Patriots Player Practices: Lets Talk Kevin Faulk
by Greg Knopping on Jun 2, 2011 7:30 PM EDT
in Opinion/Analysis
Email
Print
One of the biggest stories coming out of the Patriots player-run practices today was the news that veteran running back Kevin Faulk was in attendance and participating. Faulk, 35, missed nearly all of 2010 with an ACL tear suffered in week two against the New York Jets.
According to the Boston Herald, Faulk took part in all drills and seemed to run without a noticeable limp. This is certainly encouraging news for the 13th year veteran (assuming he doesn't plan on retiring), but what does it mean for his future with the team?
The Patriots have gotten considerably younger at the running back position this offseason, with free agents Fred Taylor and Sammy Morris presumably on the way out the door, and with the team spending second and third round picks on California's Shane Vereen and LSU's Stevan Ridley, respectively. This, the fact that Faulk is coming off serious injury, and the fact that Shane Vereen and Danny Woodhead, two younger options, seem to mimic a lot of what Faulk does has led many to believe that Faulk's Patriots days are over.
But if Faulk's presence at today's workout is any indication, Faulk may not be ready to hang 'em up just yet. After practice, Faulk spoke to reporters and seemed to hint that it may be Patriots-or-bust, saying, "I'm a free agent, but I'm a Patriot for life."
So should the Patriots bring him back? There are plenty of reasons both for and against, For argument's sake, I'm going to leave nostalgic reasons out of this.
One of the reasons I would be hesitant to bring him back would be because of the fact that he could cut into the development of the younger backs. In addition, he's still an injury risk that might be wasting a roster spot (for a fifth running back) if he isn't high on the depth chart.
But as I said, there are also plenty of reasons for bringing him back as well. For one, it would likely be on a low risk, high reward contract. If he were to come into camp and just not be the same player, the Patriots could simply cut ties with him (or have him "retire"). If he showed that he could still be an effective player, he could earn a roster spot and be a contributing member of the team. Lets not forget: Kevin Faulk is an elite third down back. Danny Woodhead did some great things last year, but he's not on the same level as Faulk as a receiver or in blitz pick-up. Now it remains to be seen if Faulk can be the same player he was pre-inujry. But if he can, you've got to think that Tom Brady would love to see old, reliable #33 out there again (even if it means less playing time for Woodhead and/or Vereen). Either way, Faulk is a great locker room player and a real leader who could help teach the younger players a thing or two about the game (Coach Faulk?).
My verdict: Give Faulk a chance to earn a roster spot in training camp on a non-guaranteed deal.
What do you think?
40 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Bring him back
No nostalgia need be involved in this decision. With 80 players invited to camp, there’s plenty of room for a player of his abilities, talent, leadership and wisdom. If his knee makes him a few steps behind, then the team can make a decision from there, but otherwise, by all means, bring him in. There is nothing to lose with this move.
Keep the faith!
by Marima on Jun 2, 2011 7:40 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
He can come to camp, but I don't see him sticking around when the games start
Between Law Firm, Woodhead, and the new blood, the Pats seem to have a good committee of RBs present that cover Faulk’s skillset and more. The thought of carting 5 RBs into the regular season is pretty silly to me, even if Faulk is over his injury.
Shawn Camp earned my dog several beatings back in 2007
by wtbudlight on Aug 30, 2010 5:54 PM PDT
I agree in a sense, but I think that if Faulk is healthy
There’s no one on the roster than can be as good as Faulk at what he does. They might have similar skillsets, but Faulk still has the edge as a receiving back over Woodhead and Vereen IMO.
by Greg Knopping on Jun 2, 2011 8:10 PM EDT up reply actions
Exactly
Belichick says he doesn’t decide who makes the roster, the players do. The answer to this question could be evident after Training Camp or pre-season.
Keep the faith!
I still don't think that Faulk would make the roster over Vereen.
Or Woody with his new contract. Youth + potential will inevitably win out.
by Richard Hill on Jun 6, 2011 10:57 PM EDT up reply actions
well it wouldnt be either faulk or vereen or woody
it would be faulk and vereen and woody and ridley and lawfirm. carrying 5 rbs wouldnt be out of the question it has been done in the past. if they resign faulk he will go to camp and if he is recovered enough and good enough bb will find a spot for him.
In case people didn't know
My recent inactivity has been due to a serious computer malfunction on my end. For some reason, all my friends and family at home seem to think that because I’m a blogger, I’m a computer tech wizard. Alas, I am not. The backlight on my Vaio went dead, and it turns out my computer had a bunch of other issues, so it’s in the hands of BestBuy under my extended warranty for a few weeks. The good news is I may be getting a new computer in a few weeks. The bad news: I’m relegated to using my Android Phone and an extremely old apple ibook ppc to write my articles.
The articles I wrote on my phone have taken about three to four hours a piece to work. Even while I’m home from college for part of the summer, my mother won’t let me use her laptop. Therefore, I’m relegated to the laptop that my mom received as a birthday gift from my father shortly before they divorced. My parents have been divorced for the better part of a decade.
What does this mean?
For one, I don’t have a stable version of flash on my computer since adobe no longer supports Mac OS X PPC’s. Pretty much, that makes 1/2 the sites unavailable to me and video next to impossible to run.
Anything I type lags by about 3 seconds. This is incredibly frustrating and makes it nearly impossible to type.
The computer itself is a shell of what it once run. Not a single application runs smoothly. If there are a lot of comments in an article, it becomes very difficult to load the page.
So… in summation… This situation completely blows and I’m going to try my best to get up one article per day then resume real activity once my computer is fixed. Until then, I will continue to pound my head continuously against my keyboard in an effort to get my computer to work better. This method has yet to work effectively.
The timing of this is actually really unfortunate
Considering all of the activity going on around the league.
by Greg Knopping on Jun 2, 2011 8:08 PM EDT up reply actions
If you are interested,
Some sites have netbooks between 155-210 bucks. I love them but they hate open threads past 800 comments.
Non Sibi Sed Patriae ;I bleed Scarlet and Grey...A Buckeye for Life.
In Bill We Trust.
I was actually really interested in trying out a Chrome book
You could get a decent one for about $500. I’m not sure how well Google Docs and online applications could replace Microsoft Office for school work, but the idea of a PC as simple as the Chrome Books is pretty intriguing. Plus, the fact that my job is on the internet is another bonus.
by Greg Knopping on Jun 2, 2011 8:24 PM EDT up reply actions
I''ve seen the platform it uses...kinda odd.
Looks like Xbox live interface doesn’t it?
Non Sibi Sed Patriae ;I bleed Scarlet and Grey...A Buckeye for Life.
In Bill We Trust.
Bring 33 to camp
And let him earn his wAy onto the roster. Bottom line is BB takes the best 53 that gives him the best chance at winning the sb. So if after camp 33 shows he belongs in the rb rotation then bb will have a spot ready for him . And if during camp he looks a step behind he will cut ties like the bruschi situation a couple years back.
by brady12mvp3 on Jun 2, 2011 8:19 PM EDT via mobile reply actions
the aspect of mentorship should not be overlooked
BGE has already said how much Fred and Faulk helped him to be a better player under their wings last year. (How to prepare for games etc)
Although BGE and Woodhead will certainly help the two rookies anyway they can, they are still relatively young and have had experience as major part of the offence only for a year. This means that they may not be as good mentor as the older guys are. Assuming Fred and Sammy both not returning, Faulk shall be kept in order to guide Redley and Vareen as a veteran. Not to mention BGE and Woody still can learn a lot from Faulk too.
Agreed on the mentorship thing, and I wonder if Belichick would consider bringing Faulk in as a coach
Belichick has never done anything like it before. In fact, the closest thing to it would be the hiring of Corwin Brown… and look how that went.
But if the team doesn’t want to use a roster spot on Faulk, why not try him out with the title of “Offensive Assistant” and see how he fares?
by Greg Knopping on Jun 2, 2011 8:27 PM EDT up reply actions
Pepper Johnson!
There is also Bryant Cox but he coached w. the Broncos and now is the pass rushing coach for the Fins.
Non Sibi Sed Patriae ;I bleed Scarlet and Grey...A Buckeye for Life.
In Bill We Trust.
Faulk was basically a coach last season.
Reiss reported on his blog that despite being on IR, Faulk stuck around the facilities and in a behind the scenes type role helped coach up Green-Ellis and Woodhead.
by UtopianAverage on Jun 2, 2011 10:02 PM EDT up reply actions
Just a though.
I read somewhere (Don’t remember where or have a link, sorry.) that if there is a shortened training camp and pre-season because of the lockout, the NFL may increase the allowed roster size for this season.
If that does happen, that may permit the Patriots to not only keep Faulk, but also maybe some guys that would typically be bubble players, i.e. 4th TE Lee Smith.
Even though that would be total BS
it really would help us immensely.
yeah from 53 to 56 man roster but only 45 players could dress.
Non Sibi Sed Patriae ;I bleed Scarlet and Grey...A Buckeye for Life.
In Bill We Trust.
damnit, go to 60 and let it be settled
by quadruple option on Jun 3, 2011 3:10 AM EDT up reply actions
Don't see him making the team beyond anything but nostalgia
know that luck favors the prepared. - SMP
If he earns the spot, great
But if it turns out that BB thinks it to be better to go in a different direction as far as the roster goes, then I think he should be brought back as an “offensive assistant” from everything that’s been said about his ability to mentor the younger backs.
Whoops
Voted no without seeing that “Yes” is for Training Camp
But I still think we’ve got our backs all in a line.
Over the Monster -- SB Nation's Resident Red Sox Site
USG
does anyone remember how many rb we broke camp with last year?
wasnt it law firm , taylor ,morris,faulk and didnt thomas clayton make the squad out of the gate? if so that was a 5 rb stable so this years group of law firm , vereen ,ridley, woodhead and faulk wouldnt be out of the question only thing having 5 rb takes another quality player off the roster. darn it bb why do u have to have so many good football players to choose from !!!!!
Maroney, not Clayton.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010_New_England_Patriots_season#Week_1_roster
"Perhaps it was the Noid who should have avoided me." Mayor Adam West
by insertscreenname on Jun 3, 2011 9:41 AM EDT up reply actions
Hey Ben,
Glad I’m not the only OTM’er here
by GroundRuleTriple90 on Jun 3, 2011 9:44 AM EDT up reply actions
Still say that one of the RB's could shift to WR
and see how the position shapes up. Ridley is 5’11 with good hands, and Woodhead is dynamic with the ball and has remarkable hands. Having either of those guys shift to a RB/WR role on the roster would keep the RB’s to 4 and a half and allow the offense to slip one of those guys in for 4 WR sets or as a slot on Welker’s off plays. It feels like letting Faulk go, if he still has it, is silly. The most talented players should stay regardless of position. A roster can be shaped.
by GroundRuleTriple90 on Jun 3, 2011 9:44 AM EDT reply actions
I'm pretty confident in Belichick's ability to put the right people on the field,
and Brady to put them in the right positions to make plays. If that’s 2 TE, 2 RB, 1 WR packages, and Faulk stays in to block and Woodhead walks out to get the LB matchup, then that will work. You can never have too much talent, and if good players are sitting on the bench, then that’s a nice problem to have.
Even if it says RB next to his name, that doesn’t mean anything.
"Perhaps it was the Noid who should have avoided me." Mayor Adam West
by insertscreenname on Jun 3, 2011 10:24 AM EDT up reply actions
Completely agreed
If a player is athletic and bright enough he will make himself versatile enough to be valuable to any roster. Being a former Baseball and Football player I know that firsthand. I played OLB, FB, and even TE in some formations for 4 years, and I played Catcher, Pitcher, Short, and OF for 6 more years. Athletes need to be flexible, especially with BB’s playbook. I would love to see some plays where Gronk or Hernandez slot out, or one of the RB’s shift out to WR. As long as theres 10 WR/RB’s or less I’ll be happy. If that means keeping 4 or 5 WR’s and 5 RB’s then that’s what needs to be done to keep the best players on the roster.
by GroundRuleTriple90 on Jun 3, 2011 10:46 AM EDT up reply actions
5 WRs and 5 RBs for week one, I think.
Welker, Branch, Tate, Price, Edelman
BJGE, Woodhead, Vereen, Ridley, Faulk
Last year we went into week 1 with 6 WRs (including Slater, but I’d assume Williams kicks him out of STs duty) and 5 RBs.
"Perhaps it was the Noid who should have avoided me." Mayor Adam West
by insertscreenname on Jun 3, 2011 10:55 AM EDT up reply actions
This would mean casualties elsewhere
We could be going:
2 QB—3 QB
4 WR—5 WR
3 TE—4 TE
4 RB—5 RB
Another extra OLB in Carter
Another tackle (Solder)
More DBs (Ras-I, Williams)
And probably more that I’m forgetting. But that’s at least 8 completely new roster spots that weren’t occupied at the end of last year. Somethings gotta give, and I’m not sure I see Faulk surviving that (and it breaks my heart to say it).
Now we may be able to assume that Slater will be gone, along with Morris and Taylor, bit there’s just too little space for Faulk to fit in there.
by dreynoldsPATS on Jun 4, 2011 4:11 AM EDT via mobile up reply actions
I wouldn't worry about that just yet
Training camp roster is bigger than the roster allocation for the season, and injuries always happen on the way through. Remember Leigh Bodden’s injury – people thought there would be cuts last preseason in the CB corps – Bodden, McCourty, Wilhite, Wheatley, Arrington, Butler. Somehow they were all kept (at least for a while) due to Bodden’s being put on IR.
Have to factor in the likelihood of injuries before factoring in how many roster spots are available, and who will be cut because of it.
Token southern hemisphere guy - 14,688km from Foxboro. That's 9128 miles, for you heathens.
Contributing Writer at PatsPulpit
At the moment I think we're carrying 12 D-linemen.
That would probably get cut down to 6-8 come week 1.
"Perhaps it was the Noid who should have avoided me." Mayor Adam West
by insertscreenname on Jun 4, 2011 4:39 AM EDT up reply actions
Nope
I love Faulk….but I think the team already decided it’s time to focus on younger blood with the high pick draft RBs. If they hadn’t drafted any backs I’d love to see him compete for a slot…but at this point I think the team has to go with the younger backs.
If they want to give him a coaching or assistant job for mentoring that might be better for us.
I think Faulk needs to be there for training camp.
That doesn’t mean that he will be on the week 1 roster.
As others have already alluded, these things tend to work themselves out, unfortunately via injuries, during camp.
Last year our CB corp looked pretty stocked going into camp, no ? We had Bodden, Butler coming off an impressive rookie season, and 1rst round pick Devin McCourty, along with Wilhite and Arrington etc. Well the season ending injury of Leigh Bodden kind of solved that problem didn’t it ?
This year we have BenJarvus Green-Ellis, Danny Woodhead, Shane Vereen, Stevan Ridley, and Kevin Faulk all at RB. Now assuming the Week 1 Roster limit (53) will not be increased, that would be 5 RBs. We may carry 5 RBs, but some are assuming that we carry 4. If we do indeed carry 4 it may not be because we cut one of the 5, it may be because one of them gets injured during training camp and goes to IR.
For all who think Faulk should not be in training camp, what happens if in the middle of camp Danny Woodhead tears his ACL ?
Whether Faulk is or is not on the week 1 Roster he needs to be in training camp.
by UtopianAverage on Jun 6, 2011 9:37 PM EDT reply actions 1 recs
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Media requests: Please email patspulpit at gmail.com
Related FanPosts on Pats Pulpit
Related FanShots on Pats Pulpit
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
In Association With
Shutdown Corner - NFL - Yahoo! Sports
- Former high-school star Brian Banks does serious time on trumped-up charge, now hopes for an NFL shot
- Former ‘idiot kicker’ Mike Vanderjagt in trouble after accosting junior-high heckler
- Adrian Peterson blows teammates away in footraces; appears to be on the mend
- UPDATE: Charlie Sheen didn’t buy Lawrence Taylor’s Super Bowl ring
- Alex Smith gets blown up by Jon Beason over Cam Newton comments
