To fullback or not to fullback

[DogFace]

I'm one who's always preferred a fullback. The traditional symmetry of a fire-hydrant battering ram to clear out the trash for a trailing tailback just bleeds football essence to me. The backfield looks naked without one.

However, there's good reasoning behind not bothering with them these days.

1. Two-TE offenses make it very hard for defenses to effectively blitz. With two tight ends on opposite sides of the center, if you blitz off either corner, it's an easy hitch and catch for the QB. It also forces teams to play more in their basic formation and package because they have to cover each TE and be ready for the run. Run block assignments are more straight forward without a "loose" linebacker roaming around before the snap.

2. Three-receiver sets are such a standard package, it takes snaps away from the fullback.

3. Lots of backs prefer a clean backfield, especially those with good vision. This is often based on preference, but Zeke Elliott is used to playing without a FB, so I'd bet he prefers not having one.

4. There just aren't any good ones anymore. College football has pretty much abandoned traditional running attacks, so most teams don't really even use fullbacks. That makes them tough to draft, and there are hardly any good ones in the NFL these days. Moose, Neal, Rathman, Leach.....they're like dinosaur fossils anymore.

5. I'm tired of watching fullbacks here get stoned in the hole and just clog up the running lanes. Doesn't seem to matter who Dallas brings in, they turn in to 230-pound speed bumps that the RB has to negotiate around. I'd rather pull that linebacker out of there with a third receiver or a tight end in motion.

6. The tight ends, despite their usual height, seem to do just about as good a job if you need them to line up in the backfield. Not great, but not noticeably worse.

Makes me nostalgic, but I think it's probably the best way to go.

Yep ball good points. I'd like to think any number of position players could step up and do this job as well or better than Clutts. Especially since it's a limited number of plays as you said.
Backup linebackers, TE, or mobile lineman, I think, should be able to be coached into being able play FB without wasting a roster spot.

 

[Tusan_Homichi]

I like a fullback set, but the problem is finding a fullback that's worth doing it. How about trying Rico Gathers at FB? He hasn't played football in over a decade anyway, so any position he plays will be new to him... That said, it is hard to imagine a 6'7" FB... But I do think that if used correctly, there could be such thing as a transcendent FB emerge in today's NFL...

Yeah. I'd imagine Rico would have a hard time being so tall and getting low enough to get leverage on some of those lead blocks.

Personally, I'd say no to taking up a roster spot for a FB. It seemed like a waste last year except for a handful of plays. Just go 2 TEs and occasionally throw a 2nd RB back there just to mix it up.

 

[Bullflop]

There's no practical reason to insist upon having a FB on your team unless he's productive. I don't think the Cowboys currently have one on their roster to answer that description. Good luck locating the next Daryl Johnston -- that type is about as rare as hen's teeth these days. Maybe it would be wiser to retain another position on the roster that we would actually use. What a novel idea!

 

[fortdick]

I love the fact that, in another thread, I was criticized for suggesting Darius Jackson could convert into a FB, but in this thread I have heard it lamented that we haven't had a good FB in a while, or we should convert Morris, or Smith, or even a transcendental Gathers at the position. It was even suggested that it be left up to Elliott to decide if he wants one. Maybe we can ask Dez what routes he wants to run? Or ask McClain to consult the voices in his head about defensive schemes.

 

[Manwiththeplan]

There's no practical reason to insist upon having a FB on your team unless he's productive. I don't think the Cowboys currently have one on their roster to answer that description. Good luck locating the next Daryl Johnston -- that type is about as rare as hen's teeth these days. Maybe it would be wiser to retain another position on the roster that we would actually use. What a novel idea!

Darrel Young is a good fullback and is just out there

 

[Bullflop]

Darrel Young is a good fullback and is just out there

I'm not familiar with the guy but I'm guessing we're about to find out what he's got to offer. Here's hoping he measures up to your admiration.

 

[Manwiththeplan]

I'm not familiar with the guy but I'm guessing we're about to find out what he's got to offer. Here's hoping he measures up to your admiration.

he was the fullback in Washington the last few seasons, good on special teams as well

 

[Bullflop]

he was the fullback in Washington the last few seasons, good on special teams as well

I looked him up and his record seems fairly impressive. Wonder why the Commanders didn't re-sign him. I saw where coach Callahan reduced his role to "utilize TEs more." He's 29. Maybe he's had it? Guess we'll see.

 

[Wolfpack]

I like the fullback position. In Norvs old offense the FB was an important position in both the passing and running game. Be nice to find a guy that can do both as it removes some easy to read formation tells for the defense.

A TE type really can't block well inside with their typical tall body type. I don't think that's worked all that well here and limits the running game to more of just reads and some traps.

I'm guessing this year will see a TE doing most of the work with hoping someone can learn the short yardage FB roll. Not ideal but I think it's hard to find a guy who can do both.

 

[links18]

Would like to have a Ritchie Anderson type. He was a multi-dimensional threat who played as a FB.

 

[texbumthelife]

Running a lead blocking back somewhat defeats the purpose of using a zone scheme.

 

[theebs]

Fiammetta was the last effective FB I can remember. Clutts sucks.

he was pretty good in 14, plus he played special teams.

 

[theebs]

Running a lead blocking back somewhat defeats the purpose of using a zone scheme.

in 14 down the stretch when we made all those 3rd and 4th and goals against chi, philly, detroit it was murray running behind big blocks from clutts.

He was very good in those 3 tight end packages.

 

[Jarv]

Would like to have a Ritchie Anderson type. He was a multi-dimensional threat who played as a FB.

That's why i think Morris should have that role

 

[AbeBeta]

Best case is FB on the roster who can serve a key special teams role. He gets snaps in a handful of packages at most. I expect that is the plan with the Smiths moving to FB

 

[BAT]

Best case is FB on the roster who can serve a key special teams role. He gets snaps in a handful of packages at most. I expect that is the plan with the Smiths moving to FB

Sounds like Will Tukuafu. At 6-2 280 he played ST, DL, in line blocking TE and FB lead blocking for Marshawn Lynch.

Tukuafu is all about power running. Lynch loved running behind Tukuafu. And Cowboys employ a hybrid zone and power blocking scheme, this ability to be multiple and do so at elite level is what sets them apart from 90's OL which was almost exclusively a power blocking unit.

 

[texbumthelife]

in 14 down the stretch when we made all those 3rd and 4th and goals against chi, philly, detroit it was murray running behind big blocks from clutts.

He was very good in those 3 tight end packages.

Murray was also vocal about preferring a lead blocker and he was more successful running behind one. Those also weren't zone runs.

 

[theebs]

Murray was also vocal about preferring a lead blocker and he was more successful running behind one. Those also weren't zone runs.

yea the 3 te big sets were power runs. they were the difference in some of the most important moments of the most important games. I have to think the team wants a fb for the same sets and special teams. Will be fun to see how the summer goes.

 

[LocimusPrime]

John Kuhn is still available. He's pretty good