Patriots looking to to sign their 3rd fullback

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from stewart7557. Show stewart7557's posts

    Patriots looking to to sign their 3rd fullback

    http://www.boston.com/sports/football/patriots/extra_points/

    Bedard comments that

    :Apparently, new offensive coordinator Josh McDaniels is aiming to run a little bit more of a two-back offense, which was largely non-existent under Bill O'Brien outside of short yardage.


    I like hearing this: The Patriots absolutely need to diversify their offense from the constant 4 & 5 reciever spread so when they play teams like the giants, ravens, and texans with good defenses that can get to Brady, they have other options.

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

    Re: Patriots looking to to sign their 3rd fullback

    I too like hearing this but, his concussion history concerns me. 

    I would absolutely love to see good old smash-mouth football again. Big crushing FB leading the way for Vereen/Ridley/Woodhead even Edeleman. 

    IMO, and I've said this before, football has "trends". The trend practically started by BB was the 3-4 defense alignment. Now it's to utilize both the 3-4 and 4-3. 

    The trend on offense is to pass, pass, pass the ball. Why not start to go against the flow that other defenses are made for and play run-first? I'm not talking about Brady taking a vacation but, let's be honest here. Every team expects Brady to throw. All of a sudden we have an offense that looks like the late sixties NFL teams like the Packers but, also incorporates all the schemes of todays' game. 

    In fact, look at last years' Patriots. 2 TE's that are among the best (well, Gronk IS the best). Hernandez can run. This was kind of a new look for a team. To have 2 TE's like that. I see having a run game with FB's as a continuation of that new look. 4 Wheel Drive is what I call it. 

    Long threat? Check

    Smash-mouth run game? Check?

    2 TE's that demand coverage? Check.

    Short passing game with Welker/Edeleman? Check.

    I pray that Lloyd stays healthy and that Ocho Cinqo can redeem himself. Having that long threat is key. 
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from JayShizzle45. Show JayShizzle45's posts

    Re: Patriots looking to to sign their 3rd fullback

    Im all for it. Lets just hope they are blocking backs and not the "pass catching" fullbacks like the L.Centers and P.Pass' that we have had in the past.
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from TSWFAN. Show TSWFAN's posts

    Re: Patriots looking to to sign their 3rd fullback

    In Response to Re: Patriots looking to to sign their 3rd fullback:
    [QUOTE]Im all for it. Lets just hope they are blocking backs and not the "pass catching" fullbacks like the L.Centers and P.Pass' that we have had in the past.
    Posted by JayShizzle45[/QUOTE]

    Jay.... Let's hope they are both!!!
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from stewart7557. Show stewart7557's posts

    Re: Patriots looking to to sign their 3rd fullback

    In Response to Re: Patriots looking to to sign their 3rd fullback:
    [QUOTE]Im all for it. Lets just hope they are blocking backs and not the "pass catching" fullbacks like the L.Centers and P.Pass' that we have had in the past.
    Posted by JayShizzle45[/QUOTE]

    Ideally, I think you could use a guy like Kevin Turner who could both run block and catch out of the backfield. I used to like to watch Sam Gash blow up linebackers and create space for the backs to eat  up yardage. Having a fullback also creates a more physical presence and that sorts of perpetuates itself on the field (i.e., players feed off the smash mouth style) and more clock control.
    I know the Patriots will be a pass first offense as long as they have Brady but running more often when they cant pass (Brady having a bad day, oppositions 0pass rush too intense, key reciever gets injured (Gronk) will allow the patriots to more options to score.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Patriots looking to to sign their 3rd fullback

    In Response to Re: Patriots looking to to sign their 3rd fullback:
    [QUOTE]Im all for it. Lets just hope they are blocking backs and not the "pass catching" fullbacks like the L.Centers and P.Pass' that we have had in the past.
    Posted by JayShizzle45[/QUOTE]

    I think you might have hit the nail on the head why they are looking at larger FB's

    Without BJGE you have no real blocking RB at this point. You can't trust Vereen to protect Brady, Woodhead is a good 3rd down chip blocker but won't last a full season if he is asked to block a majority of the time, and Ridley is still working on his blocking skills. A larger blocking FB will be needed to keep Brady upright as well as to get the short yardage runs.

    It might be one reason they brought in the kid from Den. He was mainly used in blocking situations, as he knows how LB's think and might see where potential holes will open up that will need to be blocked.

    Personally, I wish they would try to trade for Marcel Reece, as I think he's currently the best all around FB in the league. But, since he's a ERFA he would be hard to pry away from Oak. Still though it's worth the phone call
     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from JayShizzle45. Show JayShizzle45's posts

    Re: Patriots looking to to sign their 3rd fullback

    Oh Man M.Reese is huge and has speed and hands to boot. Could do it all here.

    I feel bad for S.Larsen though, B.B. is gonna have that kid playing FB and Linebacker DAY 1. He loves those versatile guys and this will save him a roster spot somewhere...ahem, Gary Guyton.

    As for the Fullbacks. I hope they are used to block for Brady as well as being traditional Fullback in the run game. We havent employed one since 06' I believe with H.Evans, but we did score 30 plus pts in the playoffs that year vs the Colts sooooooo

    Lets put a guy bck there to keep our backs from getting stuffed behind the line.

    I like the direction and it means we are probably  gonna get an Upgrade at RB with the commitment to FB..
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from pcmIV. Show pcmIV's posts

    Re: Patriots looking to to sign their 3rd fullback

    Here you go Jay:

    "Having attended Syracuse University during Fiammetta's time there, I can tell you that Fiammetta embodies a lot of the qualities that the Patriots look for in their players. At 6' and 242 lbs, Fiammetta is a true blocking fullback. While he occasionally can carry the ball in short yardage situations or catch a pass out of the backfield, he was best known at Syracuse for his role as a blocker. That being said, Fiammetta also had a big presence on special teams, and was a team leader, having been recognized as a captain."

    http://www.patspulpit.com/2012/3/26/2903720/patriots-close-to-signing-fb-tony-fiammetta
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from mthurl. Show mthurl's posts

    Re: Patriots looking to to sign their 3rd fullback

    In Response to Re: Patriots looking to to sign their 3rd fullback:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Patriots looking to to sign their 3rd fullback : Ideally, I think you could use a guy like Kevin Turner who could both run block and catch out of the backfield. I used to like to watch Sam Gash blow up linebackers and create space for the backs to eat  up yardage. Having a fullback also creates a more physical presence and that sorts of perpetuates itself on the field (i.e., players feed off the smash mouth style) and more clock control. I know the Patriots will be a pass first offense as long as they have Brady but running more often when they cant pass (Brady having a bad day, oppositions 0pass rush too intense, key reciever gets injured (Gronk) will allow the patriots to more options to score.
    Posted by stewart7557[/QUOTE]

    My God Kevin Turner! Remember him? That was one heck of a player for us.
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from pcmIV. Show pcmIV's posts

    Re: Patriots looking to to sign their 3rd fullback

    In Response to Re: Patriots looking to to sign their 3rd fullback:
    [QUOTE]In Response to Re: Patriots looking to to sign their 3rd fullback : My God Kevin Turner! Remember him? That was one heck of a player for us.
    Posted by mthurl[/QUOTE]

    Yeah he was a rock.  Was really sad when I heard about his ALS diagnosis.

    Edit: This is a pretty special video if you haven't seen it.  Came out a while ago: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0HUYF8wFchI
     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from JayShizzle45. Show JayShizzle45's posts

    Re: Patriots looking to to sign their 3rd fullback

    thx for the info PCMIV.

    I think we may finally see an end to Rusty's rants!!   lol

    sounds like we are re-committing to the Run Game. My only question now is WHO/WHEN are we getting for the UPGRADE at RB...
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from stan17. Show stan17's posts

    Re: Patriots looking to to sign their 3rd fullback

    I remember Turners diving catch in the endzone in OT against the Vikings, great catch.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from msteven. Show msteven's posts

    Re: Patriots looking to to sign their 3rd fullback

    This is a counter to the Bills.  Williams and Anderson can get to the QB but are not strong against the run.  Smart move to look at where the division is going and counter.  They will have a good passing attack and a strong running attack.  They have added a blocking tight end and two fullbacks. 
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from zbellino. Show zbellino's posts

    Re: Patriots looking to to sign their 3rd fullback

    In Response to Re: Patriots looking to to sign their 3rd fullback:
    [QUOTE]Im all for it. Lets just hope they are blocking backs and not the "pass catching" fullbacks like the L.Centers and P.Pass' that we have had in the past.
    Posted by JayShizzle45[/QUOTE]

    Nah. Fiametta is the rill dill Jay. 

    I wanted NE to take him when he came out of Syracuse. But they passed on him. He isn't a good runner at all. He isn't a reall pass catcher either. 

    But he is an absolutely bruising lead blocker. 

    My guess is there will be competition between him and Larsen for a special teams spot.

    I also agree that NE will use more 2RB sets, but I think another reason these guys are here is because they want a real short yardage presence, which has been kind of missing for a while. 

    I hated it when they ditched Evans and I wanted a real FB for a while. Polite didn't work out, but NE really needs a true FB ... they aren't antequated, IMO, like many here say.  
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from thejoshuatree28. Show thejoshuatree28's posts

    Re: Patriots looking to to sign their 3rd fullback

    Look at Murray run behind fiametta, vs not, FB's can still be very effective
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from LazarusintheSanatorium. Show LazarusintheSanatorium's posts

    Re: Patriots looking to to sign their 3rd fullback

    ALL:

    Alright, this was the thread I was looking for...  Been posting less, due to certain redundant !d!ots and !d!ocies rampantly present on this board these days (in this respect I wanted to reply to Zb's additions on the workings of Ron E's policies and schemes, but didn't).  Still, I HAVE to know, specifically from those very well versed in schematics and deployments of personell packages (see zbellino, PatsEng, Faucetman, MrBungle, Russ, Prolate, TrueChamp, among others), Exactly what Belichick could be angling towards in terms of Offensive Looks.

    Here's my broader theme:  NE, in signing Fiametta, Getting Eric Kettani back from his Military stint (for the 1st time fully I believe), and even with Ridley too- See these guys are  each and all between 5'11-6'2 and 225-243lbs respectively, whereas with Woodhead and Vareen, we're lookin' at 5'8-5'9 guys, with both right about dead even at the 200lb mark...  So (the big question), In terms of versatility of a base design package, and solely in terms of deploying an Offensive Scheme that we can ideally hope to use, as many of NE's weapons out of- Just HowInTH, Can NE best hope to accomplish this?!?

    So IF NE's moving back towards the 1 FB (or bigger back) and small back 2 RB set-up, to use again (or more...or at all), How does this affect being able to deploy the 2 TE set-up...and/or use of multiple wideouts (beit only even 2, or more).  How can NE remain versatile in their schematics and deployment of having 2 or more TEs on field (or something similiar, esp in light of our 2 star proven producers at those standard and pass-catching TE positions and simultaneous deployment), and/or 2 or more wideouts (or something similiar, esp in light of all the wideouts we've picked up), Yet still be angling towards moving to a 2 RB set-up within this whole mess (without short-changing some other area in terms of numbers of wideouts and/or TEs).

    What I'm looking for are different theories of design packages wherein NE can deploy this 2 RB set, and yet STILL have the least amount of- idk "shortchanging" of the wideouts and/or 2 TEs, but STILL remain schematically versatile enough in this usage wherein the oppossing Defense still must respect both the versatility of what the NE Offense still might be able to do per play (e.g. 2 RBs, 2 TEs, 5 Linemen, 1 QB, and 1 WR-you're gonna creep up and crowd the box on Defense, ya know? So, I want to various theories to hope to best offer as many possible threats, in as many possible areas of the field as possible to keep the defense from guessing and from cheating their countering personell-pass, run, power run, deep ball, TE mismatches, play-action...can screens be a big factor, etc.)?

    Ideas?     
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from LazarusintheSanatorium. Show LazarusintheSanatorium's posts

    Re: Patriots looking to to sign their 3rd fullback

    If it helps, I'm angling less towards sub-packages that are more specialized, and therefore, More obvious in terms of what they might be doing out of them when they're deployed...  I'm looking for novel theories (even crazy ones) of either: 2 RB, or just 1 Bigger Back (if this helps broaden the surrounding schematic spectrum), and what the surrounding personell looks of TEs and WRs, might be tailored to in design, to ideally offer the most (more) fluid play designs and play directions as imaginably possible from such a base scheme (one that keeps defenses guessing in the same way, Belichick always intends to in an ideal set-up-In the same way Belichick wants the big O-Line potential running game looks of Multiple TEs, along with the versatility and mismatches they provide when going in motion, audibling 1 or both outwards, or just releasing into a pass play as well). 

    Think 2 RBs + The greatest Versatility of a Passing Game Threat(s) in base package looks.  
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from leonardo0110. Show leonardo0110's posts

    Re: Patriots looking to to sign their 3rd fullback

    I think we're going to have what used to be the bread and butter of this O from the championship years, more screen passes,play-action,hit the deep pass when is there, dump it short instead of forcing it, hit the open guy, TAKE WHAT THE DEFENSE IS GIVING YOU!!!! I like this shift....Hopefully!!!
     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from prolate0spheroid. Show prolate0spheroid's posts

    Re: Patriots looking to to sign their 3rd fullback

    In Response to Re: Patriots looking to to sign their 3rd fullback:
    [QUOTE]ALL : Alright, this was the thread I was looking for...  Been posting less, due to certain redundant !d!ots and !d!ocies rampantly present on this board these days (in this respect I wanted to reply to Zb's additions on the workings of Ron E's policies and schemes, but didn't).  Still, I HAVE to know, specifically from those very well versed in schematics and deployments of personell packages (see zbellino , PatsEng , Faucetman , MrBungle , Russ , Prolate , TrueChamp , among others), Exactly what Belichick could be angling towards in terms of Offensive Looks. Here's my broader theme:  NE, in signing Fiametta, Getting Eric Kettani back from his Military stint (for the 1st time fully I believe), and even with Ridley too- See these guys are  each and all between 5'11-6'2 and 225-243lbs respectively, whereas with Woodhead and Vareen, we're lookin' at 5'8-5'9 guys, with both right about dead even at the 200lb mark...  So (the big question), In terms of versatility of a base design package, and solely in terms of deploying an Offensive Scheme that we can ideally hope to use, as many of NE's weapons out of- Just HowInTH, Can NE best hope to accomplish this?!? So IF NE's moving back towards the 1 FB (or bigger back) and small back 2 RB set-up, to use again (or more...or at all), How does this affect being able to deploy the 2 TE set-up...and/or use of multiple wideouts (beit only even 2, or more).  How can NE remain versatile in their schematics and deployment of having 2 or more TEs on field (or something similiar, esp in light of our 2 star proven producers at those standard and pass-catching TE positions and simultaneous deployment), and/or 2 or more wideouts (or something similiar, esp in light of all the wideouts we've picked up), Yet still be angling towards moving to a 2 RB set-up within this whole mess (without short-changing some other area in terms of numbers of wideouts and/or TEs). What I'm looking for are different theories of design packages wherein NE can deploy this 2 RB set, and yet STILL have the least amount of- idk "shortchanging" of the wideouts and/or 2 TEs, but STILL remain schematically versatile enough in this usage wherein the oppossing Defense still must respect both the versatility of what the NE Offense still might be able to do per play (e.g. 2 RBs, 2 TEs, 5 Linemen, 1 QB, and 1 WR-you're gonna creep up and crowd the box on Defense, ya know? So, I want to various theories to hope to best offer as many possible threats, in as many possible areas of the field as possible to keep the defense from guessing and from cheating their countering personell-pass, run, power run, deep ball, TE mismatches, play-action...can screens be a big factor, etc.)? Ideas?     
    Posted by LazarusintheSanatorium[/QUOTE]

    One thing Laz is they can change their packages and formations a lot more with a larger number and variety of players.  Last year, they relied awfully heavily on just six guys (Welker, Gronk, Hernandez, Branch, BJGE, and Woodhead). This contributed to their lack of diversity and their predictability on offense.  Now, they can mix it up a lot more.  You'll see all sorts of combinations, no back, one back, two backs, maybe even three backs on occasion.  You'll see anywhere from zero to three TEs.  And you'll see anywhere from zero to five wideouts.  I don't think there will be one "base" package on offense.  Instead, there will be multiple formations and packages which they'll use depending on situation and which they'll be changing constantly during games.  Plus, BB has a way of lining up players in unusual positions--FBs and RBs lined up as wideouts, TEs in the backfield or split out wide, WRs in the backfield. . .  What we'll have is a much more protean offense . . . and that's going to make the offense a lot harder to pin down, a lot less predictable, and a lot harder to defend against. 

    Let's just hope all these players are real contributors . . . if so, the offense could be scary good next year.  

     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from Paul_K. Show Paul_K's posts

    Re: Patriots looking to to sign their 3rd fullback

    At some point the Patriots had Polite on the field with Hernandez and Gronkowski, maybe Solder as a third tight end.  They must have liked the concept but not the play of Polite.

    With two tight ends that double as pass catchers, the defense has to somehow respect the run and the pass, except trying to respect both doesn't work.  Nor does trying to respect one and not the other work.  The idea of having a pass-blocking fullback raises the ante on both the run and the pass.

    Polite was a Miami castoff.  Fiammetta wasn't worth $1.2 million per year to the Cowboys, but he could have played for the Cowboys in 2012.  The Pats made him a better offer.  I conclude that none of the fullbacks are game-changers, but Fiammetta should be a step up from Polite.  Every step forward counts, and so do a few of the side-steps (except for Maroney's).
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from PatsEng. Show PatsEng's posts

    Re: Patriots looking to to sign their 3rd fullback

    Laz, basically you are looking at what's shaping out to be an exotic look with a 2 TE base.

    For this you'll have a heavy base package:

    TE's: Fell's and Gronk
    WR: Lloyd and/or Welker
    RB: Ridley and/or FB/Hern

    This will most likely be the main running and play action formation

    standard base package

    TE's: Hern and Gronk
    Z WR: Lloyd
    F WR: Welker 
    RB: Ridley or Vereen or Woodhead depending on opponent and game time situation

    This is the formation looks normal for a standard 2 TE base, what makes it exotic is that all can be considered receivers with the addition of Hern being motioned into a H back role as a RB on lead block FB

    Protection spread

    TE's: Gronk
    Z WR: Stallworth/Lloyd
    X WR: Ocho/Branch/Hern 
    Y WR: Welker/Edelman/Gonz 
    RB: Woodhead or FB

    if it's max protection spread then Gronk and the FB will be left in for protection if it's a option spread then Hern and Woodhead will be in for the option. This again is exotic as either of the TE's can go wide and the FB can be motioned out with Hern motioned in

    Empty back field

    TE: Gronk
    Z WR: Stallworth/Lloyd
    X WR: Branch/Ocho
    F WR: Welker/Hern
    Y WR: Edelman/Gonz/Woodhead

    This one is dependant on match ups as you can have multiple types of WR's on the field at the same time ala 1 Z, 2 F, and a Y or 1 Z, 1 X and 2 Y

    Goal line

    TE: Fells, Hern, and Gronk
    RB: Ridley and FB

    basically a 3 TE heavy base with the exception that Hern acts like a Y WR who can stay in to block
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from rameakap. Show rameakap's posts

    Re: Patriots looking to to sign their 3rd fullback

    bump
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from LazarusintheSanatorium. Show LazarusintheSanatorium's posts

    Re: Patriots looking to to sign their 3rd fullback

    In Response to Re: Patriots looking to to sign their 3rd fullback:
    [QUOTE]Laz, basically you are looking at what's shaping out to be an exotic look with a 2 TE base. For this you'll have a heavy base package: TE's: Fell's and Gronk WR: Lloyd and/or Welker RB: Ridley and/or FB/Hern This will most likely be the main running and play action formation standard base package TE's: Hern and Gronk Z WR: Lloyd F WR: Welker  RB: Ridley or Vereen or Woodhead depending on opponent and game time situation This is the formation looks normal for a standard 2 TE base, what makes it exotic is that all can be considered receivers with the addition of Hern being motioned into a H back role as a RB on lead block FB Protection spread TE's: Gronk Z WR: Stallworth/Lloyd X WR: Ocho/Branch/Hern  Y WR: Welker/Edelman/Gonz  RB: Woodhead or FB if it's max protection spread then Gronk and the FB will be left in for protection if it's a option spread then Hern and Woodhead will be in for the option. This again is exotic as either of the TE's can go wide and the FB can be motioned out with Hern motioned in Empty back field TE: Gronk Z WR: Stallworth/Lloyd X WR: Branch/Ocho F WR: Welker/Hern Y WR: Edelman/Gonz/Woodhead This one is dependant on match ups as you can have multiple types of WR's on the field at the same time ala 1 Z, 2 F, and a Y or 1 Z, 1 X and 2 Y Goal line TE: Fells, Hern, and Gronk RB: Ridley and FB basically a 3 TE heavy base with the exception that Hern acts like a Y WR who can stay in to block
    Posted by PatsEng[/QUOTE]

    ^ Take a look at this folks...  Fan-freakin'-tastic=TeamWork.  PatsEng, by you offering 2 things from above, something clicked idea-wise.  So check out the following thought and it's potential, and you or anyone, tell me what'cha think here...

    5 OffensiveLinemen
    1 Quarterback

    Now, In this 1 Base Package...

    1 Standard big-blocking TE, who's also anywhere from above-average in 1 case, to excellent in the other, In the pass-catching threat department:  Rob Gronkowski (6'6 265lbs) & Daniel Fells (6'4 252lbs)...alright?

    1 Z-Wide Receiver: Brandon Lloyd, then Donte Stallworth, then Britt Davis (funny how these guys with the similiar skill-sets and physical make-ups, were not 1, but 3 different pick-ups this offseason, huh?)
    0 X-Wide Receiver: Neither Branch Nor Ocho deployed in this 2 wideout set-up package.
    1 Y-Wide Receiver: Wes Welker, then either Julian Edelman or Anthony Gonzalez (Weird how we'd overdue it at this spot too, right? Might be simply a worrisome concern regarding WW's franchise tag...buuut, their very well might be more to this than simply that alone).

    1 Biggerback- And now, here's the funny part regarding Tony Fiammetta And Eric Kettani AND Stevan Ridley as well. 
    < />Tony Fiammetta (6'0 245lbs)/Here's a scouting take on him, from his draft analysis report:
    Analysis

    Positives: Very solid build in the upper and lower bodies with long arms. Lines up with his hand down on the line, as well as in motion and in the backfield. Quick to get to the edge when in motion. Takes outs the linebackers and safeties in the hole with a nice pop. Sustains his blocks through the whistle by locking on and moving his feet. Good hands, and can adjust to low throws or those behind him. Runs through cut blocks in the open field. Quick set in pass protection; able to handle oncoming blitzers. Sorts through trash to neutralize the middle linebacker, and has the strength to put him to the ground.

    Negatives: Not the wide-chested thumper some teams prefer. A bit slow getting into his routes as a receiver.
    ~In Fiammetta's final 2 years as a Junior and Senior at Syracuse, He ran the ball a grand total of just 8X...YET: In those same 2 Collegiate Seasons, Fiammetta hauled in 28 Receptions- VERY high for a Fullback, playing in the college ranks nonetheless too.

    < />Eric Kettani (5'115 235lbs)/And so HERE is a scouting take on him, during Kettani's Draft Year:
    2009 NFL Draft Prospect Scouting Report:
    Eric Kettani, FB, Navy

    A Navy back in the 2009 NFL Draft? You bet! Eric Kettani started all of the Midshipmen's thirteen games in 2006 as a fullback, where he rushed for 229 yards on 53 attempts (4.3 avg) with a TD. In 2007, Kettani started five of thirteen games for Navy. He rushed for 880 yards on 152 carriers (5.8). Good frame, although he needs to add more weight and upper body strength. Powerful legs. Great leg drive. Tough to bring down. Runs with passion and determination. Find spaces between the tackles. A willing blocker who likes contact. Good set of soft hands. Slow (4.6). Limited athletic ability. Although he has good hands, his route running skills are underdeveloped. Needs more time in the weight room. Kettani is not as strong or physically impressive as other fullback prospects, but he has determination and runs very hard. Plus, he does have one of the softer sets of hands in the nation.
    ~Eerily similiar, right?  2 seperate scouting sites too, RE: Kettani & Fiammetta's seperate analysises (NFL.com & FFToolbox respectively).

    < />Stevan Ridley (5'113 230lbs)Finally, Here's 2 quick scouting takes on Ridley from before last year's draft:
    Strengths-Thickly built and well muscled.  North-South runner who hits the hole hard.  Shows good vision and nice burst.  Runs with good power and keeps legs churning.  Is tough to bring down.  Shows good hands as a receiver.  Will lower the shoulder.
    And:
    Positives: Good size. Competitive and runs with urgency. Good lean and leg drive to churn through and spin off contact. Nice inside run vision. Powers through arm and ankle tackles. Catches naturally out of the backfield. Willing blocker who does not hesitate to initiate contact.
    ~Really, we all witnessed Ridley's surprisingly soft hands during preseason.  Weird though, right?

    ~~~

    Now, Here's what'cha just made me wonder (and man, It lends some serious credence towards the Matt Forte Rumours):

    HB that's versatile enough to be deployed as a pass-catching TE (in motion, pass-catching TE-HB, HB-pass-catching TE):  Matt Forte (6'2 220lbs): EVERY single one of his 4 seasons thus far in the pros=50+-60+ receptions...Each Year.  CRAZY receiving threat for a good RB (sh#t, even a stellar 3rd down runningback)...

    Pass-Catching TE that's versatile enough to be deployed behind a big FB, and O-Line with a big TE as an added beast in the run game (Again, same deal, Pass-catching TE or HB, to be determined any way you see fit per defensive look and match-ups of personell):  Aaron Hernandez (6'1 245lbs).  Hernandez: 8 seperate Running Plays given him, in this past postseason alone.

    Simple worrisome question mark: Durability of Hernandez and continuing durability of Forte.  Both guys, are HIGH producers, and have gotten b#nged up the past couple seasons...yet: 2 Guys splitting time along with that reduced wear & tear, + When the play calls for them to be deployed as a HB running the ball, you now have SUCH a powerful front ahead of you to take just a bit more of that brutal RB pounding away (1 Big FB cleaning up the way through 5 O-Linemen + 1 Big Blocking TE (6'4-6'6 and 255-265lbs).

    Thoughts?

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

    Re: Patriots looking to to sign their 3rd fullback



    One thing to keep in mind, all the guys signed now aren't going to make the roster.  BB is going to look at everyone in preseason and make his choices who to keep. For the eligible receiver/runner positions (RB, FB, TE, WR) I suspect BB will keep about 14 players (probably about 5 RBs/FBs, 3 TEs , and 6 WRs). I'll be a little surprised if he keeps more than one or at most two "FB" type players.  If he keeps two, one will have to be a guy who can catch the ball well and be a decent contributor in the passing game, I think.  He won't keep more than one to be primarily a run-blocking back I don't think. 


     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share