Haley
In the Starting Line-Up
- Joined
- Sep 14, 2010
- Messages
- 3,352
- Reaction score
- 1,498
Registered Members experience this forum ad and noise-free.
CLICK HERE to Register for a free account and login for a smoother ad-free experience. It's easy, and only takes a few moments.C-Gronk : Romo :: Morris : TFB
And yet Morris was on the roster through last year. . . .
The Phins fan that I asked said that he's only a decent blocker.
LeRon McLain was available in the offseason. Settling for Polite because the team didn't bother earlier doesn't really inspire.
Polite is more than a "decent blocker". Guy is a damn good blocker. The Phins probably dumped him because he was a Parcells guy. Polite is one of the guys Parcells brought with him from Dallas.
I wanted the Pats to sign Polite during Pre-season.
Very interesting. The logical call is that the injury to Hernandez mitigated their ability to utilize their 2 TE sets and in turn, the motion based tight end blocking that accomplished the role of the fullback in the running game. I think that there is deeper undertones in this though. This does represent a shift away from the ambiguity afforded by the TE heavy offense and towards a more declarative offense. I have always been a fan of the line up and just play football philosophy in certain instances (particularly in balance with a spread based offense) and I think this represents an indication of this initiative. Further, the fullback is a well known way of defeating the faster spread killing defenses. I believe that this is representative of the major early season philosophic adjustment The Patriots have historically done. Should they actually sign one, this move should be study closely as a major thread in the evolution of the 2011 team.
How come we never work out anyone at Safety?
I mean fullback is cool and all but our secondary isn't looking so good.
If he can run routes and catch the ball is there any reason why a FB can line up and function as a TE? They’re generally shorter than TEs while being similar in weight, which would likely translate into better cutting ability and they’d also have better leverage when blocking.
I think that's true to a certain extent however prototypes exist for a reason. The reason tight ends are taller is that they matchup better in several ways that a fullback can't. First, they play on the edge, and consequently height and wingspan are important when matching up on edge defenders. Leverage in blocking is very important but wingspan in critical as well. Reaching the breastplate of a defender enables the blocker to effectively steer the other player. A lot of man on man engagement is locking the other guy out. The easier the defender can either lockout or keep the hands of the blocker off of him the easier his life is going to be. In order for a tight end to match up with these players he must be a taller guy.
The differences in the pass receiving game are at least four. First, tight ands and flexed out fullbacks are frequently jammed. This is usually done by the linebackers based off of personnel packages. A tall tight end has the length to disengage from a linebacker for a much cleaner release. A fullback will often be, at best, a draw in reach with most linebackers. This will hurt his ability to get a clean release. Once that player has released into coverage we speak about physical matchups. Tight ends are usually faster and usually bigger than a linebacker and always bigger than a safety. Not only can the tight end win body positioning stuff as well as creating a bigger catch radius, but his height ends itself to running seam routes and going up for the ball in the endzone. Fullbacks are a poor matchup as they lose on speed to safeties with similar heights, as well as on size and at times speed to linebackers. Even all world receiving fullbacks like Larry Centers are best used on leaks, flats, middle hitches, and screens. Fullbacks really struggle to compete in a game changing manner in the passing game.
While they can produce in the passing game it is limited to situational exploits and smart playcalling. The fullback is best existing as a run player who can account for extra run defenders, create seals, lead through to the second level, and provide the back with a clean read to explode off of. His biggest contribution is taking away one less player the ball carrier has to beat. If you have a good one, he should be able to get you a few tough power yards, catch the defense offguard on a quick handoff, and leak to the flat in the passing game. To expect a significant contribution with carries in the NFL is unrealistic. Triple option this is not. I know there is a lot of creativity that can be imagined with the fullback, but ultimately a lot of that is placing the player in a situation where he is poorly utilized. There's a reason Belichick has tried for the past decade to find Gronk before finding him instead of simply motioning around a fullback.
The fullback is best existing as a run player who can account for extra run defenders, create seals, lead through to the second level, and provide the back with a clean read to explode off of. His biggest contribution is taking away one less player the ball carrier has to beat.
That's a great point that bears repeating. I hope Bill signs an FB, because I think it would most benefit Woodhead; who I believe could be a poor man's Ray Rice with the right personnel and run calls. Having Woodhead run behind a FB could give help him get to the second level, where he does the most damage. No more getting swallowed up by big lineman all the time.
Pairing Woodhead with a FB is meaningless because his bread and butter is his amazing ability to shift laterally and elude tackles in large part due to his small frame and weight which, physics-speaking, allows him to shift laterally much quicker than the large and bulky linemen who are trying to tackle him.
No question an FB would help any RB in a goal-line situations. I just think Woodhead needs more blocking help than BJGE or Riddley most of the time. I'd love to see him in the I-form in an off-tackle run or a toss sweep.
Pairing Woodhead with a FB is meaningless