Fullback versus tight end

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Fullback versus tight end

    In response to TrueChamp's comment:

    In response to Salcon's comment:

     

    Before this thread,  I never really knew the value of having a true, skilled fullback in the backfield.  

    It seems like a unique position where there probably aren't many players that fit the bill out there.

    I remember those days of Pass, Edwards, Evans etc. catching passes out of the backfield, running in short yardage situations, lead blocking and blitz pickup.  

    I guess running backs like Ridley, Bolden and Vareen would have to adjust their game with a FB leading the way?

     




    I don't think they would need much of an adjustment, plus just having another option in the back field helps to confuse a defense. For example, I just watched the 1st qtr of Pats Bucs again and on the opening drive we lined up Bolden and Vareen split on either side of Brady. We still had Amendola, Ballard, and Suddfield in the game. I love seeing an offense like this mixed in with our other down field stuff. A 2 back set with 2 RB's or 1 RB and 1 FB can give a D another aspect to defend against.

     

    To me it is what we were missing in the Obrien era(not saying its all OB's fault). We didn't have this dimension to the offense for whatever reason. In the play I mentioned Bolden went right and Vareen was wide open in the left flat for a 1st down pass from Brady. I expect/hope to see more of these type plays being called this season. Like you I remember the days of our FB's picking up key 1st downs and our offense being being more diverse. If it's not Devlin, it will be Hoomy, or Bolden, or Blount. While they are not true FB's I think they have the physical make up to get the job done. It might not be worth keeping Devlin on the roster if other guys have more value for positional depth and can still fill the void at FB.



    That is more of a 2HB formation, and with a player like Vereen, it's a shift on an 11 package really. 

    It doesn't fundamentally change much about the game, because neither Vereen nor Bolden/Ridley are "take-on" blockers. They can't lead the other one. 

    One thing it can do, in a pro-set formation, is force the defense to guess which direction a run might go to, and have to prepare a personell package to deal with Vereen split wide. 

    OB couldn't do that, btw, because he didn't have a RB like Vereen who can also split out or play the slot if he has too.

    The guy has a unique gift for that. I'm glad they are thinking outside the box to get him on the field, and then do other things to add value to the package ... like running a 2HB pro-set.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Fullback versus tight end

     

     Seems worth resurrecting given the Develin discussion underway 

     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from quinzpatsfan. Show quinzpatsfan's posts

    Re: Fullback versus tight end

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

    In response to wozzy's comment:

     

    Good thread,

    Hernandez was labeled a tight end but took handoffs, regardless of his position we'd be hard pressed to find a better blocker out of the backfield than Huey, the guy really comes up and meets defenders, even standing up big guards and linebackers, whether he can carry the ball, which I think he can probably handle a handoff and once you have the ball the rules are the same for everybody.

    The most carries Heath Evans ever had as a Pat(2007)was 34 carries, Larry Centers 21 carries, Marc Edwards had 51 carries (2001) once, then 31 carries was his second highest total. 

    I guess the point is even if we carried a fullback they wouldn't carry the ball often, less often if they were less talented than Edwards who probably was our most talented all around fullback.

     



    Wozzy, you're definitely right that a FB isn't going to carry the ball a lot.  But I think a true FB tends to think more like a RB and see the field and the developing play more like a RB than a TE does.  I wish I could find it, but years ago BB in one of his press conferences spent a ton of time talking about Patrick Pass's skills as a lead blocker and praising Pass's decision-making and vision.  One of the points BB was making about Pass was that a lead blocker had to see the play developing the same way as the RB saw it.  If he didn't he'd either lead the RB through the wrong hole or, if the RB didn't follow him, end up blocking someone away from the point of attack.  I think TEs can learn to see the play the same way, but FBs practice with the RBs regularly and have that RB mentality, which I think is valuable if you are blocking from the backfield.  

     

    I agree Hoomanawanui is the TE closest to a true FB, but I'm still not sure he's quite the same as a real FB.  Of course, using a roster spot on a true FB only makes sense if they plan to use a blocker in the backfield regularly.  If they just want an extra blocker on short yardage, using a TE or lineman (as they've done most years recently) makes more sense, since it doesn't use up a valuable roster slot on a specialist who won't play much. 



    How much do you think your above statement vs Develin's excelling in ST had to do with him making the team, slater and ebner offer little if anything other than STs, which isn't the norm, usually guys have potential upside but haven't showed enough to make the team but contribute on ST enough to warrant the team to develop.  Some guys never develop but have to really excell in STs.  We now have 2 guys that can play FB, howman and Develin.

    Personally would love to see the pats play 2 back sets, old school smash mouth, iform, wishbone type stuff..

     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from quinzpatsfan. Show quinzpatsfan's posts

    Re: Fullback versus tight end

    In response to quinzpatsfan's comment:

    In response to prolate0spheroid's comment:

     

    In response to wozzy's comment:


    DISREGARD DIDN'T REALIZE HE WAS CUT @!#$$%%

     

    Good thread,

    Hernandez was labeled a tight end but took handoffs, regardless of his position we'd be hard pressed to find a better blocker out of the backfield than Huey, the guy really comes up and meets defenders, even standing up big guards and linebackers, whether he can carry the ball, which I think he can probably handle a handoff and once you have the ball the rules are the same for everybody.

    The most carries Heath Evans ever had as a Pat(2007)was 34 carries, Larry Centers 21 carries, Marc Edwards had 51 carries (2001) once, then 31 carries was his second highest total. 

    I guess the point is even if we carried a fullback they wouldn't carry the ball often, less often if they were less talented than Edwards who probably was our most talented all around fullback.

     

     



    Wozzy, you're definitely right that a FB isn't going to carry the ball a lot.  But I think a true FB tends to think more like a RB and see the field and the developing play more like a RB than a TE does.  I wish I could find it, but years ago BB in one of his press conferences spent a ton of time talking about Patrick Pass's skills as a lead blocker and praising Pass's decision-making and vision.  One of the points BB was making about Pass was that a lead blocker had to see the play developing the same way as the RB saw it.  If he didn't he'd either lead the RB through the wrong hole or, if the RB didn't follow him, end up blocking someone away from the point of attack.  I think TEs can learn to see the play the same way, but FBs practice with the RBs regularly and have that RB mentality, which I think is valuable if you are blocking from the backfield.  

     

     

    I agree Hoomanawanui is the TE closest to a true FB, but I'm still not sure he's quite the same as a real FB.  Of course, using a roster spot on a true FB only makes sense if they plan to use a blocker in the backfield regularly.  If they just want an extra blocker on short yardage, using a TE or lineman (as they've done most years recently) makes more sense, since it doesn't use up a valuable roster slot on a specialist who won't play much. 

     



    How much do you think your above statement vs Develin's excelling in ST had to do with him making the team, slater and ebner offer little if anything other than STs, which isn't the norm, usually guys have potential upside but haven't showed enough to make the team but contribute on ST enough to warrant the team to develop.  Some guys never develop but have to really excell in STs.  We now have 2 guys that can play FB, howman and Develin.

     

    Personally would love to see the pats play 2 back sets, old school smash mouth, iform, wishbone type stuff..




     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from stillgridlocked. Show stillgridlocked's posts

    Re: Fullback versus tight end

    San Francisco last year used a 2 back set with the shotgun.  I like the idea of 2 backs to protect Brady give him more time.

    With receivers that can actually break away that can work imo or one of the backs breaks off for a screen.

     

     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Fullback versus tight end

     

     If we don't have a true FB (and I see Hoomanawanui as more a TE/H back), I think two back sets if we use them may be more designed to get Vereen on the field as a receiver.  As the roster has evolved over the past few days, however, I've begun to think that one back is going to continue to be what we mostly see. The question is whether we see more two -TE sets or more three-WR sets.  

     

    People may hate it here, but I do see a scenario where they go spread a lot with Gronk, Vereen, Amendola, Thompkins, and Dobson.  Boyce and Edelmam may get in that mix too.  

     

    Will be interesting to see how much they do with Sudfeld.  I'm not fully sold on him being on the field nearly as much as Hern was when healthy (and not incarcerated).

     

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from TripleOG. Show TripleOG's posts

    Re: Fullback versus tight end

    John Conner _ Terminator! Just released.  Get him and stop playig games. If u cant afford to keep ONE FB, specialist to help in the run game while keeping 5 safeties, and only one good one, there is a problem. 2 years in a row  now Joshy is back, we sign 5 fullbacks, none of them make the roster. Weve been trying the big nickel since 2002 when it failed horribly. Am I the only one seeing a problem here? These guys aint even on the same page and then u had Tebow here taking up space and stealing headlines!?   smdh

     

    "Take care of my B*tch, I may need her back in a couple years"

    Brady to Manning after Wes signed with Denver

     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from LittleTimmy31. Show LittleTimmy31's posts

    Re: Fullback versus tight end

    If the Pats really do want to feature a true running game, then a FB is a must. Tough yards up the middle on key short yardage plays require a big back to kickout DE's and LB's. Some FB's have decent hands for pass catching and can be every bit effective as a TE for blocking. 

     

    Personally, as a former FB myself, it's sad that the FB position is being systematically phased out of the pro game with the spread, up-tempo offenses so many teams use today.

     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from TripleOG. Show TripleOG's posts

    Re: Fullback versus tight end

    In response to russgriswold's comment:

    In response to TripleOG's comment:

     

    John Conner _ Terminator! Just released.  Get him and stop playig games. If u cant afford to keep ONE FB, specialist to help in the run game while keeping 5 safeties, and only one good one, there is a problem. 2 years in a row  now Joshy is back, we sign 5 fullbacks, none of them make the roster. Weve been trying the big nickel since 2002 when it failed horribly. Am I the only one seeing a problem here? These guys aint even on the same page and then u had Tebow here taking up space and stealing headlines!?   smdh

     

    "Take care of my B*tch, I may need her back in a couple years"

    Brady to Manning after Wes signed with Denver

     



    Conner sucks.

     

     




    of course he does, cuz he played for the jets. I dont think he is anything special and doesnt do anything well outside of HIT people. Thats what traditional fbs' do. If they cant stand on one hand while picking their nose, they are cut I guess.

     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from seawolfxs. Show seawolfxs's posts

    Re: Fullback versus tight end

    Thank you all for this discussion

    When I sit back and look at it

    1) We never had a healthy Gronk and AH in the Playoffs against a top D team
    2) Our Oline against these teams has not always been effective in Pass Protection, and run?
    3) Except for TB in his QB sneak, we have not been a succesfull short yardage running team?
    4) Sometimes the wr's weren't able to make separation and made TB and the line look worse

    5) Forget the regular season games - but look at the top D's we might face in the playoffs ( Houston,SF, Seatle and on the outside Giants and Detroit)with good Dlines that rush only 4 - with our new and hopefully separating effective wr's - Would you want a "FB" for run blocking and pass protection? what is your final suggestion?


    Pat's Fan lost in Jet Land

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from TripleOG. Show TripleOG's posts

    Re: Fullback versus tight end

    In response to seawolfxs's comment:

     

    Thank you all for this discussion

    When I sit back and look at it

    1) We never had a healthy Gronk and AH in the Playoffs against a top D team
    2) Our Oline against these teams has not always been effective in Pass Protection, and run?
    3) Except for TB in his QB sneak, we have not been a succesfull short yardage running team?
    4) Sometimes the wr's weren't able to make separation and made TB and the line look worse

    5) Forget the regular season games - but look at the top D's we might face in the playoffs ( Houston,SF, Seatle and on the outside Giants and Detroit)with good Dlines that rush only 4 - with our new and hopefully separating effective wr's - Would you want a "FB" for run blocking and pass protection? what is your final suggestion?


    Pat's Fan lost in Jet Land

     



    I think with all the wasted spots weve seen in the past few years(ocho, haynesworth, chris baker, fells, ventrone, Bequette, etc), I dont see why/how the past 2 years weve brought in atleast 5 FB's and cant stick with atleast ONE to keep on the roster to help out. I like FB's because they can run block and because they are ALWAYS open in the flat off playaction. Id like to see simple plays like this ran more instead of (5 yard pass play to Amendola X Infinity) until he gets hurt. I counted ONCE all year they ran this play ....and it was wide open. Thats the whole point! If you put a pass catching TE at FB, the defense may not leave him wide open. BB tries to get too cute instead of keeping some things simple and I hope we get back to basics this year. Run the ball, stop the run. Play action to flat, playaction over the middle,, playaction deep. etc. So far so good, but they NEED to settle on a FB and stop being cheap and looking for a FB/TE/S/T'er/tax preparer/LB/Safety/Fireman! I mean, we got 53 SPOTS!!!! and 15 backers and 2 D/Tackles!  WHo put this roster together, Stevie Wonder?...lol

     

     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Fullback versus tight end

    In response to seawolfxs' comment:

     

    Thank you all for this discussion

    When I sit back and look at it

    1) We never had a healthy Gronk and AH in the Playoffs against a top D team
    2) Our Oline against these teams has not always been effective in Pass Protection, and run?
    3) Except for TB in his QB sneak, we have not been a succesfull short yardage running team?
    4) Sometimes the wr's weren't able to make separation and made TB and the line look worse

    5) Forget the regular season games - but look at the top D's we might face in the playoffs ( Houston,SF, Seatle and on the outside Giants and Detroit)with good Dlines that rush only 4 - with our new and hopefully separating effective wr's - Would you want a "FB" for run blocking and pass protection? what is your final suggestion?


    Pat's Fan lost in Jet Land

     



    Good question seawolfxs.

     

    I hate to be so noncommital, but I think the answer is "it depends." 

    The first thing you need to consider is whether you think putting a blocker in the backfield (rather than on the line) is strategically useful.  I think it is if you are going to run a lot, but not so much if you're mostly passing.  If you're passing a lot, then the TE generally makes more sense.  If you want a back for pass protection, a third down type (like Kevin Faulk) might be more useful than a FB too.  But if you want to pound the ball, I think a FB is useful.

    The second decision you need to make (assuming you like lining a blocker up in the backfield) is do you keep a specialist FB or just make do by using a TE or O or D lineman or a big tailback when you need someone to line up as a FB.  I think the former makes sense if you use the formation a lot and can find a talented guy who can block, catch, and run a bit.  If you aren't using the formation much, or can't find a good FB, then I think you go the other, make-do route.

    For the Pats this year, I don't know because I don't know what BB and JMcD are planning to do.  When Develin was on the roster, I thought it was a sign we'd see more power running.  With him off, I suspect more spread, passing formations.  But not knowing what BB thinks he can do with this particular set of players, I can't really say whether a FB makes sense or not.  It's almost the other way around: if there is a FB on the roster, I'd guess BB is planning to use an offensive style that suits having a FB; and if there's no FB, then I expect BB is planning more spread type formations,  which make TEs and extra WRs more desirable than a FB. 

     

     

     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from JohnHannahrulz. Show JohnHannahrulz's posts

    Re: Fullback versus tight end

    For me its all about skill sets, formations and production. With Gronk out of the picture the TE spot is a little murkier because Gronk was an effective blocker and obviously a great pass catcher. I think Hou can be a decent pass blocker but alot of pass blocking is good footwork and being able to pick up where the blitz is coming from (instinct). I would not necessarily say that Hou is an effective lead blocker out of the I primarily because the Pats don't use that formation often. I would like to see who gets used on run play goaline situation or PATs with Gronk, but I went to Cancun for two weeks and only have a single pre-season game to work with. Sufeld seems like primarily a pass catcher with very limited potential as a blocker. Can the Pats use a back-up O lineman for goaline and PATs? To me players like Lorenzo Neal and Vonta Leach have similar skills sets and both can be used as lead blockers and short yardage guys.

    I have lobbied for the Pats to get a fullback who is good at both short yardage and pass protection for the basic reason that it keeps the RBs fairly fresh and keeps Brady off the turf? If the FB can catch passes or lead block than that would obvious be a huge bonus. I don't know that Blount is that guy. Again I have seen only the last pre-season game and some of what Blount did in TB; he does not seem to be an FB just a big RB, however if BB puts him at FB I will defintely learn more about his skill set.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share