Fullback

[Ron Rico]

I don’t see the sense in starting a thread on a topic that has already been covered ad nauseum, so I decided on the topic of the Fullback position. I’m pretty sure no one has started a topic titled Fullback, so here goes.

Two weeks ago, in Buffalo, with 4:45 left in the 3^rd quarter, on 1^st and ten, a passing play was called; it was an incompletion to TE Tyler Conklin. As we vividly recall, Mike White was speared, elevated off the ground, and drilled into the turf by LB Mike Milano.

This is why every team should have a Fullback on the roster. There are critical plays throughout every possession where a QB needs a bodyguard in the backfield. For the design of that play, Michael Carter, who is 5’ 8”, 200 lbs, was supposed to put his body between Mike White and Mike Milano.

He failed to do that. Why? Probably because it wasn’t his primary responsibility, he was still supposed to make himself an available option at receiver.

Every roster must have a long snapper. There is no choice. Is it a “wasted” roster spot? No, because you have to have a long snapper.

When did the Fullback position become non-essential? I’ve heard it referred to as a wasted roster spot, or wasted draft pick. The position has become so maligned over the past decade that FB is considered a dinosaur and very few teams in the NFL have them on their roster.

Let’s talk about the spread offense, which requires 4 and sometimes 5 WR’s for the play. It prevents the opposing defense from double teaming the primary receiver. It also requires the QB to get rid of the ball quickly. At least two of those WR’s are decoys and the defense more often than not “assume” the ball is not going in their direction. It’s a calculated risk. The defense is betting that they can get to the QB before he can get rid of the ball.

A team that primarily runs a spread offense SUCCESSFULLY will not have a Fullback on the roster. They don’t need one because they get rid of the ball, fast.

The play Mike White was injured on was not a spread offense play. It was a routine 1-10 set.

A fullback as a part of that set would have prevented that brutal hit.

A fullback is not a wasted draft pick. A wasted draft pick does not exclude other positions. A wasted draft pick is a result of the player, not the position.

So why not use a 5^th or 6^th draft pick on a man mountain with a bad temper who’s primary purpose is to be a bodyguard for the QB? Not on every play, of course. 1-10? Third and long? Yes, definitely. But the FB shouldn’t be 1 dimensional. He should able to carry the ball. First and Goal?

Maybe I’m reminiscing the good old days, too much, but I can’t help but think how that one roster spot, that one player, a Fullback, could be the big difference between being 8-6 or even 9-5 as opposed to being 7-7.

[Darnold's Forehead]

Sure would be nice to have a lead blocker on a run to the outside for once.

[Skeet Ulrich]

It's wasted value as a position in modern football. Teams are less reliant on running the football and you could get the same value by having an extra tight end or lineman in place of the FB.

[Ron Rico]

22 minutes ago, Skeet Ulrich said:

Teams are less reliant on running the football

It begs the question, "why"?

Our best win this year was against Buffalo and it's because we ran the ball down their throat. The 5-2 run was primarily due to Breece Hall. That to me is Championship type football. 

 

 

[Ron Rico]

Dumbest call ever. This is when the NFL jumped the shark

 

 

[JetPotato]

12 minutes ago, Coquito said:

It begs the question, "why"?

Our best win this year was against Buffalo and it's because we ran the ball down their throat. The 5-2 run was primarily due to Breece Hall. That to me is Championship type football. 

 

 

It would be interesting to see if smaller, faster defenses could be beat up that way, but no one seems to want to be first to reverse the trend. With the "let them play" edict taking more jump ball hope-for-PI throws out of the equation, why not? Especially if you don't have a QB (ahem - although, you also need a healthy o-line)

[Larz]

I remember discussing this in the summer and some people thought that Conklin would fill the role to a degree and they had a FB in camp, but then just nothing came of it. Definitely weird 

[Ron Rico]

Just now, JetPotato said:

 taking more jump ball hope-for-PI throws out of the equation, why not? 

That's actually an excellent point. How many plays are actually designed and called "hoping" for a PI? It's very demoralizing because the decision can be so arbitrary. You see a team do it on purpose and get the call, and then when it should be called  (Zach's pass to Jeff Smith in the end zone was blatant) the refs ignore it.

[Joe Willie White Shoes]

Doesn't a running back who can pass block solve this problem?  Who plays with a FB these days, two teams?

[JetPotato]

1 minute ago, Coquito said:

That's actually an excellent point. How many plays are actually designed and called "hoping" for a PI? It's very demoralizing because the decision can be so arbitrary. You see a team do it on purpose and get the call, and then when it should be called  (Zach's pass to Jeff Smith in the end zone was blatant) the refs ignore it.

It's been one of the top features of Tom Brady's repertoire for many years. Although I see less guys getting that call now with this edict. Which is fine. For a while there, it was too easy to throw in this league if you had a competent QB.

[Ron Rico]

13 minutes ago, Larz said:

I remember discussing this in the summer and some people thought that Conklin would fill the role to a degree and they had a FB in camp, but then just nothing came of it. Definitely weird 

It's like when they are making the cuts during training camp is almost a foregone conclusion the fullback will get bumped eventually to make room for a backup WR or TE who will never see any significant playing time. 

I just want to see a more balanced attack, I'm partial to running the ball but keep it balanced. Some games I watch there are virtually no running plays from either team. The number one priority is keeping your starting QB healthy, I just don't see the point in having 4 WR's on the field when 3 will be just as efficient and keep a fullback in the backfield with the QB to pick up a pass rusher breaking free. Not every play, of course. Just mix it up. Once in a while.

[Ron Rico]

5 minutes ago, Joe Willie White Shoes said:

Doesn't a running back who can pass block solve this problem?  Who plays with a FB these days, two teams?

You know, I'm going to do some research on that. 

Something I did look up; you know who used the FB in their scheme? BYU when Zach was there. 

[Ron Rico]

Anyone remember Tom Rathman? Or Mike Alstott? Man, that was football.

[Ron Rico]

Ha ha I just looked, the Jets do have a Fullback, Nick Bawden, he's 6'2 and 245 lbs. Get this meathead suited up for Thursday night!

https://sports.yahoo.com/nfl/players/31207/

[JTJet]

22 hours ago, Coquito said:

Anyone remember Tom Rathman? Or Mike Alstott? Man, that was football.

Strange. I was just thinking about Rathman yesterday. I was going through some collectibles I own and came across my stash of Coca Cola "Monsters of the Gridiron" cards. He was the 49ers player they used in the setlol.