass threat but when the passing game is not producing results, the talent level isn't good enough to run the ball and make plays in the teeth of a defense
4. Why bother running. (see 1986 Patriots)

In 2001-2006, the Pats were #2.

From 2007-present, they are #3

Vs the NYJ in last years playoff, they dared the Pats to run. The Pats did run but the NYJ NEVER brought any extra defenders to the LoS to stop it. Why? Because the Pats longest run was 11 yards. Reasons? Down field blocking, line blocking, BJGE not being elusive enough and Woody going down on the 1st hit. - thus the longest gain was 11yds.

In 03 they did not have a running game that was "statistically" successful but if you look closely- especially in the playoffs, they ran it when the had to run it.

I'm still skeptical that this team can do that vs a good defense and they just might to vs BAL.

 

[strngplyr]

I don't think our running game is successful ONLY because of the pass, I think we can grind out the tough yards when we need them on occasion, I wouldn't bet the house on it, but I think we're capable.

I simply think we're opportunistic. Obviously, our passing threat gives us a lot of "light" fronts and when we see it we'll go no huddle and try to pound them.

 

[RobertWeathers]

I don't think our running game is successful ONLY because of the pass, I think we can grind out the tough yards when we need them on occasion, I wouldn't bet the house on it, but I think we're capable.

I simply think we're opportunistic. Obviously, our passing threat gives us a lot of "light" fronts and when we see it we'll go no huddle and try to pound them.

I agree. The offensive philosophy is not to bang its head against the wall and try to run 40 times vs the #1 run defense in the league. However, when it does need to run, make plays so to help open things up in the passing game, I also have my doubts that they have this capability.

 

[Patspsycho]

Vs the NYJ in last years playoff, they dared the Pats to run. The Pats did run but the NYJ NEVER brought any extra defenders to the LoS to stop it. Why? Because the Pats longest run was 11 yards. Reasons? Down field blocking, line blocking, BJGE not being elusive enough and Woody going down on the 1st hit. - thus the longest gain was 11yds.

In 03 they did not have a running game that was "statistically" successful but if you look closely- especially in the playoffs, they ran it when the had to run it.

I'm still skeptical that this team can do that vs a good defense and they just might to vs BAL.

Don't distort the facts. The Pats didn't really run- Woodhead had 14 attempts, BJGE had 9 attempts. That's way below average.

BJGE had almost a 5 YPC. How is that not being elusive?

The playcalling was the big problem last year, not the running game.

 

[RobertWeathers]

Don't distort the facts. The Pats didn't really run- Woodhead had 14 attempts, BJGE had 9 attempts. That's way below average.

Check your numbers and your facts. In 2010, they ran 28 times a game in. Vs the NYJ they ran 28 times.

BJGE ran 14 times a game and Woody 6 times a game. They flipped their carries because Woody is more elusive and can get to the outside better than BJGE. He also gave them more of an open field threat. In that game, combined they ran more than the reg season average.

In some instances, should they have ran instead of passed? Sure. In other instances should have the passed instead of ran? Sure.

BJGE had almost a 5 YPC. How is that not being elusive?

His longest run was 11 yds. That pretty much sums it up.

The playcalling was the big problem last year, not the running game.

The playcalling would have been better if they had a running game that made the NYJ move closer to the line and not flood the middle of the field with defenders.

 

[alvinnf]

IMO they will run against Suggs with an extra tackle on that side. I don't know how much success they will have, but it will be effective in other ways. This might be a big Woodhead game.