Maybe No Fullback?

[Banned_n_austin]

I've been saying that we might not carry a FB since it was pretty clear Anderson was done.

It's not rocket science, Parcells likes a versatile FB, He loves Witten and Campbell, and we have a numbers crunch at several spots on the roster. If any of the players in that crunch can give him more "plays" O, D, or ST than Barnes or Polite it's an easy call.

This is exactly what I'm thinking. Consider me on the forefront of the "no fullback" movement here in Dallas.

:starspin

 

[Yeagermeister]

We've got bigger bulldozing TEs who can go in motion and lead block better. And let's face it, this team has sucked at short yardage for probably 8 years. I don't think FB has been the only problem.

Yeah since Moose, a big bulldozing fb, retired

 

[ddh33]

He may be looking at someone like Bickerstaff to be his psuedo-fullback. That, along with the TEs may be enough, in his mind.

 

[Baileyneverfailey]

If it means we get to keep a deeper DLine rotation, and an extra linebacker, corner, or receiver, get rid of the fullback. It's far and away the least important position on a football team. A fullback is a running back with good blocking skills, who isn't fast enough to be a tailback, like it or not. If Bickerstaff can block well enough, let him be the 4th back and block sometimes, simple as that.

Maybe it's just me, but I would much rather have Campbell or Witten as an H-back blocking than any of the runners on our team. And for the guy who said Witten is not a good blocker, you're absolutely wrong. In that highlight video I have here on my PC that Calico or whoever made, there are some plays where Witten pancakes a guy, only to move on to another and spring the receiver/runner for more. He can block.

 

[Banned_n_austin]

Consider this too fellas (and ladies) ...

Drew Bledsoe is better protected in without a FB ... and this is one of many reasons why I think we do not use a true FB this year. We have guys who can be lead blockers in Cambell and even Witten. Don't forget about Keyshawn either on occasion.

And in most cases we don't need a FB for lead blocking purposes. Recently, Parcells has used a HB-type at the FB position to move the ball by running and recieving.

 

[onetrickpony]

Was anyone else surprised by the statement by Bill today (8-4) that he may not keep a fullback on the roster?

I hadn't thought of that before. Seems possible at this point. I think our TE talent is overall much better than our talent at FB.

What say you?

Bickerstaff is practicing at both RB and FB. At his current weight (230) he is big enough to serve as a change of pace back and pull the limited snaps that a fullback will get in this offense.

But Tuna could just be yanking Barnes' and Polite's chains to get their attention. :laugh2:

 

[dboyz]

I disagree with HH and agree with those that say Witten is a good blocker. He can block well at the TE spot, and also well from the FB spot. Having two TE's in the game gives you more flexibility IMO. You can have them both in the TE position. Or one can be in the full back position. Or you can even put Witten in the slot.

I expect to see a lot 2 TE sets with a lot of motion, etc. Full house backfield, motion one TE out of the back field. Two TE set with one motioning to FB position, etc.

 

[CowboysFan02]

If we go the route of no FB, except for Bickerstaff. I see our RB's being Julis, MBIII, and Bickerstaff. If we go this route I don't know if A-Train would make the team, unless we use him as a FB sometimes as well.

 

[joseephuss]

Witten and Campbell will both be used as H-backs and in two tight end sets. I agree that A-Train or Bickerstaff may be used as a hybrid full back.

I also wouldn't be surprised to see aa defensive lineman get put in as a full back in short goal line situations. Spears, Canty, Ogbogu and Ellis are all athletic guys. Perhaps one of them can be lined up and just told to blow up anyone in your way. Wouldn't be the first time that kind of thing was done.

 

[Banned_n_austin]

I disagree with HH and agree with those that say Witten is a good blocker. He can block well at the TE spot, and also well from the FB spot. Having two TE's in the game gives you more flexibility IMO. You can have them both in the TE position. Or one can be in the full back position. Or you can even put Witten in the slot.

I expect to see a lot 2 TE sets with a lot of motion, etc. Full house backfield, motion one TE out of the back field. Two TE set with one motioning to FB position, etc.

All of this is true. And don't forget the TE can motion to the FB position out of the backfield and block or catch a pass from there. This makes a LOT more sense than keeping Polite or Barnes.

 

[Billy Bullocks]

It may have to do with what Thomspon has shown in camp so far

 

[Banned_n_austin]

Would any of you be surprise IF J.Jones, A-Train, M.Barber, Bickerstaff and Tyson Thompson made the roster?


Just curious ...

 

[MichaelWinicki]

Would any of you be surprise IF J.Jones, A-Train, M.Barber, Bickerstaff and Tyson Thompson made the roster?


Just curious ...

With no FB on the roster?

Yes I would.

I could see Julius and Barber of course. Add the A-train and Thompson.

There are our 4 backs.

 

[blindzebra]

We will have a go to back...Jones.

A change of pace/3rd and long back...most likely Barber.

A back that could step in in a pinch and start...Thomas' experience factors in here, giving him the edge. The draw back here is Parcells wants this back to play special teams 20 + plays per game.

Thompson, Kincade and Bickerstaff are all fighting for that #3 spot with A-Train. They're going to have to beat out Thomas, or bring enough on special teams to get us to keep 4 backs.