What to make of the Patriots "RBBC" (1 Viewer)

[David Yudkin]

I went through all the Pats games since 2007 to see what happened over time. I was mostly concerned about how often their top of the depth chart guy fared each week in terms of how often he touched the football. As I suspected, the Pats usually gave that guy the ball pretty consistently.

Looking over the game numbers below, be aware that the first back listed each week is the one I used for analysis. Secondary or 3rd down backs were left out entirely. So the numbers listed first are what the primary back did each week. By that I mean, If Maroney was the #1 and got hurt and he passed the baton to Morris, I only counted Morris' touches that week, even if someone else had more touches.

2007

Maroney 20

Maroney 15

Maroney 19 (Hurt) *** RESET ***

Morris 23

Morris 23

*Morris 10 (Hurt) / Faulk 15 *** RESET ***

*Faulk 7 / Maroney 6

Maroney 16

Maroney 15

*Maroney 6 (Hurt), Evans 12, Eckel 11

Maroney 10

Maroney 15

Maroney 8

Maroney 26

Maroney 14

Maroney 19

Playoffs

Maroney 24

Maroney 26

Maroney 16

Including playoffs, #1 back accounted for 289 touches (18.1 touches per game) in the 16 games where there was a healthy RB starter (Maroney or Morris) and no mid-game injuries.

I ignored 3 games where injuries caused a mess and there was no clear RB either mid-game or because of injuries.

2008

*Maroney 10 (Hurt), Morris 15 *** RESET ***

Morris 10, Jordan 11

Morris 10

Morris 16

Morris 14, Faulk 11

Morris 16 (Hurt), BJGE 13 *** RESET ***

BJGE 9, Faulk 17

BJGE 16, Faulk 15

BJGE 26 *** RESET ***

Morris 5, Faulk 12

Morris 10, Faulk 14

Morris 11, Faulk 13

Morris 11

Morris 14, Jordan 12

Morris 17, Jordan 20

Morris 24, Jordan 20

In the 15 games where there was a healthy RB starter (Morris or BJGE), the #1 back accounted for 209 touches (13.9 touches per game).

Given the rash of injuries to the RBs in 2008 (and Brady being out), this season was a mess to try to get a grasp on who the top back was.

2009

Maroney 12

*Maroney 6 (Hurt), Taylor 8 *** RESET ***

Taylor 21 (Hurt) *** RESET ***

Morris 11

Morris 19 *** RESET ***

Maroney 18

Maroney 13

Maroney 20

Maroney 15, Faulk 14

Maroney 22

Maroney 18

Maroney 14

Maroney 24, Faulk 13

Maroney 23 (Benched) *** RESET ***

Morris 13

Morris 10

In the 15 games where there was a healthy RB and no in-game injury, the #1 back accounted for 253 touches (16.9 touches per game).

2010

Taylor 16

*Taylor 5 (Hurt), BJGE 10 *** RESET ***

BJGE 10

BJGE 17

BJGE 10, Woodhead 16

BJGE 11, Woodhead 11

BJGE 18, Woodhead, 11

BJGE 9, Woodhead 11

BJGE 22

BJGE 22, Woodhead 11

BJGE 12, Woodhead 10

BJGE 19

BJGE 21

BJGE 8, Woodhead 10

BJGE 20, Woodhead 16

BJGE 21, Taylor 10

Playoffs

BJGE 11, Woodhead 20

In the 16 games including playoffs that the Pats had a healthy #1 back and no in-game injury, the #1 back accounted for 247 touches (15.4 touches per game).

2011

BJGE 7, Woodhead 15

BJGE 18

BJGE 10

BJGE 17, Ridley 11

BJGE 28

BJGE 15

BJGE 5, Faulk 11

BJGE 13, Woodhead 10

BJGE 8

BJGE 21

BJGE 14

BJGE 6, Ridley 8

BJGE 5, Woodhead 9

BJGE 12, Ridley 11

BJGE 3, Ridley 13

BJGE 8, Ridley 15

Playoffs

BJGE 14

BJGE 15

BJGE 10, Woodhead 11

In 19 games counting BJGE as the #1 back, he accounted for 231 touches (12.2 touches per game). By the end of the year, it was clear the Pats were more interested in seeing what Ridley could do than just feeding the ball to BJGE. However, I still counted those weeks as BJGE as being the majority back (even though that clearly was not the case).

Using that framework, over the 81 games since 2007 where there were no in-game injuries or multiple RB injuries the game after an injury, the primary RB (NOT the guy that had the most touches each week) averaged 15.2 touches a game. That works out to 243 touches over a full season.

I suggest using those per game and full season numbers as a baseline for what to expect heading forward. Unless BB changes his strategy, there will again be a lead back and other role players. If Ridley is the top dog, stays healthy, and doesn't fumble (admittedly all big IFs), I would expect him to see around 250 touches on the season.

 

[Bobble Fett]

Let's take a gander at Wikipedia:

"According to The New York Times, in 2008, it was McDaniels who called the offensive plays for the 2005 season, although suggestions to that effect were made in 2005.[2][4] After the season, McDaniels was officially promoted to offensive coordinator, while retaining his responsibilities coaching the team's quarterbacks.

In the 2007 season, with McDaniels at the helm of the offense, the Patriots set NFL records, scoring 75 touchdowns (67 on offense, 50 passing and 17 rushing) and 589 points, leading to rumors that McDaniels might leave the Patriots for a head coaching job. McDaniels withdrew his name from consideration, however, during the Patriots' January 2008 playoff run. Shortly after the Patriots' loss in Super Bowl XLII, Patriots head coach Bill Belichick gave McDaniels a five-page typed report on what it takes to be an effective head coach and run a winning organization, which McDaniels termed "his bible." Throughout the 2008 season, the two would meet to discuss the report and allow McDaniels to ask non-coaching questions that he brought to later head coaching interviews.[6]

Starting quarterback Tom Brady suffered a season-ending injury in Week 1 of the 2008 season. McDaniels directed the Matt Cassel-led Patriots' offense as the team finished the season with an 11-5 record."

Welcome back McDaniels. I'll take me some Stevan Ridley folks!

 

[David Yudkin]

Let's take a gander at Wikipedia:"According to The New York Times, in 2008, it was McDaniels who called the offensive plays for the 2005 season, although suggestions to that effect were made in 2005.[2][4] After the season, McDaniels was officially promoted to offensive coordinator, while retaining his responsibilities coaching the team's quarterbacks.In the 2007 season, with McDaniels at the helm of the offense, the Patriots set NFL records, scoring 75 touchdowns (67 on offense, 50 passing and 17 rushing) and 589 points, leading to rumors that McDaniels might leave the Patriots for a head coaching job. McDaniels withdrew his name from consideration, however, during the Patriots' January 2008 playoff run. Shortly after the Patriots' loss in Super Bowl XLII, Patriots head coach Bill Belichick gave McDaniels a five-page typed report on what it takes to be an effective head coach and run a winning organization, which McDaniels termed "his bible." Throughout the 2008 season, the two would meet to discuss the report and allow McDaniels to ask non-coaching questions that he brought to later head coaching interviews.[6]Starting quarterback Tom Brady suffered a season-ending injury in Week 1 of the 2008 season. McDaniels directed the Matt Cassel-led Patriots' offense as the team finished the season with an 11-5 record."Welcome back McDaniels. I'll take me some Stevan Ridley folks!

You can pimp Ridley all you want, but IMO McDaniels had nothing to do with the RB usage. Maroney got hot at the end of the 2007 season, but indivdually the top dog RB saw the ball a lot less in 2008. So IMO, McDaniels being OC or not being the OC won't impact Ridley much at all. If you want to suggest that the offense will score more, that may be true, but again that may not be just a McDaniels thing. The Pats offense scored almost 300 points over the last 8 games of the regular season last year, and that was without the help of McDaniels.

 

[Bobble Fett]

Let's take a gander at Wikipedia:"According to The New York Times, in 2008, it was McDaniels who called the offensive plays for the 2005 season, although suggestions to that effect were made in 2005.[2][4] After the season, McDaniels was officially promoted to offensive coordinator, while retaining his responsibilities coaching the team's quarterbacks.In the 2007 season, with McDaniels at the helm of the offense, the Patriots set NFL records, scoring 75 touchdowns (67 on offense, 50 passing and 17 rushing) and 589 points, leading to rumors that McDaniels might leave the Patriots for a head coaching job. McDaniels withdrew his name from consideration, however, during the Patriots' January 2008 playoff run. Shortly after the Patriots' loss in Super Bowl XLII, Patriots head coach Bill Belichick gave McDaniels a five-page typed report on what it takes to be an effective head coach and run a winning organization, which McDaniels termed "his bible." Throughout the 2008 season, the two would meet to discuss the report and allow McDaniels to ask non-coaching questions that he brought to later head coaching interviews.[6]Starting quarterback Tom Brady suffered a season-ending injury in Week 1 of the 2008 season. McDaniels directed the Matt Cassel-led Patriots' offense as the team finished the season with an 11-5 record."Welcome back McDaniels. I'll take me some Stevan Ridley folks!

You can pimp Ridley all you want, but IMO McDaniels had nothing to do with the RB usage. Maroney got hot at the end of the 2007 season, but indivdually the top dog RB saw the ball a lot less in 2008. So IMO, McDaniels being OC or not being the OC won't impact Ridley much at all. If you want to suggest that the offense will score more, that may be true, but again that may not be just a McDaniels thing. The Pats offense scored almost 300 points over the last 8 games of the regular season last year, and that was without the help of McDaniels.

You're right. IMO is all we have isn't it? It is after all, a forum.Also, at least for Week 1, Ridley is the player who would run between the tackles on a regular basis throughout the game. Vereen may not even play.

 

[ImTheScientist]

I suggest using those per game and full season numbers as a baseline for what to expect heading forward. Unless BB changes his strategy, there will again be a lead back and other role players. If Ridley is the top dog, stays healthy, and doesn't fumble (admittedly all big IFs), I would expect him to see around 250 touches on the season.

I'll take the under.

 

[Bobble Fett]

"Patriots RB Shane Vereen (foot) has been ruled out for Week 1.

Source: Field Yates on Twitter"

 

[David Yudkin]

I suggest using those per game and full season numbers as a baseline for what to expect heading forward. Unless BB changes his strategy, there will again be a lead back and other role players. If Ridley is the top dog, stays healthy, and doesn't fumble (admittedly all big IFs), I would expect him to see around 250 touches on the season.

I'll take the under.

That's fine. I would agree with you if Ridley doesn't do well, gets hurt, or fumbles too often. Those would all lead to him not seeing 250 touches.But I don't see BB having a weekly RBBC where every week there is a different lead dog. I also don't see a history where he changed his pecking order at RB very often. Maroney got benched for having fumblitis at the worst times and they looked to see what they had in Ridley the last few weekws last year, but in the main the Pats have stayed the course for the most part.

 

[David Yudkin]

"Patriots RB Shane Vereen (foot) has been ruled out for Week 1.Source: Field Yates on Twitter"

I am not arguing with you that Ridley is a good play this week, but given the history of things, Vereen being out doesnot necessarily mean Ridley will get a ton of carries.Overall, Ridley's other concern will be that in some weeks the Pats don't game plan a lot of runs and/or they abandon the run in favor of the pass if they are losing. To me, that will happen some weeks no matter how good Ridley performs.

 

[bicycle_seat_sniffer]

dave seems to me you are in the vereen "camp" more than the ridley "camp".

I think if all backs are healthy, they will all get touches.

Plus like you said, sometimes the gameplan calls for little to no runs, or a specific back.

 

[David Yudkin]

dave seems to me you are in the vereen "camp" more than the ridley "camp".I think if all backs are healthy, they will all get touches. Plus like you said, sometimes the gameplan calls for little to no runs, or a specific back.

I am in the Ridley camp at this point. Vereen has not been able to stay healthy and effectively has lost his chance. I don't see anyone else getting enough touches to be anything but an after thought until Ridley loses the job or gets hurt.As I just outlined, the Pats generally havenot rotated who gets the ball all that often and there almost always has been one gut that gets the biggest piece of the pie. I see Ridley averaging 15 carries and a few receptions sprinkled in now and again.

 

[Bobble Fett]

dave seems to me you are in the vereen "camp" more than the ridley "camp".I think if all backs are healthy, they will all get touches. Plus like you said, sometimes the gameplan calls for little to no runs, or a specific back.

I am in the Ridley camp at this point. Vereen has not been able to stay healthy and effectively has lost his chance. I don't see anyone else getting enough touches to be anything but an after thought until Ridley loses the job or gets hurt.As I just outlined, the Pats generally havenot rotated who gets the ball all that often and there almost always has been one gut that gets the biggest piece of the pie. I see Ridley averaging 15 carries and a few receptions sprinkled in now and again.

This is funny, because like "bicycle_seat_sniffer" (hilarious name btw) said, it did sound like you were in the vereen camp.What is your personal projection for his stats David? i say 19 touches, 84 yds, 1 TD

 

[scrumptrulescent]

As I just outlined, the Pats generally havenot rotated who gets the ball all that often and there almost always has been one gut that gets the biggest piece of the pie. I see Ridley averaging 15 carries and a few receptions sprinkled in now and again.

What I'm taking from this thread is that Ridley could be a very solid #2 RB in fantasy, as long as he doesn't fumble. New England has been a solid rushing team for years, barring last year when they stunk, and you'd have to figure on 450-500 carries and 18-23 rushing TD's. I see no reason why Ridley wouldn't be in line for half of the carries and TD's at least.

 

[David Yudkin]

dave seems to me you are in the vereen "camp" more than the ridley "camp".I think if all backs are healthy, they will all get touches. Plus like you said, sometimes the gameplan calls for little to no runs, or a specific back.

I am in the Ridley camp at this point. Vereen has not been able to stay healthy and effectively has lost his chance. I don't see anyone else getting enough touches to be anything but an after thought until Ridley loses the job or gets hurt.As I just outlined, the Pats generally havenot rotated who gets the ball all that often and there almost always has been one gut that gets the biggest piece of the pie. I see Ridley averaging 15 carries and a few receptions sprinkled in now and again.

This is funny, because like "bicycle_seat_sniffer" (hilarious name btw) said, it did sound like you were in the vereen camp.What is your personal projection for his stats David? i say 19 touches, 84 yds, 1 TD

In the past, I was quick to point out theat Vereen was still a potential threat and a possible option to win the starting job (as witnessed by Vereen running with the starters in mincamp). But that was 5 months ago and things have changed for the better for Ridley and for the worse for Vereen. At this point, unless something happens to Ridley or he keeps losing the ball, I don't see Vereen as much more than a situational player or a guy that will go in on occasion to give Ridley a breather. Vereen may still get a handful of carries (like Woodhead), but not enough to get a big piece of the pie.

 

[David Yudkin]

As I just outlined, the Pats generally havenot rotated who gets the ball all that often and there almost always has been one gut that gets the biggest piece of the pie. I see Ridley averaging 15 carries and a few receptions sprinkled in now and again.

What I'm taking from this thread is that Ridley could be a very solid #2 RB in fantasy, as long as he doesn't fumble. New England has been a solid rushing team for years, barring last year when they stunk, and you'd have to figure on 450-500 carries and 18-23 rushing TD's. I see no reason why Ridley wouldn't be in line for half of the carries and TD's at least.

I think your RB totals are too high. Here is what they have done in the BB/Brady era . . .

Year	Car	Yds	Run TD	Rec	Yds	Rec TD2011	377	1573	14	37	363	02010	403	1828	18	61	609	12009	418	1794	17	74	608	12008	432	1988	19	81	743	32007	399	1695	14	62	583	12006	432	1818	20	89	755	42005	395	1388	15	84	761	12004	473	2094	15	70	575	22003	417	1510	8	88	679	12002	343	1378	8	93	823	52001	415	1593	14	93	745	6

The team is still a pass first team, the running game is suspect, and the defense is still a concern. I don't see the Pats running game going back up to what it was, not do I see the stable of backs catching as many passes as they used to.

 

[scrumptrulescent]

As I just outlined, the Pats generally havenot rotated who gets the ball all that often and there almost always has been one gut that gets the biggest piece of the pie. I see Ridley averaging 15 carries and a few receptions sprinkled in now and again.

What I'm taking from this thread is that Ridley could be a very solid #2 RB in fantasy, as long as he doesn't fumble. New England has been a solid rushing team for years, barring last year when they stunk, and you'd have to figure on 450-500 carries and 18-23 rushing TD's. I see no reason why Ridley wouldn't be in line for half of the carries and TD's at least.

I think your RB totals are too high. Here is what they have done in the BB/Brady era . . .

Year	Car	Yds	Run TD	Rec	Yds	Rec TD2011	377	1573	14	37	363	02010	403	1828	18	61	609	12009	418	1794	17	74	608	12008	432	1988	19	81	743	32007	399	1695	14	62	583	12006	432	1818	20	89	755	42005	395	1388	15	84	761	12004	473	2094	15	70	575	22003	417	1510	8	88	679	12002	343	1378	8	93	823	52001	415	1593	14	93	745	6

The team is still a pass first team, the running game is suspect, and the defense is still a concern. I don't see the Pats running game going back up to what it was, not do I see the stable of backs catching as many passes as they used to.

I looked up the regular season numbers for 2008-2011 on ESPN and got totally different statistics. Car Yards TD's2011 438 1764 182010 454 1973 192009 466 1921 192008 513 2278 21In those years 1 or 2 TD's from Brady may be sprinkled in but I'd still consider that a rushing TD. Maybe the difference is WR's or TE's rushin?

 

[David Yudkin]

As I just outlined, the Pats generally havenot rotated who gets the ball all that often and there almost always has been one gut that gets the biggest piece of the pie. I see Ridley averaging 15 carries and a few receptions sprinkled in now and again.

What I'm taking from this thread is that Ridley could be a very solid #2 RB in fantasy, as long as he doesn't fumble. New England has been a solid rushing team for years, barring last year when they stunk, and you'd have to figure on 450-500 carries and 18-23 rushing TD's. I see no reason why Ridley wouldn't be in line for half of the carries and TD's at least.

I think your RB totals are too high. Here is what they have done in the BB/Brady era . . .

Year	Car	Yds	Run TD	Rec	Yds	Rec TD2011	377	1573	14	37	363	02010	403	1828	18	61	609	12009	418	1794	17	74	608	12008	432	1988	19	81	743	32007	399	1695	14	62	583	12006	432	1818	20	89	755	42005	395	1388	15	84	761	12004	473	2094	15	70	575	22003	417	1510	8	88	679	12002	343	1378	8	93	823	52001	415	1593	14	93	745	6

The team is still a pass first team, the running game is suspect, and the defense is still a concern. I don't see the Pats running game going back up to what it was, not do I see the stable of backs catching as many passes as they used to.

I looked up the regular season numbers for 2008-2011 on ESPN and got totally different statistics. Car Yards TD's2011 438 1764 182010 454 1973 192009 466 1921 192008 513 2278 21In those years 1 or 2 TD's from Brady may be sprinkled in but I'd still consider that a rushing TD. Maybe the difference is WR's or TE's rushin?

My numbers are for RBs only.

 

[nb009]

What's the deal with all these Ridley pessimists? Are people expecting all 2-3 of their starting RBs to be studs? The guys the starting RB in a great offense, filling the shoes of someone who had back-to-back 10+ TD seasons, and likely didn't cost you a very expensive draft pick. Are you really afraid Woodhead will take over or something? As far as I know, Vereen can't seem to stay healthy and is likely out of the picture for the first few weeks.

 

[Bobble Fett]

well, actually. I don't really know if Ridley is they "starting RB" or not.... considering this is the Patriots "Unofficial Depth Chart" on their website:

RB Danny Woodhead Shane Vereen Lex Hilliard

RB Stevan Ridley Brandon Bolden

 

[There it is]

David. I tried to figure this one out before and more so this year,but I can't. He does truly use "situational" RBBC. He's playing Football not FFB and he's a genius.

IMHO I would chose Ridlry

 

[Run It Up]

What's the deal with all these Ridley pessimists? Are people expecting all 2-3 of their starting RBs to be studs? The guys the starting RB in a great offense, filling the shoes of someone who had back-to-back 10+ TD seasons, and likely didn't cost you a very expensive draft pick. Are you really afraid Woodhead will take over or something? As far as I know, Vereen can't seem to stay healthy and is likely out of the picture for the first few weeks.

If im not mistaken its a contract year for Woodhead, I dont think he takes any carries from Ridley at all, but I also expect their offense to be pretty static this year.Lloyd+Welker+Gronk+Hernandez+RB.I do think that Woodhead and Ridley will be the two most used as Woodhead is proven his worth in the passing game and can be relied on for many of their plays that require a utility player.I still expect Ridley to get 10 TDs, just hard to say whether or not he approaches 1k yards, im inclined to say not.

 

[whatadai]

well, actually. I don't really know if Ridley is they "starting RB" or not.... considering this is the Patriots "Unofficial Depth Chart" on their website:RB Danny Woodhead Shane Vereen Lex Hilliard RB Stevan Ridley Brandon Bolden

Considering Woodhead is definitely not the starting RB, I assume that the top one is for the passing down role while the bottom one is for early down/short yardage/goal line work.

 

[The Jerk]

What's the deal with all these Ridley pessimists? Are people expecting all 2-3 of their starting RBs to be studs? The guys the starting RB in a great offense, filling the shoes of someone who had back-to-back 10+ TD seasons, and likely didn't cost you a very expensive draft pick. Are you really afraid Woodhead will take over or something? As far as I know, Vereen can't seem to stay healthy and is likely out of the picture for the first few weeks.

I'm not a pessimist on Ridley. I have him on my contest team and had him slotted 2-3 rounds before ADP in my local draft but someone else beat me to him.There are a lot of reasons to be optimistic about Ridley for the season, but given the unpredictable nature of the Patriots offensive game plan, and the capability of the Patriots to shift gears in game, I think reasonable concern exists about being able to count on Ridley every week. I fully expect to him to reach or even exceed 1000 yards and 10 TDs, but I am least certain about when he will put up good weeks than just about any other RB near him projections-wise.Every RB can have a tough game or see his team get down big early and make rushing an afterthought. But every team doesn't have the Patriots history of getting away from the run at a moment's notice due to matchup considerations. I may be wrong about this, but I feel like a larger level of uncertainty exists on a weekly basis for Ridley. I guess the best way I can put it, is that he figures to get his season totals, but I'm less confident of him getting good production any one week than I would players who are also projected to end up with the same totals.That all being said, if I own him, I'd play him every week not wanting to miss out on the big games and willing to accept the bad ones and that it all evens out. Playing matchups with Ridley could see you often on the wrong side of the decision.

 

[Rovers]

As I just outlined, the Pats generally havenot rotated who gets the ball all that often and there almost always has been one gut that gets the biggest piece of the pie. I see Ridley averaging 15 carries and a few receptions sprinkled in now and again.

What I'm taking from this thread is that Ridley could be a very solid #2 RB in fantasy, as long as he doesn't fumble. New England has been a solid rushing team for years, barring last year when they stunk, and you'd have to figure on 450-500 carries and 18-23 rushing TD's. I see no reason why Ridley wouldn't be in line for half of the carries and TD's at least.

Woodhead NEVER fumbles... (insert post to claim he did once er sumpthin...) but BB trusts Woodhead, as did Ryan in NY with ball security. I think Woodhead can and will get more touches than most posters in this thread. He can pick up a blitz despite his size, has great hands, runs good routes, etc, he's better than Faulk was IMO. He'll continue to steal touches.

 

[David Yudkin]

As I just outlined, the Pats generally havenot rotated who gets the ball all that often and there almost always has been one gut that gets the biggest piece of the pie. I see Ridley averaging 15 carries and a few receptions sprinkled in now and again.

What I'm taking from this thread is that Ridley could be a very solid #2 RB in fantasy, as long as he doesn't fumble. New England has been a solid rushing team for years, barring last year when they stunk, and you'd have to figure on 450-500 carries and 18-23 rushing TD's. I see no reason why Ridley wouldn't be in line for half of the carries and TD's at least.

Woodhead NEVER fumbles... (insert post to claim he did once er sumpthin...) but BB trusts Woodhead, as did Ryan in NY with ball security. I think Woodhead can and will get more touches than most posters in this thread. He can pick up a blitz despite his size, has great hands, runs good routes, etc, he's better than Faulk was IMO. He'll continue to steal touches.

The Pats barely used Woodhead last year and his per touch numbers were a lot lower than in 2010. Not sure he will be that much of a factor.

 

[Rovers]

As I just outlined, the Pats generally havenot rotated who gets the ball all that often and there almost always has been one gut that gets the biggest piece of the pie. I see Ridley averaging 15 carries and a few receptions sprinkled in now and again.

What I'm taking from this thread is that Ridley could be a very solid #2 RB in fantasy, as long as he doesn't fumble. New England has been a solid rushing team for years, barring last year when they stunk, and you'd have to figure on 450-500 carries and 18-23 rushing TD's. I see no reason why Ridley wouldn't be in line for half of the carries and TD's at least.

Woodhead NEVER fumbles... (insert post to claim he did once er sumpthin...) but BB trusts Woodhead, as did Ryan in NY with ball security. I think Woodhead can and will get more touches than most posters in this thread. He can pick up a blitz despite his size, has great hands, runs good routes, etc, he's better than Faulk was IMO. He'll continue to steal touches.

The Pats barely used Woodhead last year and his per touch numbers were a lot lower than in 2010. Not sure he will be that much of a factor.

I had thought the same thing, and expected Woodhead to get cut. Now I think he may look more like the 2009 version.

 

[David Yudkin]

Relentless homerism doesn't give you the right to take a random chucker and act like he just got a pin from the Pope. I have high hopes for Ridley and Vereen, but let's be real and call them hope for a "new era" for a Patriots rushing attack rather than trying to compare them to a past that highlights an area of organizational failure.

The point was that the Pats have gone with a more primary guy almost exclusively for the past 5 years. Not a 300 carry guy, but a guy that usually got the ball 15 times a game. The names changed over time, sometimes even in the same season because of injuries, but that has been their pattern. They have not run a free for all RBBC as many have suggested. I don't expect them to have a different back with the most carries rotating week to week. That has not been their M.O.