Quote:
Originally Posted by Fixit
Normally, when you fix a post, you make it better.
|
More accurate is generally considered better.
Quote:
|
Woodhead is far from a minor role player.
|
The Stats and playtime says otherwise.
Quote:
|
Again, just because your team couldn't do anything with him doesn't mean he's not talented.
|
Absolutely right.
The fact the Pats were in a unique situation to use his limited skillset is, as I said, aa good thing for them. Never know when that 3rd string RB might be needed.
It's a silly argument. Woodhead was an abject failure in NY behind L.T. and Greene. He succeedd in a minor way in New England as #3 RB.
The only way to know if he's succeed outside his role in New England would be to see him leave New England and see how he does.
I'd bet he gets signed, listed at #3 RB someplace, and we never hear of him again.
Quote:
|
Saying he couldn't do it on 30 other teams because the Jets screwed it up is just dumb.
|
Aye, the mad rush of teams to aquire him when we cut him was something to behold.
Quote:
|
Through 12 games he has 57 carries (more than all but two guys on the Jets), 26 receptions (more than all but two guys on the Jets), 500 yards of offense (more than all but two guys on the Jets), 4 TDs (more than all but one guy on the Jets), and plays special teams. Yeah, totally "very minor."
|
On a team with Brady (the best QB in the league), Welker, Gronk and the already-1,000 yard rusher Ridley?
It makes him exactly what he is. The thirs string RB/Flanker and a minor roleplayer.
Quote:
|
If he's a very minor role player, what does that make damn near the entire Jets roster?
|
At RB? Better than Woodhead for our scheme at the time Woodhead was cut.
Because at that point, it was either L.T., Greene, McKnight (a 4th rounder that same year), or UDFA Woodhead. Only a fool would have kept Woodhead.
Which is kinda the point.