posted at 10/16/2013 6:22 AM EDT
In response to Low-FB-IQ's comment:
In response to Harvey-Wallbanger's comment:
Ugh. Not again. Why do people think this guy is such a savior? Every time he was overused, we'd lose!
Have to disagree with you on this one.
First I didn't read anyone saying he was a savior. Now admittedly I am biased because I like Woody a lot and think he is a gamer. I was disappointed but understood why.
Second, I am sure you must have some specifics in mind but the statement every time he was over used the Pats lost does seem to hold any merit to it. I mean the Pats did not lose very often from 2010 to 2012. I only looked at 2010 and 2011 before writing this.
In 2010 they lost twice in the regular season and one of the losses Woody did not even play in and the other he had a 6.0yrd/avg. meanwhile on the exact same number of carries BJGE had a 1.6 yrd/avg. How exactly are either of those losses his fault or rather tied to him? 2010 was the season he was used the most by the Pats and it was his best year and the Pats best regular season record since 2007.
In each of the following two seasons, the Patriots used Woody a lil less and they won one fewer game each of the following two seasons as well. I am sure it is only cooincindence but still interesting fact none the less.
In 2011 he only played in 2 of the teams 3 regular season losses. So out of the 5 losses from 2010-2011 Woody only even played in 3 of them. Woody was only involved in 3 lost regular season games out of 5 over that 2 year stretch.
I'm just not sure you can say they lost everytime they overused him. I did not check the wins but I am pretty sure he was used a lot in some of those wins over the 2 years.
I was too lazy to go look up 2012 details, the year they used him the least.
I'll take a best guess and assume you mean you dislike how and when he was used at times and not so much that you actually believe the Pats lost every time because Woody played to much?
Rusty has a theory that can be summarized as follows:
- Pats (through last year, at least) used way too much shotgun and threw too much (because Brady is addicted to shotgun and throwing)
- Woodhead was the passing back used in shotgun formations a lot
- Subbing for the "lead" back (i.e., BJGE or later Ridley/Bolden) is bad because it tips the defense on whether you are more likely to run or pass
So by Rusty's theory, whenever Woodhead was on the field, the Pats were tipping off pass and were probably in the shotgun and therefore, in Rusty's mind, likely to lose.
By this theory any use of Woodhead is bordering on "overuse." Personally, I think this theory reveals a weak grasp of Belichick's offensive strategy and approach to utilizing talent, but there you have it.
My own feeling on Woodhead is that he was a pretty smart player who did lots of good things, but wasn't really a big impact runner or receiver. I think the Pats let him go mostly because they thought there was an opportunity to upgrade the passing back position, and Vereen had the physical skills to be both a better runner and better receiver at that position. I think the long term plan since 2011 has been to replace BJGE with Ridley and Woodhead with Vereen. Letting Woodhead go was simply the next step in executing that plan.