Re: Fullback versus tight end
posted at 9/3/2013 3:06 PM EDT
In response to seawolfxs' comment:
Thank you all for this discussion
When I sit back and look at it
1) We never had a healthy Gronk and AH in the Playoffs against a top D team
2) Our Oline against these teams has not always been effective in Pass Protection, and run?
3) Except for TB in his QB sneak, we have not been a succesfull short yardage running team?
4) Sometimes the wr's weren't able to make separation and made TB and the line look worse
5) Forget the regular season games - but look at the top D's we might face in the playoffs ( Houston,SF, Seatle and on the outside Giants and Detroit)with good Dlines that rush only 4 - with our new and hopefully separating effective wr's - Would you want a "FB" for run blocking and pass protection? what is your final suggestion?
Pat's Fan lost in Jet Land
Good question seawolfxs.
I hate to be so noncommital, but I think the answer is "it depends."
The first thing you need to consider is whether you think putting a blocker in the backfield (rather than on the line) is strategically useful. I think it is if you are going to run a lot, but not so much if you're mostly passing. If you're passing a lot, then the TE generally makes more sense. If you want a back for pass protection, a third down type (like Kevin Faulk) might be more useful than a FB too. But if you want to pound the ball, I think a FB is useful.
The second decision you need to make (assuming you like lining a blocker up in the backfield) is do you keep a specialist FB or just make do by using a TE or O or D lineman or a big tailback when you need someone to line up as a FB. I think the former makes sense if you use the formation a lot and can find a talented guy who can block, catch, and run a bit. If you aren't using the formation much, or can't find a good FB, then I think you go the other, make-do route.
For the Pats this year, I don't know because I don't know what BB and JMcD are planning to do. When Develin was on the roster, I thought it was a sign we'd see more power running. With him off, I suspect more spread, passing formations. But not knowing what BB thinks he can do with this particular set of players, I can't really say whether a FB makes sense or not. It's almost the other way around: if there is a FB on the roster, I'd guess BB is planning to use an offensive style that suits having a FB; and if there's no FB, then I expect BB is planning more spread type formations, which make TEs and extra WRs more desirable than a FB.