Fullback, the outdated position?

#1
dan4vols

dan4vols

VN GURU
Joined
Sep 28, 2004
Messages
9,997
Likes
1,087
#1
I looked up the websters dictionary definition of the American term fullback as well as other sources on the net and they basically say the same thing. Its a position that requires power football skills in addition to blocking ability. Ideally that sounds great even in this era of college football where raw speed is awesome. In this day and time an offensive lineman can and would outrun a back of NFL teams of the 1st superbowl. The fullback is IMO an outdated position as defensive team speed negates any advantage a FB could or does bring to the table. I believe offenses in college football will and soon to follow the NFl...will gravitate to single back offenses utilizing the extra position as an on the line of scrimmage blocker or an additional WR. I believe gone are the days of Csonka and Riggins....as the players get faster and stronger.
 
#2
#2
It would be cool to see the fullback position come back and get more play, along with offenses like the power I, wishbone, etc. being revived and ran with great success.
 
#3
#3
I think the fullback position only works when you can find an athlete who runs, blocks, and catches the ball well; like Shawn Bryson for instance. Those kind of athletes are hard to find.

The philosophy now seems to be spread the field with a 4 WR set to prevent defenses from overplaying the run.
 
#4
#4
A big, mobile fullback is essential in goaline situations.
 
#5
#5
exactly, it's a situational thing, I love the big back that stays in to protect
 
#6
#6
(dan4vols @ Aug 8 said:
I looked up the websters dictionary definition of the American term fullback as well as other sources on the net and they basically say the same thing. Its a position that requires power football skills in addition to blocking ability. Ideally that sounds great even in this era of college football where raw speed is awesome. In this day and time an offensive lineman can and would outrun a back of NFL teams of the 1st superbowl. The fullback is IMO an outdated position as defensive team speed negates any advantage a FB could or does bring to the table. I believe offenses in college football will and soon to follow the NFl...will gravitate to single back offenses utilizing the extra position as an on the line of scrimmage blocker or an additional WR. I believe gone are the days of Csonka and Riggins....as the players get faster and stronger.
Click to expand...
interesting thought Dan....and i agree with you in regards to the position in the NFL...with the amount of speed available to NFL teams now a days, this point is valid.

But in college football, the talent pool is a little bit more shollow than in the NFL....the NFL gets the cream of the crop from College, so the Speed is inherently there...whereas in college, the vast majority of the players playing college football dont' have NFL caliber speed or skills, and that goes for skill position players as well as they guys in the trenches....so i would argue that in college football, the fullback still has value. Maybe not in so much as the traditional sense, as i think more full backs are capable of being RB's or even tight ends...i.e. Shawn Bryson a few years ago...so yeah, maybe the traditional fullback is gone, but in college football, i do think the fullback still has some value, and can be more versatile than just being a plug along blocker ahead of the HB.
 
#7
#7
It depends on the offense you use. Navy's offense is centered around the fullback (who's usually the best running back they have), but in the "traditional" sense of using him for blocking between the tackles that's non-existent.
 
#8
#8
(dan4vols @ Aug 8 said:
I looked up the websters dictionary definition of the American term fullback as well as other sources on the net and they basically say the same thing. Its a position that requires power football skills in addition to blocking ability. Ideally that sounds great even in this era of college football where raw speed is awesome. In this day and time an offensive lineman can and would outrun a back of NFL teams of the 1st superbowl. The fullback is IMO an outdated position as defensive team speed negates any advantage a FB could or does bring to the table. I believe offenses in college football will and soon to follow the NFl...will gravitate to single back offenses utilizing the extra position as an on the line of scrimmage blocker or an additional WR. I believe gone are the days of Csonka and Riggins....as the players get faster and stronger.
Click to expand...

That's pretty much what June Jones and Jerry Glanville thought too.
 
#10
#10
(GAVol @ Aug 8 said:
That's pretty much what June Jones and Jerry Glanville thought too.
Click to expand...
Don't forget Mike Leach... except he's being more successful than Jones.
 
#11
#11
I think you can get away with it in college moreso than in the NFL where it's mainly a pass protection issue.

Run and Shoot type offenses work great for about 55 minutes, but it's the last 5 minutes with a lead where a FB becomes handy.
 
#12
#12
(GAVol @ Aug 8 said:
I think you can get away with it in college moreso than in the NFL where it's mainly a pass protection issue.

Run and Shoot type offenses work great for about 55 minutes, but it's the last 5 minutes with a lead where a FB becomes handy.
Click to expand...

Auburn and Georgia both have offenses that rely heavily on their fullback. They seem to be doing fairly well lately. UT's fullbacks weren't stellar last year, but I don't think that is any indication that the position is outdated. Sometimes oneback sets can work, but FBs will always have a place.

Also, I believe UGA beat us with a pass to their fullback in 2001.
 
#19
#19
Fullback is to Runningback as Tightend is to Receiver. They are vital to an offense if used properly.
 
#20
#20
Eddie George was never the same back after Lorenzo Neil, his fullback, was traded. I think they still have a place.
 
#21
#21
Everyone has made good points. Im looking at this issue in terms that I cant remember in the last 10-12 seasons a Fullback who impressed me with his ability to block consistantly against defenses that didnt have more speed. Goaline situations...if you defense has a lotta speed you can run blitz shooting the gaps and disrupt the backfield b4 the offense has a chance to develope a hole. In the past a FB was essential in kicking out the DE while the TE and tackle blocked down on the DT. Nowadays it appears to me the defensive speed negates this option because theyre already in the backfield penetrating. There fore you should go to a 1 back set and employ an additional on line of scrimmage blocker or reciever to slow down the surge.
 
#22
#22
(dan4vols @ Aug 8 said:
Everyone has made good points. Im looking at this issue in terms that I cant remember in the last 10-12 seasons a Fullback who impressed me with his ability to block consistantly against defenses that didnt have more speed. Goaline situations...if you defense has a lotta speed you can run blitz shooting the gaps and disrupt the backfield b4 the offense has a chance to develope a hole. In the past a FB was essential in kicking out the DE while the TE and tackle blocked down on the DT. Nowadays it appears to me the defensive speed negates this option because theyre already in the backfield penetrating. There fore you should go to a 1 back set and employ an additional on line of scrimmage blocker or reciever to slow down the surge.
Click to expand...
yep...the FB now imo has to be more of a runner, blocker and receiver...he can't survive as a blocker alone...we now call those TE's.
 
#23
#23
(dan4vols @ Aug 8 said:
I looked up the websters dictionary definition of the American term fullback as well as other sources on the net and they basically say the same thing. Its a position that requires power football skills in addition to blocking ability. Ideally that sounds great even in this era of college football where raw speed is awesome. In this day and time an offensive lineman can and would outrun a back of NFL teams of the 1st superbowl. The fullback is IMO an outdated position as defensive team speed negates any advantage a FB could or does bring to the table. I believe offenses in college football will and soon to follow the NFl...will gravitate to single back offenses utilizing the extra position as an on the line of scrimmage blocker or an additional WR. I believe gone are the days of Csonka and Riggins....as the players get faster and stronger.
Click to expand...




Tell all of this to a Tailback and see how he fills about not having a FB. Then I may go for the idea. I for one sure did enjoy an extra big body blocking. That was years ago and the game has changed, but I still notice that the TB'S that are successful and staying out of the training room, and teams that can control the game with the running game, have a darn nice FB in front of them.
 
#24
#24
(dan4vols @ Aug 8 said:
Therefore you should go to a 1 back set and employ an additional on line of scrimmage blocker or reciever to slow down the surge.
Click to expand...

Hence in the 1980s when Lawrence Taylor was wreaking havoc coming off the edge, Joe Gibbs created a hybrid known as an H-back who he used as an extra body at the point of attack and to facilitate better pass protection. Really just a Fullback that is closer to the line of scrimmage and motions a lot.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top