+- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (https://thebengalsboard.com)
+-- Forum: Cincinnati Bengals / NFL (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-3.html)
+--- Forum: JUNGLE NOISE (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-2.html)
+--- Thread: Fullback (/thread-24960.html)
Fullback - WhodeyRay - 09-23-2020
I think having a true fullback could be a great asset to have on the team. I don't mean a TE playing fullback but a true bone crusher that can catch passes out of the backfield as well. With most teams going to safety sized linebacker a fullback could really blow some holes open. Have 3 TE's and 1 FB on the roster would be beneficial I feel. The 4th TE never sees the field and you could always have the 4th TE on the practice squad if needed. Whats everyones thoughts?
RE: Fullback - JSR18 - 09-24-2020
If you're trying to have a power running game, I never understood not having a true fullback...
RE: Fullback - GreenCornBengal - 09-24-2020
Our identity identity so far seems to be 5 wide. Fullback ain’t fittin!
RE: Fullback - Truck_1_0_1_ - 09-24-2020
(09-23-2020, 11:46 PM)WhodeyRay Wrote: I think having a true fullback could be a great asset to have on the team. I don't mean a TE playing fullback but a true bone crusher that can catch passes out of the backfield as well. With most teams going to safety sized linebacker a fullback could really blow some holes open. Have 3 TE's and 1 FB on the roster would be beneficial I feel. The 4th TE never sees the field and you could always have the 4th TE on the practice squad if needed. Whats everyones thoughts?
Yeah, back until 2015 or so, a FB was needed on this team (and it usually worked well).
Since then, with how our offense has changed, we have 0 use for a FB and I'm sure Burrow would agree that he'd rather have a pass-catcher on the field, instead of a mauling blocker that can really only be used as a check-down.
RE: Fullback - Nately120 - 09-24-2020
(09-24-2020, 10:27 AM)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: Yeah, back until 2015 or so, a FB was needed on this team (and it usually worked well).
Since then, with how our offense has changed, we have 0 use for a FB and I'm sure Burrow would agree that he'd rather have a pass-catcher on the field, instead of a mauling blocker that can really only be used as a check-down.
Blocking and checking down seem pretty essential to our current style of play.
RE: Fullback - Bengalitis - 09-24-2020
Mr Dillon was a possibility in a losing decade because he had one of the best FULLBACKS in the NFL.
RE: Fullback - Truck_1_0_1_ - 09-24-2020
(09-24-2020, 10:51 AM)Bengalitis Wrote: Mr Dillon was a possibility in a losing decade because he had one of the best FULLBACKS in the NFL.
No he didn't.
He had:
- Scottie Graham/Jeff Cothran
- Brian Milne
- Cliff Groce/Nick Williams(Luchey)
- One of the most overrated NFL players in history, Lorenzo Neal
- Jeremi Johnson (who was superior to Neal in almost every way and never got his due)
While Milne/Groce were good FBs with the ball in their hands and Jeremi/Luchey were good blockers, he never really had one of the best in the league, until Jeremi.
And he still ripped teams up.
I like FBs; if I ever played, that would probably be my position, as I have the perfect size to be a FB, but unless you run the correct scheme for them, they are basically useless.
RE: Fullback - ochocincos - 09-24-2020
(09-24-2020, 10:17 AM)JSR18 Wrote:
A power running game is not the Bengals' identity.
But I agree, if the Bengals want to run better, having an actual FB should help.
RE: Fullback - TheLeonardLeap - 09-24-2020
I've been banging the FB drum every year for what feels like eternity.
4th RBs are useless anyway, so why not a FB? Even if you don't use him a ton, a FB could be money on goal line situations, 3rd and shorts, and any time you want to bring in an extra blocker for your QB but retain better catching ability than an extra OL who reports eligible.
RE: Fullback - Wes Mantooth - 09-24-2020
(09-24-2020, 11:05 AM)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: - One of the most overrated NFL players in history, Lorenzo Neal
I've seen you rip on Lorenzo Neal a couple of times now. Why exactly do you consider him to be so overrated?
-Played 16 years in the league (Huge accomplishment in and of itself. Average players don't play a decade plus)
-4 Time Pro Bowler
-2 Time All Pro
-Member of the 2000's All Decade Team
I just don't see how he can be considered overrated. Most average fans don't even know who he is, due to his position. Do you not think he was one of the best fullbacks of his era? If not, why not?
Also, I've been meaning to ask you this. I'm generally curious, not trying to call you out or anything like that:
Were you able to watch those older games up in Canada? I've always wondered how people from outside of the country followed the Bengals before streaming and NFL ticket.
I'm assuming you watched all those late 90's, early 2000's games, because of references like these and Willie Anderson. Did you guys just use one of those old school dishes that were the size of an above ground pool, that people had back in the day?
RE: Fullback - Luvnit2 - 09-24-2020
(09-24-2020, 10:17 AM)JSR18 Wrote:
I see teams like the Ravens use a fullback. I remember this guy named Montana who had a great fullback. What good does it do to go 4 or 5 WR if your QB lacks the OL to protect him in that formation for longer than 2.5 seconds?
I never understood why we could not only find a FB, but find a great one since only half the league uses a FB on the roster. It is different look for a defense, one right now we can't give them.
RE: Fullback - Wes Mantooth - 09-24-2020
Quick Lorenzo Neal tidbit, to counter Truck's opinion that he was one of the most overrated players ever...
He are the halfbacks he spent the majority of his career blocking for:
-Warrick Dunn (2 years)
-Eddie George (2 years)
-Corey Dillion (2 years)
-Ladainian Tomlinson (4 years)
I'm not sure you can pair any other single player (FB or Lineman) with rushers that produced as much as these 4. Surely he had some hand in their success, no?
RE: Fullback - Luvnit2 - 09-24-2020
(09-24-2020, 11:06 AM)ochocincos Wrote: A power running game is not the Bengals' identity.
But I agree, if the Bengals want to run better, having an actual FB should help.
The Bengals are 2-16 under ZT, I would think he would be open to designing an offense that works, our offense right now is now great, so our offensive identity sucks.
In contrast, I give the Harborough (spelling?) of the Ravens all the credit. He went from a Flacco led offense to a Lamar Jackson offense in a year. He did a 360 degree turn changing the identity of the offense based on his QB's strengths. I hope Burrow is given an offense he can succeed in, not have to adapt to a ZT offense that may or may not highlight his strengths.
I believe even the Chiefs have a FB for Malone and their offense. It is just one more formation and position group Reid uses depending on the opponent.
RE: Fullback - Synric - 09-24-2020
Drew Sample and Cethan Carter have both lined up as a fullback which works with the Bengals outside zone.
RE: Fullback - Sled21 - 09-24-2020
While I'm on my campaign to bring in Peko as a backup DT, might as well show him playing fullback on one of my all time favorite plays...
RE: Fullback - Truck_1_0_1_ - 09-24-2020
(09-24-2020, 11:44 AM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: I've seen you rip on Lorenzo Neal a couple of times now. Why exactly do you consider him to be so overrated?
-Played 16 years in the league (Huge accomplishment in and of itself. Average players don't play a decade plus)
-4 Time Pro Bowler
-2 Time All Pro
-Member of the 2000's All Decade Team
I just don't see how he can be considered overrated. Most average fans don't even know who he is, due to his position. Do you not think he was one of the best fullbacks of his era? If not, why not?
Also, I've been meaning to ask you this. I'm generally curious, not trying to call you out or anything like that:
Were you able to watch those older games up in Canada? I've always wondered how people from outside of the country followed the Bengals before streaming and NFL ticket.
I'm assuming you watched all those late 90's, early 2000's games, because of references like these and Willie Anderson. Did you guys just use one of those old school dishes that were the size of an above ground pool, that people had back in the day?
Not a problem; I made a very, VERY lengthy post on the mothership back in 2012 or 2011 or something, when people were hyping him up to death. So I took an hour or so out of my time at that point and went through EVERY year of his career, with each team and their running backs. I looked at:
- how they did before Neal was on the team
- how they did after Neal was on the team
- their age
- their team performance
- their offensive line (this was the biggest one, I found)
1. For starters, he played with a bunch of huge names who racked up a ton of yards, as you mentioned; literally every one of those names was a 1,000 yard rusher before Neal came on (save for Dunn, who got 942 as a rookie) and all were 1,000 yard rushers AFTER he left the team as well. In addition to that, the addition of Neal did NOT see a massive spike in YPC or TDs or anything, in any of those name players. Strike one.
2. All of those names are big names, but what about the lesser RBs that he played with; how did they do with him as a lead blocker?
- Adrian Murrell got barely over 1,000 yards in Neal's 1 year as a Jet
- Nobody in his time at NO hit 1,000 yards and a little-known guy named Mario Bates was the RB. This was also with a line with the likes of Willie Roaf on it.
- His last season (with the Ravens) was spent blocking for Le'Ron McClain and Willis McGahee and they both failed to hit 1,000 yards or 4.0 YPC (and the line wasn't bad at all).
Strike 2
3. The biggest thing of all, I feel he earned the PB nod when he was with us, but the rest of his accolades were all blocking for arguably the best RB in NFL history, who ran behind one of the best OLs of the 2000s AND had a superb offense that picked up a shit-ton of yards and points; anyone would look good blocking for LT and behind that line.
Strike 3
To say he was a BAD player is false, as the guy was tough as nails, strong as anyone and wasn't awful with the ball in his hands, but he basically just happened to play with phenomenal rushers for 11 years straight and, like I said, anyone would look good on those teams.
Hell, his first year with us, when our line was terrible, Corey only rushed for 3.9 YPC, which was his lowest total as a FT starter in the league. His second year with the Titans (and that was a very good OL as well) had George rushing for 3.7 YPC, the lowest in his career up to that point.
After the comprehensive look at all the players involved and teams, situations, etc., etc., the numbers told me clear as day, that regardless of the oline, talent, team, system, Lorenzo Neal had little to no effect on the players around him, from a numbers POV.
Put that together with the fact that, while not awful with the ball in his hands (as mentioned above), he wasn't that great either, makes him one of the most overrated players of our generation.
I'll take Alstott, Rob Konrad, Juszcyzk, Fred Beasley, Marc Edwards or Jeremi Johnson, if I have a choice of FBs.
As for my viewing, the Bengals were NEVER on TV, unless they played the Bills, Giants or Jets: I just was glued to the highlight clips and any bit of internet news I could get my hands on (I was one of the few people who had parents actually sign the household up to the internet in 1997, around here) at the time, plus I played Madden 98 (Genesis and a little bit PC) and Madden 2000 (PC) extensively, so I was very familiar with the players, the positions, etc.
I became a fan of the team when I was 3 years old (1992); the first Madden for consoles (on the Genesis), did not have the Cowboys on it (my dad's team), thus since I liked tigers at a young age, I became a Bengals fan. It wasn't until I turned about 5 or 6 that I really started to see them on tv (in the aforementioned highlight clips) and I got Madden 98 when I was 9, so that was my first exposure to non-Bengal players and the depths of our roster.
RE: Fullback - bengalfan74 - 09-24-2020
I'm old school, so a FB and strong running game is right up my alley. But having said that with circumstances being what they are today I'm just not so sure that's the direction we need to go ?
I mean we have right now what I hope is going to become a very prolific passer. I don't believe 3 yards in a cloud of dust is the offense we want to develop with Joe ?
Do we need to improve the run ? Ummmm there's no doubt. But I'm kinda in the minority around here I suppose ? I don't think we're as far away as many believe.
Do we need to improve the Oline ? There's no doubt ! And other areas for sure. But the Chargers are a good team as are the Browns and we're only a couple plays away from winning both those games.
I'm willing to let it ride awhile more and see what shakes out.
RE: Fullback - BrownAssClown - 09-24-2020
Having a true fullback isn't a bad idea, Mixon would be for it I'm sure.
RE: Fullback - Wes Mantooth - 09-24-2020
While we're on the subject of improving the running game, I thought I'd offer an alternative option that hasn't been disussed much on here.
What about running a split backfield, with both Mixon and Bernard in at the same time?
I think this could open up the running lanes a bit, by keeping the defense honest and off-guard. Not to mention, Bernard is plenty servicable coming out of the backfield, so I'm not sure the pass game would suffer all that much by pulling a receiver in some of the sets.
You'd have two potential check down options, and you have a capable blocker in Bernard on thei field almost all of the time. He could help pick up the blitz, or you can have him run slip screens. You could use both of them to pick up defenders who beat our guys on the outside.
Just spitballing. I think this is something creative we could use.
RE: Fullback - BrownAssClown - 09-24-2020
(09-24-2020, 02:25 PM)Wes Mantooth Wrote: While we're on the subject of improving the running game, I thought I'd offer an alternative option that hasn't been disussed much on here.
What about running a split backfield, with both Mixon and Bernard in at the same time?
I think this could open up the running lanes a bit, by keeping the defense honest and off-guard. Not to mention, Bernard is plenty servicable coming out of the backfield, so I'm not sure the pass game would suffer all that much by pulling a receiver in some of the sets.
You'd have two potential check down options, and you have a capable blocker in Bernard on thei field almost all of the time. He could help pick up the blitz, or you can have him run slip screens. You could use both of them to pick up defenders who beat our guys on the outside.
Just spitballing. I think this is something creative we could use.
Not a bad idea at all if we had an oline that could provide Burrow with decent protection.