Re: How about the run game last night.
posted at 9/13/2013 3:51 PM EDT
In response to zbellino's comment:
In response to CablesWyndBairn's comment:
I'm not missing the point, or at least I'm not agreeing with your assessment. If Ridley can correct his drops he's a good back. If he's a head case, then we'll find that out soon enough. Re-watch the game on DVR if you can and tell me that he had a shot on a good percentage of the runs where he was immediately stuffed or was held to 1 yard. That's Ridley's fault? If you've consistently said that Ridley stinks, then you're being consistent in that opinion. I didn't hear too many people saying Ridley Scuks last year.
Ridley doesn't blow.
But, obviously, as if the playoffs without Gronk weren't enough to illustrate this: Ridley, and especially Benny, are not the kind of runners who can carry an offense.
Ridley is a good peice, if you have other WR/TE stars to build the offense around. Benny is a backup.
They can "go all in" on their running game if they want. But Ridley isn't the kind of runner who can carry this offense. If the other team is set up for him to run, he doesn't make it happen.
He's not Ray Rice, or Arian Foster, or some other back that teams game plan to specifically stop before evey single game ... and who then comes out and still manages to get 100 yards.
He's a guy who can keep the chains moving if you give him space, and occaisionally gash you if you let him into the second level.
And yeah ... the running game was't good, per the OP. But who really thought that Ridley was going to carry the load of losing Welker, Gronk, and Hern, then Amendola.
He's a good back ... he's not Barry Sanders.
Agree fully. Ridley is part of the solution to an effective run game. He's not top notch, but he does a lot of things that help a team win.