What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Shane Vereen vs. Stevan Ridley (2 Viewers)

Which RB is the one to own?

  • Shane Vereen

    Votes: 250 47.2%
  • Stevan Ridley

    Votes: 250 47.2%
  • Niether, BJGE will be back for the foreseeable future

    Votes: 31 5.8%

  • Total voters
    530
I feel Vereen is the most talented of the bunch and if BJGE parts from New England, he's the one I want to own. Is this the general concensus? I think Vereen can be had for pennies on the dollar right now.

 
Like Vereen as well, though I don't know about getting him for pennies on the dollar. I've been trying to pry him away from people for cheap and most are holding.

 
Im gonna go Ridley, Vereen is just too injury prone and wouldnt be surprised if he's cut ala Taylor Price just do to the fact he cant stay on the field and they have Ridley anyway who's shown he's very talented himself.

 
Im gonna go Ridley, Vereen is just too injury prone and wouldnt be surprised if he's cut ala Taylor Price just do to the fact he cant stay on the field and they have Ridley anyway who's shown he's very talented himself.
Is he really injury prone? I thought he was pretty much injury free in college, but then had the hammy this season which put him behind the 8 ball given no off-season. Does a one-year hammy really classify him as "injury prone"??
 
Im gonna go Ridley, Vereen is just too injury prone and wouldnt be surprised if he's cut ala Taylor Price just do to the fact he cant stay on the field and they have Ridley anyway who's shown he's very talented himself.
:confused: Is he really injury prone? I thought he was pretty much injury free in college, but then had the hammy this season which put him behind the 8 ball given no off-season. Does a one-year hammy really classify him as "injury prone"??
:goodposting: Having a nagging hamstring injury your rookie season when you were virtually injury free for the most part in college doesn't qualify as being injury proned. Now if he is hurt again during the pre-season then I might think this is a player to be cautious about. But I think he deserves the benefit of the doubt and let him start with a clean slate this year and see what he does with it. (It should be noted that during the season players get voted (5 OFF and 5 DEF players) during practice week who was the most impressive player that week. Vereen was in the top 5 like 2 or 3 times this year.)
 
My order would be:

BJGE

Ridley

Vereen

BJGE does not excite anyone but he seems to be the guy that they always fall back on. Ridley was very impressive and if he can hold onto the football I think he has a chance to assume the role BJGE has had the past couple of seasons. Vereen will probably start to see some spot duty next year and may be able to earn more playing time but I see him picking up more of the Kevin Faulk/Danny Woodhead work.

 
NE had 5 runs over 20 yards this year and Ridley had all of them. He was also in the hurry up offense at times until he fumbled the ball. So until then they trusted him in pass protection a weakness of many rookies. He needs to work on ball security to stay on the field which would be my biggest concern.

Both backs should see playing time increase the coming year and will improve with a full off season in the system. I've got a feeling the Veeren will the change up/pass back and Ridley will be the grinder/GLB. BUT Ridley needs to protect the ball to earn GLB.

 
I would also like to note. You don't trade up to grab a player in the 2nd Rnd to only use him as a Faulk/Woodhead type. I think the Pats think more of him then that. But the Pats offense is tough to pick up, no offseason really, nagging hamstring injury set Vereen back a bit. So don't count him out so quickly. :popcorn:

 
I have the entire Pats backfield as an avoid, unless a players can be had on the cheap. The Pats haven't had a consistent fantasy impact RB since BB has been the head coach. By consistent I mean over a period of more than a year. Sure there have been a few useful RBs, like Dillon for a season a while back, and BGE in 2009. BB uses a RRBC, always has; always will IMO.

 
I have the entire Pats backfield as an avoid, unless a players can be had on the cheap. The Pats haven't had a consistent fantasy impact RB since BB has been the head coach. By consistent I mean over a period of more than a year. Sure there have been a few useful RBs, like Dillon for a season a while back, and BGE in 2009. BB uses a RRBC, always has; always will IMO.
I kind of disagree on the "always has, always will" thing. If someone steps up and is clearly a better option than the others, then I think he gets the ball. Right now they don't have an every down back so they are making do with what they have, and have done that for a while. If he ALWAYS had a RBBC then Corey Dillon would never have had that year and neither would BGE. I think he'd like to rely on one guy (or maybe two), but hasn't had a guy he can rely on. Whether Vereen or Ridley are that guy I don't know.
 
I would also like to note. You don't trade up to grab a player in the 2nd Rnd to only use him as a Faulk/Woodhead type. I think the Pats think more of him then that. But the Pats offense is tough to pick up, no offseason really, nagging hamstring injury set Vereen back a bit. So don't count him out so quickly. :popcorn:
Are you sure about that? Would you have made the following statement before the 3rd round happened last year?...You don't trade up to grab a RB in the 2nd RD only to turn around and grab another RB in the 3rd round.
 
I have the entire Pats backfield as an avoid, unless a players can be had on the cheap. The Pats haven't had a consistent fantasy impact RB since BB has been the head coach. By consistent I mean over a period of more than a year. Sure there have been a few useful RBs, like Dillon for a season a while back, and BGE in 2009. BB uses a RRBC, always has; always will IMO.
I kind of disagree on the "always has, always will" thing. If someone steps up and is clearly a better option than the others, then I think he gets the ball. Right now they don't have an every down back so they are making do with what they have, and have done that for a while. If he ALWAYS had a RBBC then Corey Dillon would never have had that year and neither would BGE. I think he'd like to rely on one guy (or maybe two), but hasn't had a guy he can rely on. Whether Vereen or Ridley are that guy I don't know.
Yea, the "always will" is tongue and cheek, but until I see strong evidence to the contrary is my position towards Pats RBs. By strong evidence, I mean two straight years from a single RB producing top 15 numbers.
 
I don't think either of them is particularly special and I'd be tempted to say that the Pats are happy just to fill the RB position on the cheap except they spent two 2nds on them last year. The first time they really hit on a good RB pretty much all the incumbents on the team will see their value tank.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Brady will be 35 next season. Won't be long until the Pats will need their running game again. I'd buy low on both but Ridley looks more like the workhorse.

 
I'd buy low on both for the long term, Ridley and Vereen. They will eventually make a nice thunder and lightning style tandem

 
'32 Counter Pass said:
'finito said:
'32 Counter Pass said:
I have the entire Pats backfield as an avoid, unless a players can be had on the cheap. The Pats haven't had a consistent fantasy impact RB since BB has been the head coach. By consistent I mean over a period of more than a year. Sure there have been a few useful RBs, like Dillon for a season a while back, and BGE in 2009. BB uses a RRBC, always has; always will IMO.
I kind of disagree on the "always has, always will" thing. If someone steps up and is clearly a better option than the others, then I think he gets the ball. Right now they don't have an every down back so they are making do with what they have, and have done that for a while. If he ALWAYS had a RBBC then Corey Dillon would never have had that year and neither would BGE. I think he'd like to rely on one guy (or maybe two), but hasn't had a guy he can rely on. Whether Vereen or Ridley are that guy I don't know.
Yea, the "always will" is tongue and cheek, but until I see strong evidence to the contrary is my position towards Pats RBs. By strong evidence, I mean two straight years from a single RB producing top 15 numbers.
The Pats were also WRBC... until they weren't. As soon as they got Wes Welker and Randy Moss, they became huge producers, making people forget about the David Givins and Troy Browns of the world. But time will tell.
 
I would also like to note. You don't trade up to grab a player in the 2nd Rnd to only use him as a Faulk/Woodhead type. I think the Pats think more of him then that. But the Pats offense is tough to pick up, no offseason really, nagging hamstring injury set Vereen back a bit. So don't count him out so quickly. :popcorn:
Says who? What people don't do this? Are these the same people who wouldn't have traded for Randy Moss after his performance in Oakland?

Are these the same people who wouldn't have traded away Randy Moss in the middle of a season, leaving them with no other deep threat?

Are these the same people who wouldn't have traded for Albert Haynesworth and Chad Ochocinco?

Are these the same people who wouldn't have taken 2 TEs in the first 4 rounds of the same draft?

Are these the same people who wouldn't have signed a fringe player away from the Jets PS, only to give him a substantial role?

Trying to suggest that "you don't trade up for a guy to play a role" is faulty logic, especially when you consider the types of moves the Patriots & BB have made.

 
I would also like to note. You don't trade up to grab a player in the 2nd Rnd to only use him as a Faulk/Woodhead type. I think the Pats think more of him then that. But the Pats offense is tough to pick up, no offseason really, nagging hamstring injury set Vereen back a bit. So don't count him out so quickly. :popcorn:
Says who? What people don't do this? Are these the same people who wouldn't have traded for Randy Moss after his performance in Oakland?

Are these the same people who wouldn't have traded away Randy Moss in the middle of a season, leaving them with no other deep threat?

Are these the same people who wouldn't have traded for Albert Haynesworth and Chad Ochocinco?

Are these the same people who wouldn't have taken 2 TEs in the first 4 rounds of the same draft?

Are these the same people who wouldn't have signed a fringe player away from the Jets PS, only to give him a substantial role?

Trying to suggest that "you don't trade up for a guy to play a role" is faulty logic, especially when you consider the types of moves the Patriots & BB have made.
I live in NE and wouldn't touch the NE backfield. BB is such a game plan oriented coach that one week he wants to pound the rock, the next week he wants to spread it out. Ridley and Vereen are worth rostering of course, as I have, but starting a NE back is as risky as it gets. As a NE fan, I think the ideal scenario would be Ridley as the sustaining back and Vereen to hit the big plays on the perimeter and in the passing game. One thing that gives BB a chubby is ball security though and Law Firm has never fumbled in his career. It's ugly here IMO.
 
I had both in my dynasty and traded Ridley away. I am not excited about the situation and kept the one that I thought had the greatest upside.

 
If BJGE is gone it will be Ridley. Go with the hammer. That is who will score the TD's. If BJGE stays it will be him at the goal line.

 
Vereen way out in front in this poll. He was slightly over drafted in most leagues after then NFL draft (esp. by me) but cooled off by late August after the hammy. I think he's this year's CJ Spiller and expect he will get some opportunities in 2012 but still not be worth much after the season because of his situation.

 
Like every year in recent memory . . . who knows. The Pats have embraced RBBC since Dillon had a monster year like 8 years ago. It would not surprise if the guys they have now all return (except for Faulk) . . . if they drafted another RB . . . or if they signed a veteran free agent (like they did with Taylor, Jordan, Morris, etc.). I don't think there is a good way to evaluate this until we see the actual opening day roster.

 
As always with Belichick, it's all about the roles that they can carve out for themselves. If Ridley can hang onto the football, he's already shown he is capable of handling 10-15 carries and being a bit of an inside/outside runner. Vereen's been injured and essentially red-shirted last year but he's pretty known for his speed. I can see Vereen battling Woodhead in order to try and claim a 3rd down role with potential to get more touches depending on how Ridley performs.

 
If Ridley can hang onto the football, he's already shown he is capable of handling 10-15 carries.
I don't want to pick too many nits . . . but a guy with 87 career carries has proven he's capable? Ridley had 4 games in the bandwidth you mentioned in terms of workload. Ridley at this point has a slight edge over Vereen heading forward, but I don't think either one has proven anything consistently at this point. If Ridley actually HAD proven he could hang on to the ball and was capable of 10-15 carries, he would have had more than 4 total carries in the Pats post season SB run. As I mentioned earlier, it's too soon to try to unwrap what will happen in the NE backfield until we know who will be on their roster.
 
If Ridley can hang onto the football, he's already shown he is capable of handling 10-15 carries.
I don't want to pick too many nits . . . but a guy with 87 career carries has proven he's capable? Ridley had 4 games in the bandwidth you mentioned in terms of workload. Ridley at this point has a slight edge over Vereen heading forward, but I don't think either one has proven anything consistently at this point. If Ridley actually HAD proven he could hang on to the ball and was capable of 10-15 carries, he would have had more than 4 total carries in the Pats post season SB run. As I mentioned earlier, it's too soon to try to unwrap what will happen in the NE backfield until we know who will be on their roster.
David.....I guess this is probably your answer....but if we held your feet to the fire and you had to say right now....who is the guy to have.......1. if BJGE returns....which one of the three

2. if BJGE does not return and nobody else is brought in...which one of the two

thanks...

 
If Ridley can hang onto the football, he's already shown he is capable of handling 10-15 carries.
I don't want to pick too many nits . . . but a guy with 87 career carries has proven he's capable? Ridley had 4 games in the bandwidth you mentioned in terms of workload. Ridley at this point has a slight edge over Vereen heading forward, but I don't think either one has proven anything consistently at this point. If Ridley actually HAD proven he could hang on to the ball and was capable of 10-15 carries, he would have had more than 4 total carries in the Pats post season SB run. As I mentioned earlier, it's too soon to try to unwrap what will happen in the NE backfield until we know who will be on their roster.
David.....I guess this is probably your answer....but if we held your feet to the fire and you had to say right now....who is the guy to have.......1. if BJGE returns....which one of the three

2. if BJGE does not return and nobody else is brought in...which one of the two

thanks...
I think we have seen the pecking order. BJGE - Ridley - Woodhead - Vereen. Until we see otherwise, I would think that would be the way they stack up to start the year. Vereen should be able to leap frog Woodhead. Take BJGE out of the picture, the order should stay the same . . . unless they bring in someone else. As far as I can tell (and would predict), I do not see the 2012 Pats having a bell cow RB and they will again use a RB rotation. IMO, the guy with the most carries will end up similar to Maroney or BJGE the past few years in terms of workload (probably 175-200 carries) . . . which would be ok if that guy also got the TDs like Green Ellis did in 2010. You never know with NE . . . they could trade for or draft a first round RB or they could stay with what they have and ignore the position entorely (and all points in between).I have been advocating that they beef up the run to help keep the defense off the field and better control the clock, especially late in games. Obviously that hasn't been the case as much as it was in their glory years. Like Maroney, Ridley looked really good at times and not so good on others. With the return of McDaniels, I don't think they will go back to the ball control offense they had in the early 00s. They won titles with pitching and defense, yet now are short of both. They are perennial contenders, but they clearly are not a cut above other teams like they once were.

 
If Ridley can hang onto the football, he's already shown he is capable of handling 10-15 carries.
I don't want to pick too many nits . . . but a guy with 87 career carries has proven he's capable? Ridley had 4 games in the bandwidth you mentioned in terms of workload. Ridley at this point has a slight edge over Vereen heading forward, but I don't think either one has proven anything consistently at this point. If Ridley actually HAD proven he could hang on to the ball and was capable of 10-15 carries, he would have had more than 4 total carries in the Pats post season SB run. As I mentioned earlier, it's too soon to try to unwrap what will happen in the NE backfield until we know who will be on their roster.
I appreciate the response.1: I think part of the lack of use for Ridley in the playoffs could have been maybe he hit a rookie wall (remember that he also, like Vereen, was coming off a short offseason) and maybe Belichick felt more confident utilizing Hernandez as a gimmick along with BJGE/Woodhead offering more experience? Woodhead got a similar workload in the playoffs that he had gotten all season and BJGE had at least 10 carries in each playoff game, suggesting BJGE may have just been getting healthy from injury.2: While it's a very small sample size, I think it's also pretty telling that Ridley started getting used a ton at the end of the season. In Weeks 14, 15, and 16 he was increasing his carries from 11 to 13 to 15 and being pretty productive in a YPC sense.What's telling is that Ridley rarely caught the ball, suggesting Vereen/Woodhead could fill in receiving wise. Depending on what happens with Law Firm, I could see Green-Ellis and Ridley rotating as the downhill runners while Woodhead and Vereen offered up the ability to be a checkdown receiver or 5th receiver in a hurry up.
 
If Ridley can hang onto the football, he's already shown he is capable of handling 10-15 carries.
I don't want to pick too many nits . . . but a guy with 87 career carries has proven he's capable? Ridley had 4 games in the bandwidth you mentioned in terms of workload. Ridley at this point has a slight edge over Vereen heading forward, but I don't think either one has proven anything consistently at this point. If Ridley actually HAD proven he could hang on to the ball and was capable of 10-15 carries, he would have had more than 4 total carries in the Pats post season SB run. As I mentioned earlier, it's too soon to try to unwrap what will happen in the NE backfield until we know who will be on their roster.
David.....I guess this is probably your answer....but if we held your feet to the fire and you had to say right now....who is the guy to have.......1. if BJGE returns....which one of the three

2. if BJGE does not return and nobody else is brought in...which one of the two

thanks...
I think we have seen the pecking order. BJGE - Ridley - Woodhead - Vereen. Until we see otherwise, I would think that would be the way they stack up to start the year. Vereen should be able to leap frog Woodhead. Take BJGE out of the picture, the order should stay the same . . . unless they bring in someone else. As far as I can tell (and would predict), I do not see the 2012 Pats having a bell cow RB and they will again use a RB rotation. IMO, the guy with the most carries will end up similar to Maroney or BJGE the past few years in terms of workload (probably 175-200 carries) . . . which would be ok if that guy also got the TDs like Green Ellis did in 2010. You never know with NE . . . they could trade for or draft a first round RB or they could stay with what they have and ignore the position entorely (and all points in between).I have been advocating that they beef up the run to help keep the defense off the field and better control the clock, especially late in games. Obviously that hasn't been the case as much as it was in their glory years. Like Maroney, Ridley looked really good at times and not so good on others. With the return of McDaniels, I don't think they will go back to the ball control offense they had in the early 00s. They won titles with pitching and defense, yet now are short of both. They are perennial contenders, but they clearly are not a cut above other teams like they once were.
I'd like to see them move on from Benny or at least have his role reduced...he's a nice and reliable runner but he's almost useless in the passing game and that's not a good thing with this offense...I'd like to see more diversity in the backfield...I'd like to see RBs back there that are just as dangerous running as they are receiving as well as having a little more big-play ability...with Benny you can almost guess 80% of the time when he's going to carry it...as for next year I agree that anything is possible at RB...nothing would surprise me...I like what I saw with Ridley but he's still somewhat of a mystery and Vereen is a complete mystery at this point...I would not be shocked if they made these two the centerpieces of the RB position but would also not be surprised by anything they would bring in be it a first-round pick or a younger version of Sammy Morris...Woodhead is what he is...he'll help but his role needs to be reduced because he doesn't give you enough big-play ability...if the Pats can become more dangerous in the backfield it will only help give the passing game more room to operate...if they are looking to add another young back the kid who intrigues me is Martin from Boise State...he's a bowling ball that seems to run with attitude...
 
If Ridley can hang onto the football, he's already shown he is capable of handling 10-15 carries.
I don't want to pick too many nits . . . but a guy with 87 career carries has proven he's capable? Ridley had 4 games in the bandwidth you mentioned in terms of workload. Ridley at this point has a slight edge over Vereen heading forward, but I don't think either one has proven anything consistently at this point. If Ridley actually HAD proven he could hang on to the ball and was capable of 10-15 carries, he would have had more than 4 total carries in the Pats post season SB run. As I mentioned earlier, it's too soon to try to unwrap what will happen in the NE backfield until we know who will be on their roster.
I appreciate the response.1: I think part of the lack of use for Ridley in the playoffs could have been maybe he hit a rookie wall (remember that he also, like Vereen, was coming off a short offseason) and maybe Belichick felt more confident utilizing Hernandez as a gimmick along with BJGE/Woodhead offering more experience? Woodhead got a similar workload in the playoffs that he had gotten all season and BJGE had at least 10 carries in each playoff game, suggesting BJGE may have just been getting healthy from injury.2: While it's a very small sample size, I think it's also pretty telling that Ridley started getting used a ton at the end of the season. In Weeks 14, 15, and 16 he was increasing his carries from 11 to 13 to 15 and being pretty productive in a YPC sense.What's telling is that Ridley rarely caught the ball, suggesting Vereen/Woodhead could fill in receiving wise. Depending on what happens with Law Firm, I could see Green-Ellis and Ridley rotating as the downhill runners while Woodhead and Vereen offered up the ability to be a checkdown receiver or 5th receiver in a hurry up.
From all accounts it was Ridley's fumbling that put him on the bench in the playoffs...
 
I like Vereen more but, I want nothing to do with the NE RB situation at all no matter the RB.

 
What's telling is that Ridley rarely caught the ball, suggesting Vereen/Woodhead could fill in receiving wise. Depending on what happens with Law Firm, I could see Green-Ellis and Ridley rotating as the downhill runners while Woodhead and Vereen offered up the ability to be a checkdown receiver or 5th receiver in a hurry up.
Mix and match the names over the years, and this paragraph shows why it's tough to fall in love with a Pats RB for fantasy purposes. You outlined perfectly how 4 guys could be used . . . not enough for one guy to be a true stud and enough for any of them to have a week or two of fantasy success in any given week.I admit that Ridley looked good sporadically and overall his ypc was encouraging. Maybe with a full offseason of work he could get a legit shot to start and get a big workload. Anything is possible at this point.
 
I'd like to see them move on from Benny or at least have his role reduced...he's a nice and reliable runner but he's almost useless in the passing game and that's not a good thing with this offense...I'd like to see more diversity in the backfield...I'd like to see RBs back there that are just as dangerous running as they are receiving as well as having a little more big-play ability...with Benny you can almost guess 80% of the time when he's going to carry it...as for next year I agree that anything is possible at RB...nothing would surprise me...I like what I saw with Ridley but he's still somewhat of a mystery and Vereen is a complete mystery at this point...I would not be shocked if they made these two the centerpieces of the RB position but would also not be surprised by anything they would bring in be it a first-round pick or a younger version of Sammy Morris...Woodhead is what he is...he'll help but his role needs to be reduced because he doesn't give you enough big-play ability...if the Pats can become more dangerous in the backfield it will only help give the passing game more room to operate...if they are looking to add another young back the kid who intrigues me is Martin from Boise State...he's a bowling ball that seems to run with attitude...
Since it's Festivus and we have moved on to the airing of grievances, my pet peeve with the Pats has been that if I could figure out what play they were going to run based on the backs lining up next to Brady, so could the opposition. It's great to have specialists, but like you said if BJGE was in the game teams didn't really need to cover him. In recent memory, they really haven't had an all purpose back to keep teams off balance. You and I agree with that. CLEARLY they have not gotten many big plays from the RBs very often (and certainly not rushing the ball). A guy with breakaway speed would be cause for concern for defensive coordinators. Green Ellis is not going to outrun anyone.My other pet requirement for the Pats to return to the promised land would be the ability to run the football when teams KNOW they have to run the football. They have not been very good in that area in recent years and that has stalled many drives and forced them to punt the ball away at key points at the end of games. They used to be able to grind it out, sustain one L-O-N-G time consuming drive, and put up points in their last possession to put the game out of reach. That's a pipe dream these past few years, so extending a 6 point lead to 13 points and kicking off with 45 seconds to go has turned into a 6 point lead and punting with 4 mintues to go. HUGE difference.
 
I'd like to see them move on from Benny or at least have his role reduced...he's a nice and reliable runner but he's almost useless in the passing game and that's not a good thing with this offense...I'd like to see more diversity in the backfield...I'd like to see RBs back there that are just as dangerous running as they are receiving as well as having a little more big-play ability...with Benny you can almost guess 80% of the time when he's going to carry it...as for next year I agree that anything is possible at RB...nothing would surprise me...I like what I saw with Ridley but he's still somewhat of a mystery and Vereen is a complete mystery at this point...I would not be shocked if they made these two the centerpieces of the RB position but would also not be surprised by anything they would bring in be it a first-round pick or a younger version of Sammy Morris...Woodhead is what he is...he'll help but his role needs to be reduced because he doesn't give you enough big-play ability...if the Pats can become more dangerous in the backfield it will only help give the passing game more room to operate...if they are looking to add another young back the kid who intrigues me is Martin from Boise State...he's a bowling ball that seems to run with attitude...
Since it's Festivus and we have moved on to the airing of grievances, my pet peeve with the Pats has been that if I could figure out what play they were going to run based on the backs lining up next to Brady, so could the opposition. It's great to have specialists, but like you said if BJGE was in the game teams didn't really need to cover him. In recent memory, they really haven't had an all purpose back to keep teams off balance. You and I agree with that. CLEARLY they have not gotten many big plays from the RBs very often (and certainly not rushing the ball). A guy with breakaway speed would be cause for concern for defensive coordinators. Green Ellis is not going to outrun anyone.My other pet requirement for the Pats to return to the promised land would be the ability to run the football when teams KNOW they have to run the football. They have not been very good in that area in recent years and that has stalled many drives and forced them to punt the ball away at key points at the end of games. They used to be able to grind it out, sustain one L-O-N-G time consuming drive, and put up points in their last possession to put the game out of reach. That's a pipe dream these past few years, so extending a 6 point lead to 13 points and kicking off with 45 seconds to go has turned into a 6 point lead and punting with 4 mintues to go. HUGE difference.
Could not agree more...if I can sit on my couch drinking a beer and predict when the Pats are going to run how difficult can it be for an NFL defense...two plays which are perfect examples of this were the last drives against the Ravens and the Giants...they absolutely telegraphed they were going to run (Polite actually came in for the run against the Giants) Benny and both plays got stuffed with ease and contributed to having to punt...they have had a decent YPC in the past few years but I have felt that was somewhat of a mirage as teams could lay off the run a little knowing they were not going to get burned too badly...
 
I would also like to note. You don't trade up to grab a player in the 2nd Rnd to only use him as a Faulk/Woodhead type. I think the Pats think more of him then that. But the Pats offense is tough to pick up, no offseason really, nagging hamstring injury set Vereen back a bit. So don't count him out so quickly. :popcorn:
Are you sure about that? Would you have made the following statement before the 3rd round happened last year?...You don't trade up to grab a RB in the 2nd RD only to turn around and grab another RB in the 3rd round.
More to the point, Kevin Faulk was a second-round draft pick, so the answer is clearly, yes, the Patriots can use a pick in the second round on a player they intend to put in a Faulk-like role.
 
I would also like to note. You don't trade up to grab a player in the 2nd Rnd to only use him as a Faulk/Woodhead type. I think the Pats think more of him then that. But the Pats offense is tough to pick up, no offseason really, nagging hamstring injury set Vereen back a bit. So don't count him out so quickly. :popcorn:
Are you sure about that? Would you have made the following statement before the 3rd round happened last year?...You don't trade up to grab a RB in the 2nd RD only to turn around and grab another RB in the 3rd round.
More to the point, Kevin Faulk was a second-round draft pick, so the answer is clearly, yes, the Patriots can use a pick in the second round on a player they intend to put in a Faulk-like role.
I think before we go assuming that is how Vereen will be used the rest of his career in New England. WOuld you care to provide me some evidence to back that claim up? In other words. After Jahvid Best left CAL. Vereen was used as an all purpose back his last couple of seasons. Was Faulk used like that in college (An All purpose back) and the primary back or not? If he wasn't then I don't think we can assume that. :)
 
I would also like to note. You don't trade up to grab a player in the 2nd Rnd to only use him as a Faulk/Woodhead type. I think the Pats think more of him then that. But the Pats offense is tough to pick up, no offseason really, nagging hamstring injury set Vereen back a bit. So don't count him out so quickly. :popcorn:
Are you sure about that? Would you have made the following statement before the 3rd round happened last year?...You don't trade up to grab a RB in the 2nd RD only to turn around and grab another RB in the 3rd round.
More to the point, Kevin Faulk was a second-round draft pick, so the answer is clearly, yes, the Patriots can use a pick in the second round on a player they intend to put in a Faulk-like role.
While I agree that they could do this with Vereen (it's a guess right now) Faulk is not a good example...he wasn't drafted by BB and was given an opportunity to be a lead back early in his career but found his "real" role later...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I would also like to note. You don't trade up to grab a player in the 2nd Rnd to only use him as a Faulk/Woodhead type. I think the Pats think more of him then that. But the Pats offense is tough to pick up, no offseason really, nagging hamstring injury set Vereen back a bit. So don't count him out so quickly. :popcorn:
Are you sure about that? Would you have made the following statement before the 3rd round happened last year?...You don't trade up to grab a RB in the 2nd RD only to turn around and grab another RB in the 3rd round.
More to the point, Kevin Faulk was a second-round draft pick, so the answer is clearly, yes, the Patriots can use a pick in the second round on a player they intend to put in a Faulk-like role.
I think before we go assuming that is how Vereen will be used the rest of his career in New England. WOuld you care to provide me some evidence to back that claim up? In other words. After Jahvid Best left CAL. Vereen was used as an all purpose back his last couple of seasons. Was Faulk used like that in college (An All purpose back) and the primary back or not? If he wasn't then I don't think we can assume that. :)
Kevin Faulk was a four-year starter at LSU, still holds the career rushing yardage record there and is in the top-50 all-time in NCAA career rushing yardage.Vereen probably has the skills to be an NFL starting running back, but that doesn't mean the Pats will use him that way.

 
I'd like to see them move on from Benny or at least have his role reduced...he's a nice and reliable runner but he's almost useless in the passing game and that's not a good thing with this offense...I'd like to see more diversity in the backfield...I'd like to see RBs back there that are just as dangerous running as they are receiving as well as having a little more big-play ability...with Benny you can almost guess 80% of the time when he's going to carry it...as for next year I agree that anything is possible at RB...nothing would surprise me...I like what I saw with Ridley but he's still somewhat of a mystery and Vereen is a complete mystery at this point...I would not be shocked if they made these two the centerpieces of the RB position but would also not be surprised by anything they would bring in be it a first-round pick or a younger version of Sammy Morris...Woodhead is what he is...he'll help but his role needs to be reduced because he doesn't give you enough big-play ability...if the Pats can become more dangerous in the backfield it will only help give the passing game more room to operate...if they are looking to add another young back the kid who intrigues me is Martin from Boise State...he's a bowling ball that seems to run with attitude...
Since it's Festivus and we have moved on to the airing of grievances, my pet peeve with the Pats has been that if I could figure out what play they were going to run based on the backs lining up next to Brady, so could the opposition. It's great to have specialists, but like you said if BJGE was in the game teams didn't really need to cover him. In recent memory, they really haven't had an all purpose back to keep teams off balance. You and I agree with that. CLEARLY they have not gotten many big plays from the RBs very often (and certainly not rushing the ball). A guy with breakaway speed would be cause for concern for defensive coordinators. Green Ellis is not going to outrun anyone.My other pet requirement for the Pats to return to the promised land would be the ability to run the football when teams KNOW they have to run the football. They have not been very good in that area in recent years and that has stalled many drives and forced them to punt the ball away at key points at the end of games. They used to be able to grind it out, sustain one L-O-N-G time consuming drive, and put up points in their last possession to put the game out of reach. That's a pipe dream these past few years, so extending a 6 point lead to 13 points and kicking off with 45 seconds to go has turned into a 6 point lead and punting with 4 mintues to go. HUGE difference.
Could not agree more...if I can sit on my couch drinking a beer and predict when the Pats are going to run how difficult can it be for an NFL defense...two plays which are perfect examples of this were the last drives against the Ravens and the Giants...they absolutely telegraphed they were going to run (Polite actually came in for the run against the Giants) Benny and both plays got stuffed with ease and contributed to having to punt...they have had a decent YPC in the past few years but I have felt that was somewhat of a mirage as teams could lay off the run a little knowing they were not going to get burned too badly...
I assumed that's why they drafted Vereen. He has the ability to be an all-purpose back and not tip off what plays they would run.
 
I would also like to note. You don't trade up to grab a player in the 2nd Rnd to only use him as a Faulk/Woodhead type. I think the Pats think more of him then that. But the Pats offense is tough to pick up, no offseason really, nagging hamstring injury set Vereen back a bit. So don't count him out so quickly. :popcorn:
Are you sure about that? Would you have made the following statement before the 3rd round happened last year?...You don't trade up to grab a RB in the 2nd RD only to turn around and grab another RB in the 3rd round.
More to the point, Kevin Faulk was a second-round draft pick, so the answer is clearly, yes, the Patriots can use a pick in the second round on a player they intend to put in a Faulk-like role.
I think before we go assuming that is how Vereen will be used the rest of his career in New England. WOuld you care to provide me some evidence to back that claim up? In other words. After Jahvid Best left CAL. Vereen was used as an all purpose back his last couple of seasons. Was Faulk used like that in college (An All purpose back) and the primary back or not? If he wasn't then I don't think we can assume that. :)
Kevin Faulk was a four-year starter at LSU, still holds the career rushing yardage record there and is in the top-50 all-time in NCAA career rushing yardage.Vereen probably has the skills to be an NFL starting running back, but that doesn't mean the Pats will use him that way.
:own3d:
 
I think Vereen is a nice stash away RB. A guy you can get on the cheap. Ridley has talent as well but I like Vereen a bit better for the long run.

 
It's starting to look like BGJE will move on from NE......I would have expected a resign by the Patriots if it was going to happen. How do people see this shaking out now? Vereen or Ridley?

 
'Carl Eller said:
It's starting to look like BGJE will move on from NE......I would have expected a resign by the Patriots if it was going to happen. How do people see this shaking out now? Vereen or Ridley?
As far as I can tell, the Pats likely told BJGE to test the waters and come back to them with his best offer. If it at a reasonable price, the Pats would probably match it. They still have an interest in BJGE . . . but at the right price.Even if he were to leave, that doesn't automatically mean they go with who they have. They could still sign, trade, or draft another back. That being said, Ridley would most likely get first crack at a bigger workload (based on what we know currently).
 
Who's the last patriot back to be worth anything? Dillon I would say. Both are useless, they throw the ball non-stop and they rotate 3 to 4 rbs.

 
The Patriots under BB always like to have a grinder and a slasher. The grinder is a big back who gets most of the carries and most of the goal-line work. The slasher is more of 3rd down speed or hands guy.

It was Antowain Smith and Kevin Faulk in the grinder/slasher role, then Corey Dillon and Kevin Faulk, then BJGE and Woodhead.

The grinder will sometimes not get a bunch of carries when they throw the ball a lot but they do like to grind it out in poor weather late in the season at home.

It's just wrong to say Pats RBs have no value. Whoever has played the grinder role has had significant value on occasion, particularly late in the year. The slasher has a little bit of value now and again, but not really.

Btw, if it's not obvious, they drafted Ridley to be the grinder and Vereen to be the slasher. Ridley is the back to own here. Vereen's upside is Kevin Faulk.

 
The Patriots under BB always like to have a grinder and a slasher. The grinder is a big back who gets most of the carries and most of the goal-line work. The slasher is more of 3rd down speed or hands guy.It was Antowain Smith and Kevin Faulk in the grinder/slasher role, then Corey Dillon and Kevin Faulk, then BJGE and Woodhead.The grinder will sometimes not get a bunch of carries when they throw the ball a lot but they do like to grind it out in poor weather late in the season at home.It's just wrong to say Pats RBs have no value. Whoever has played the grinder role has had significant value on occasion, particularly late in the year. The slasher has a little bit of value now and again, but not really.Btw, if it's not obvious, they drafted Ridley to be the grinder and Vereen to be the slasher. Ridley is the back to own here. Vereen's upside is Kevin Faulk.
There could be a wrinkle here since both Vereen and Ridley may have the ability to both run and catch...Dillon, Antowain and BGJE were all running threats who were limited in the passing game while Faulk was pretty much your prototypical third down RB....these guys all had distinct roles...while both Ridley and especially Vereen are somewhat unknown quantities one or maybe both could be more versatile than your normal Patriot back...if that is the case it will be interesting to see how they are used...if history tells us one thing with the Pats it's that BB will change how he does things depending on the type of talent and confidence he has in a player...
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Users who are viewing this thread

Top