Skip to content

Vickers Cut By Cowboys

The Browns Board
31 12 1.1k
  • If they pick up Vickers, expect Richardson to run through the NFL to the tune of 2500 rushing yards...

  • I would love to see him back in a browns uniform, but I have to wonder why no team keeps him on their roster for more then a couple seasons. Does he have some character issues or something?

    @louisville-slugger said:

    I would love to see him back in a browns uniform, but I have to wonder why no team keeps him on their roster for more then a couple seasons. Does he have some character issues or something?

    So why haven't we ditched Marecic already? Vickers on one leg and a bad back is better.

  • @louisville-slugger said:

    I would love to see him back in a browns uniform, but I have to wonder why no team keeps him on their roster for more then a couple seasons. Does he have some character issues or something?

    So why haven't we ditched Marecic already? Vickers on one leg and a bad back is better.

    @hoorta said:

    So why haven't we ditched Marecic already? Vickers on one leg and a bad back is better.

    there's another back we drafted too..a white kid...he was on the practice squad last season...

  • He's useless.

  • well i guess in his mind at least he's not black..............

    ????

  • Nobody gives a shit about fullbacks anymore.

  • Nobody gives a shit about fullbacks anymore.

    @shep said:

    Nobody gives a shit about fullbacks anymore.

    your the only one (that doesnt give a shit) Shep...The rest of us understand the importance of having one...

  • Then its isolated to this board. FBs are relatively useless, unless they can run, block and catch. Vickers was 1 of those 3, and a dead giveaway to the defense we were running the ball. Might as well send the D a telegram....

    Norv has a history of using versatile FBs a bit, but not to a great degree.

    Why not explain to us the importance of the FB in today's passing league. I'm curious.....

  • @shep said:

    Nobody gives a shit about fullbacks anymore.

    your the only one (that doesnt give a shit) Shep...The rest of us understand the importance of having one...

    You may... but the league doesn't. It's a dying position. Most teams prefer more receivers on the field and when they want a lead blocker just let the TE/H-back shift into the backfield. After Vickers got cut, Sobo instantly Tweeted that the position has become more than diminished... it's becoming extinct. Look at whatsisname, that uber-FB from Baltimore. They didn't seem the slightest bit concerned about losing him and nobody's fighting over him.

    So what you understand so well is entirely false. But that's the world we live in.

    @nickers said:

    your the only one (that doesnt give a shit) Shep...The rest of us understand the importance of having one...

  • Then its isolated to this board. FBs are relatively useless, unless they can run, block and catch. Vickers was 1 of those 3, and a dead giveaway to the defense we were running the ball. Might as well send the D a telegram....

    Norv has a history of using versatile FBs a bit, but not to a great degree.

    Why not explain to us the importance of the FB in today's passing league. I'm curious.....

    I don't wanna beat on Nick because he's far from the only football fan who digs in a little against how dramatically the league is changing. RBs are becoming hugely devalued, 3-4 ILBs are getting smaller and faster, and "fullback" is becoming a term or grandchildren might not even know.

    Prior to last year, the last 10 Super Bowl participants average rushing rank... was 23rd.

    @choco said:

    Then its isolated to this board. FBs are relatively useless, unless they can run, block and catch. Vickers was 1 of those 3, and a dead giveaway to the defense we were running the ball. Might as well send the D a telegram....

    Norv has a history of using versatile FBs a bit, but not to a great degree.

    Why not explain to us the importance of the FB in today's passing league. I'm curious.....

  • I'm not trying to be a dick either, just curious on his take. I'm sure you saw servos (?) Breakdown of norvs historic use of fullbacks, which suggests he doesn't use them unless they are dynamic and versatile....

    Leech and Vickers are old school fullbacks, which are useless nowadays.

  • Norv and especially Chud are innovators who like to stay at the front edge (like Chud embracing the RO)... and both have creatively skirted the need for a conventional fullback over the past couple years.

    I really think we'll see a lot of one-back (I believe T-Rich prefers it) and Kellen Davis or Barnidge shifting into the backfield on certain plays. It just isn't something GMs or coaches are sitting around talking about, their desperate search for a blocking fullback.

  • And you wonder why QB's are getting killed...cuz FB's are useless...LOL...bring on Arena NFL...

  • I wasn't wondering why QBs were getting killed. I didn't know they were. They get hit less than ever because of rules, quicker passing games, etc.

  • They're not really useless, but there's now more being required of them. The traditional throwback FB is obsolete, in favor of a more offensive threat that can do other things rather than block. Coaches can scheme better protection, rather than utilize a roster spot on a guy that can't really do much other than block.

    Just the way its progressing....otherwise, leech would have been snatched up shorty after being released.

  • http://www.boltsfromtheblue.com/2013/1/30/3933932/chargers-cut-him-or-keep-him-leron-mcclain

    Not really if you consider how little he was used, Mikey. Simply signing a guy proves nothing....how he's used and production does.

  • Vicker's has been trying to remain in Texas since he left Cle. it will be interesting to see if offered work elsewhere if he will take it and where he eventually ends up...if anywhere.

  • More and more, when a team wants a lead blocker, they drop a TE back. Makes it less predictable and doesn't waste a roster spot on a guy who won't be in the lineup all that much.

    It's one of those things you don't have to like... but it's pretty impossible to deny. Just like "big run-stuffing middle linebackers" aren't going to be at the top of anybody's shopping list in a passing league.

  • More and more, when a team wants a lead blocker, they drop a TE back. Makes it less predictable and doesn't waste a roster spot on a guy who won't be in the lineup all that much.

    It's one of those things you don't have to like... but it's pretty impossible to deny. Just like "big run-stuffing middle linebackers" aren't going to be at the top of anybody's shopping list in a passing league.

    @shep said:

    More and more, when a team wants a lead blocker, they drop a TE back. Makes it less predictable and doesn't waste a roster spot on a guy who won't be in the lineup all that much.

    It's one of those things you don't have to like... but it's pretty impossible to deny. Just like "big run-stuffing middle linebackers" aren't going to be at the top of anybody's shopping list in a passing league.

    Tell that to Chicago who took Bostic at 50.

    Then again, they're stuck in the 80s.

  • Indeed. We're at a place where a downhill "banger" is tough to field except in short yardage situations. You need so damn many cover guys.