Ridley's butterfingers...not delicious

Reverend

for king and country
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 20, 2007
64,048
Tony C said:
In re Ridley, the good news is how awesome Vereen looked. And hope Bolden is healthy soon, too. I love Ridley, but obviously he can't play if he can't hold on to the ball.
 
Agreed.
 
You're gonna be pissed when you see the thread about Vereen's broken finger.
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
No real choice now, Ridley is going to have to play and probably play more on third down passing downs.
 

E5 Yaz

Transcends message boarding
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Apr 25, 2002
90,032
Oregon
Reverend said:
 
Agreed.
 
You're gonna be pissed when you see the thread about Vereen's broken finger.
 
You're going to be pissed when you discover his finger is actually his wrist
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
Shelterdog said:
 
 
Who exactly are the people who think that there's not much that can or should be done about a fumbling running back? 
Here's a hint -- look for references to "bad luck", or suggestions that he brings much to the table that the Pats just might have to live with it.
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
dcmissle said:
Here's a hint -- look for references to "bad luck", or suggestions that he brings much to the table that the Pats just might have to live with it.
 
When the alternative is Blount, the Pats might have to live with it. 
 
That's way different from saying fumbles are random or bad luck or that there isnt anything to do about it. 
 

Shelterdog

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Feb 19, 2002
15,375
New York City
dcmissle said:
Here's a hint -- look for references to "bad luck", or suggestions that he brings much to the table that the Pats just might have to live with it.
 
That doesn't get you to the same planet as saying there's nothing that can or should be done about a running back who fumbles a lot.   There is some bad luck involved in fumbles (Ridley's fumble while knocked out comes to mind) and if a player is good enough relative to what you can get you just might have to live with it.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
caesarbear said:
 
You know he does everything he can not to land on the ball? He slipped sideways and first sticks out his knee to break the fall but also tries to get he other arm around to keep the ball from taking the brunt of it. It was an awkward fall. It's not like he was trying to land on the ball.
 
We could maybe criticize him for not closing into a fetal position and giving up once he fell, but then that's not how you make yards.
Imagine a football game where every player who fell on the ball fumbled? That would be an awesome drinking game. Ridley lands with as little impact as possible while failing to secure the ball.....the defense of this play is astounding.

Yes, BB's response to the play (benching Ridley) along with his halftime comment when asked about Ridley in the 2nd half, "We're gonna do what's best for the football team" makes it pretty clear he does not feel that fumbling the football is random.
 

Ralphwiggum

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2012
9,827
Needham, MA
dcmissle said:
Here's a hint -- look for references to "bad luck", or suggestions that he brings much to the table that the Pats just might have to live with it.
 
Who said this?  I think people are saying he's too good to bury or cut at this point, but that is not to say that they shouldn't be doing whatever they can to address the issue in practice.
 

Tony C

Moderator
Moderator
SoSH Member
Apr 13, 2000
13,695
Reverend said:
 
Agreed.
 
You're gonna be pissed when you see the thread about Vereen's broken finger.
 
yep
 
E5 Yaz said:
 
You're going to be pissed when you discover his finger is actually his wrist
 
yep yep. :(
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
I think that cutting him is not on the table -- and said so last night. I also said that maybe they would not position him to screw us up while the offense smooths out some ragged edges, not the least of which are rookie WRs making rookie mistakes. But that was before the Vereen news. One thing is pretty clear -- Coughlin has more wiggle room because right now he has vastly better options at WR.
 

Stitch01

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
18,155
Boston
Unfortunately for Coughlin, he is 0-1 and facing a game against a rested Broncos team in week 2 and then 2 road games.  The Pats are 1-0 and have two home games coming up, one against a really bad team.  So not sure Coughlin has a lot of wiggle room.
 

MarcSullivaFan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 21, 2005
3,412
Hoo-hoo-hoo hoosier land.
dcmissle said:
Agree Stitch, but even not having watched their game yesterday, I assume the Bucs are still challenged on offense. Not so Atl and NO, obviously. Yesterday, their offenses appeared in close to mid-season form. To win those games, you probably have to score in the 30s
Midseason form? Neither Atlanta or NO scored more than 23 points, and each was facing a mediocre to bad defense.
 

MarcSullivaFan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 21, 2005
3,412
Hoo-hoo-hoo hoosier land.
Acoording to my quick and dirty calculation the difference between Ridley (8 fumbles in 423 regular and postseason attempts or ~1.9 per 100 attempts) and a league average RB (~1 fumble per 100 attempts) is [~1.7] lost fumbles over a typical 300 carry season, given that offenses generally recover ~[38]% of RB fumbles.

I'm going to guess that the difference between his production and that of whoever would take his carries is a lot greater than 1.7 fumbles over 300 carries, but that, admittedly, is a just a guess.

Correction: Offenses lose approximately 62% of RB fumbles. http://www.footballperspective.com/the-definitive-analysis-of-offensive-fumbles/

So, the difference between Ridley and the league average back is about 1.7 fumbles per 300 carries, not 1.5 as I posted originally.
 

SWHB

New Member
Jul 15, 2005
178
Imagine a football game where every player who fell on the ball fumbled? That would be an awesome drinking game. Ridley lands with as little impact as possible while failing to secure the ball.....the defense of this play is astounding.
This happens all the time. It's just usually not a fumble because the offensive player is down by contact (because he's been touched by a defender). The Ridley play was fluky; I don't know why you can't accept that.
 

HomeRunBaker

bet squelcher
SoSH Member
Jan 15, 2004
30,096
SWHB said:
This happens all the time. It's just usually not a fumble because the offensive player is down by contact (because he's been touched by a defender). The Ridley play was fluky; I don't know why you can't accept that.
Lol it rarely happens much less happens "all the time." Occassionally it will occur and the play being fluky isn't an excuse for a player to lose the football. This is hammered into every player at the Pop Warner level and each one above that. Fumbling the ball will get you sent to the bench.....I've never seen or heard of a coach saying it was ok because of any excuse other than getting knocked unconscious.
 

MarcSullivaFan

Member
SoSH Member
Aug 21, 2005
3,412
Hoo-hoo-hoo hoosier land.
dcmissle said:
Marc,

Did you watch the game? Both
Some, but not all. My breathless response was excessive.

Atlanta made it into NO territory on only 5 of their 11 possessions, scoring two touchdowns and a FG. One of those possessions ended in an INT. Another one was a punt. Their other six possessions, in which the failed to cross the 50, consisted of 5 punts and lost fumble. They were 3/11 on 3rd down. This is playing indoors against one of the worst defenses in the league.

NO was better, but it was hardly midseason form for one of the best offensive teams in the league playing at home against a mediocre defense.

I suppose we'll just have to agree to disagree.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
Both teams played decent to good defense. NO was worst in history last year and Atl was mediocre at best, but I would not assume that going forward. Notwithstanding Brees completed almost 75% for 357, Ryan a bit under 70% for 304. Both were very efficient. Brady was a bit under 60% for 288. That speaks tons for Brady, who does not have close to the weapons of the other 2 right now and for the foreseeable future. By the same token, Buffalo was missing some pieces.
 

bakahump

Well-Known Member
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Jan 8, 2001
7,522
Maine
Papelbon's Poutine said:
If they can pull 7 wins out of 6 division games then it would be an awesome, awesome year. They should get an award or something for that.
Beating the jets in the playoffs?
 
I Ked I ked....
 

soxhop411

news aggravator
SoSH Member
Dec 4, 2009
46,278
 
Christopher Price ‏@cpriceNFL
28m
Ridley on what he needs to work on: "I definitely didn't get off to the start I wanted."
 
Christopher Price ‏@cpriceNFL
28m
Ridley on what he needs to work on: "Hold the ball, man. That what you're getting at--holding the ball."
 
Mary Paoletti ‏@Mary_Paoletti
2m
Ridley happy?:"Absolutely not. Definitely didn't get off to the start I wanted--I'll man up and say that. I've got to do better for my team"

 
Happy he is taking accountability 
 

williams_482

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 1, 2011
391
There were 11 total fumbles in this game. Brady and Edelman both fumbled twice. If there is any game in which we can give Ridley a pass for dropping the ball, this is it. 
 

Youkilis vs Wild

New Member
Mar 30, 2009
352
Boston, MA
I think he's out there again next week. But I am feeling very uneasy about him at this point -- I thought '11 and '12, the totals weren't enough to warrant the reputation. But this is getting to be a bit too much for my comfort.
 
Having said that, he's redeemed a bit by the fumblefest that was last night (into this morning).
 

mascho

Kane is Able
SoSH Member
Nov 30, 2007
14,952
Silver Spring, Maryland
I think you roll him out there again next week.  We don't know Blount's status, Vereen isn't an every-down back, and can Bolden carry the full load?   
 
Thinking about his fumbles and reviewing them, he consistently uses one arm to carry the ball.  Can he be the same, explosive runner using both arms?  Tonight's fumble was off of a spin move when he was using his off arm to help the spin.  Maybe better to secure the ball and just take the three yard gain?  
 
Maybe drill into his head that he's playing with one of the greatest QBs to play the game and 2nd and 7 is better than a turnover?
 

amarshal2

Member
SoSH Member
Oct 25, 2005
4,913
He's clearly the most talented + durable 1st/2nd down back on the team. There's time to get him going again - they probably will need him. But if the playoffs started tomorrow he'd be on the pine.
 

bball831

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 14, 2005
4,965
@FieldYates: Stevan Ridley on his 3rd straight game with a fumble, "It's borderline disgusting." Adds he understands team had no choice but to bench him.
 

dcmissle

Deflatigator
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Aug 4, 2005
28,269
ifmanis5 said:
Welp. Now what?
 
 
He's probably on the Coughlin lay-away plan -- and that's going to cause teeth gnashing around here -- but tough.
 
They do not need him,  They overcame a 24-zip deficit that he kicked off, without him.  So they will likely work around him.  This is 3 weeks in a row.  He has hurt the team badly. 
 
He can get out of the doghouse during garbage time.  He understands team had "no choice" but to bench him.  Ding, ding, ding.
 

Ed Hillel

Wants to be startin somethin
SoSH Member
Dec 12, 2007
43,592
Here
That was a horrible hit to lose the ball on, too. I'm glad he at least understands how serious the problem is, but he needs to start carrying the ball differently. The issue may be that if he does, he'll lose his explosiveness. What I think he needs to work on is cradling the ball better within a few yards of the LoS, then maybe letting himself makes some moves once he's past the initial point of contact. Then he has to cover up again when contact approaches. I'm not just not sure how easy it is for someone to learn that at this point in his career.
 

soxfan121

JAG
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 22, 2002
23,043
I never want to see him in any game where there is less than a three TD lead. He's a fumbler. A back breaking, momentum killing fumbler and he cannot be trusted to hold onto the ball.
 

johnmd20

mad dog
Lifetime Member
SoSH Member
Dec 30, 2003
61,996
New York City
mascho said:
I think you roll him out there again next week.  We don't know Blount's status, Vereen isn't an every-down back, and can Bolden carry the full load?   
 
Thinking about his fumbles and reviewing them, he consistently uses one arm to carry the ball.  Can he be the same, explosive runner using both arms?  Tonight's fumble was off of a spin move when he was using his off arm to help the spin.  Maybe better to secure the ball and just take the three yard gain?  
 
Maybe drill into his head that he's playing with one of the greatest QBs to play the game and 2nd and 7 is better than a turnover?
 
Why isn't Vereen an every down back? A combo of Bolden and Vereen is better than Mr. Fumbleitis. You can't keep putting the ball on the ground, it is too costly.
 

mascho

Kane is Able
SoSH Member
Nov 30, 2007
14,952
Silver Spring, Maryland
johnmd20 said:
 
Why isn't Vereen an every down back? A combo of Bolden and Vereen is better than Mr. Fumbleitis. You can't keep putting the ball on the ground, it is too costly.
 
Running between the tackles isn't his strong suit.  
 
Now you might be right in that a combo of Bolden/Vereen is the answer, but I still think Ridley gets another shot.  He's an incredibly talented ball carrier.  First drive last week, first drive last night.  Good solid runs and the Pats are riding him down the field.  You can teach ball security, but the only question is whether it would completely change his running style.
 

jk333

Member
SoSH Member
Feb 26, 2009
4,323
Boston
BigSoxFan said:
Many of Ridley's fumbles seem so preventable, including his last 2. A spin move on the sideline against 1 guy is fine but he's making these moves in the middle of the field when he's surrounded by defenders. Just look at Blount. He, too, fumbled but he almost never gets his back turned and if he does, he's securing with 2 hands.
 
Blount is a terrible example - he has the same career fumbling rate as Ridley. They both average one fumble every 56 carries. (1.8%) 
 
Interesting fact: 8 of Ridley's 9 career fumbles have occured in his first 5 carries of the game.
 
Some (randomly picked) fumbling rates:
AP - 1/66 carries - (1.5%)
Jamaal Charles - 1/61 carries (1.6%)
Ray Rice - 1/152 carries (0.7%)
Frank Gore - 1/65 carries (1.5%)
Chris Johnson - 1/97 (1.0%)
 

gmogmo

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 15, 2005
768
Hingham, Ma
soxfan121 said:
I never want to see him in any game where there is less than a three TD lead. He's a fumbler. A back breaking, momentum killing fumbler and he cannot be trusted to hold onto the ball.
Spot on....who the fk cares how explosive he is (and let's not act like he's Adrian Peterson) if he's giving games away week after week.  Go to him if other backs are completely ineffective, but no chance he should be first option in coming weeks.
 

Ralphwiggum

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2012
9,827
Needham, MA
I agree with mascho that he's going to get another shot.
 
Blount is a fumbler too so that limits them to really only two running backs (Bolden and Vereen).  They will probably shoulder the load for the most part the next couple of weeks but Bolden has been injury prone himself and Vereen is still wearing the cast on his wrist.  They are going to need another RB before the year is over.
 

bsj

Renegade Crazed Genius
SoSH Member
Dec 6, 2003
22,776
Central NJ SoSH Chapter
Really? He's due like 800k next year, and I don't think they'll get anything significant for him on a trade. There's no way Belichick just outright cuts him.


They've eaten money before. He has become a detriment. If he stays around I think its in a backup role. Cannot see him as a feature back in 2014
 

Toe Nash

Member
SoSH Member
Jul 28, 2005
5,600
02130
Fumbles are weird. Ridley has had the bad luck of having his last 5 fumbles recovered by the other team so they stick out in our memories further. As posted above his career fumble rate isn't that much worse than some other guys (though certainly unacceptable).
 
Are there examples besides Barber of guys fixing this?
 

rodderick

Member
SoSH Member
Apr 24, 2009
12,751
Belo Horizonte - Brazil
bsj said:
They've eaten money before. He has become a detriment. If he stays around I think its in a backup role. Cannot see him as a feature back in 2014
It's not about eating money, Ridley costs nothing next season and is the most talented running back this team has had since Corey Dillon. To simply let him go would be puzzling, fumble issues notwithstanding.
 

steveluck7

Member
SoSH Member
May 10, 2007
3,994
Burrillville, RI
Toe Nash said:
Fumbles are weird. Ridley has had the bad luck of having his last 5 fumbles recovered by the other team so they stick out in our memories further. As posted above his career fumble rate isn't that much worse than some other guys (though certainly unacceptable).
 
Are there examples besides Barber of guys fixing this?
My initial thought was Kevin Faulk as I recall him having fumbling issues early on. Upon further review, however, "early on" extended through his 7th season (2005). By then he had fumbled 22 times. He only fumbled 3 times over his final 6 seasons (although he only played 9 combined games in 2010 and 2011)
The fact that it took him 7 years to figure it out is slightly disheartening when attempting to apply this to Ridley but perhaps Bill will show similar patience with this (certainly more skilled) LSU running back.
 

Ralphwiggum

Member
SoSH Member
Jun 27, 2012
9,827
Needham, MA
Bump. Nice to see Ridley redeem himself a little bit last night. He's sort of been lost in the shuffle due to the emergence of LGBT, but he ran tough last night and held onto the ball. The two headed RB monster the Pats can unleash now is pretty impressive.