Lawrence Vickers
-
If we replaced Vickers with a good FB no one would care. It's just the fact we've had nothing there since he left
-
Love Vickers, he loved playing here...was pissed when we let him go. That being said...the FA list of fullbacks available reads as McClain, Jones, Leach as the top 3 and still unsigned. Any of those guys can be had for a good price. We need to do this. If not any of those guys than for gods sake bring Vickers back. Just get someone besides Obonnaya infront of Tate or we're gonna watch the same running game this season as last. Tate isn't going to light anything up running behind just our o line. FB was actually one of our biggest needs on offense besides QB. With a really good FB we would have had a much much better running game last year. Not spectacular....but our guys wouldn't have been getting met in the backfield as much as they did.
-
We all love Vickers, but he's 31, no one picked him up last year, and I'm sure Shanny has his own ideas for the type of personnel he is looking for.
Tate sure is a lot of fun on social media, God, I hope he is a star for the Browns and not just another stopgap.
My man Vickers had the greatest game I ever saw a fullback play when Jerome Harrison ran for 286 yards. He was just straight up blowing people out of the way. Shoulda made the Pro Bowl that year.
Zombo
-
@mike-h said:
Article on Shanahan and FBs from last preseason:http://www.csnwashington.com/football-washington-redskins/talk/redskins-will-test-plan-b-fullback-vs-bucs
Jim Dray can play FB: http://www.azcardinals.com/news-and-events/article-2/Jim-Dray-Finds-His-Niche/a30f2e16-dda7-4a51-b626-c6339db78bb3
Bottom line: Shanahans utilize low-priced, versatile and athletic players for their FBs. Having a guy who can move around and play multiple positions, and STs effectively is a highly desired commodity when it comes to numbers-crunching to get the roster down to 53.
I get it that you guys like Vickers, and I did too, but it's time to move on. That ship has sailed. The running game is going to be better this year without a big-name FB signing, just wait and see.
Per that first article...."We game plan for everythin in the running back room. Evan Royster might play fullback, you never know....He pass blocks the same guy, why can't he block him in the running game?"
That wasn't a quote from Shanahan but from one of the Redskin tailbacks who was presumably relating how the RB coaches, with Shanahans blessing, view the running game. We could be in a lot of trouble if Shanahan still considers that a valid backfield strategy. Pass blocking is not the same as run blocking. A FB doing run block needs to basically "tackle" guys out of the hole without actually wrapping up. This is a far far cry from standing infront of someone and trying to shunt them around the edge or cutting a blitzing inside LB'er. Per that article Shanahan believes guys lower on the depth chart at RB are perfectly capable of blowing up ILB"ers.
This is good news for the rest of the AFC cause there will be more running plays with Chris Obonnaya leading for Tate. Something Tate apparently doesn't want to see either cause he's kind of calling for a dedicated FB himself. The Skins running game didnt' need a FB cause they had RG doing the read option to Morris. We don't have RG, there is no RG in the draft either. So without that read freezing the edge we need to be old school in the run game. Get a fucking FB. THere's plenty out there you can get for next to nothing.
-
@mike-h said:
Article on Shanahan and FBs from last preseason:http://www.csnwashington.com/football-washington-redskins/talk/redskins-will-test-plan-b-fullback-vs-bucs
Jim Dray can play FB: http://www.azcardinals.com/news-and-events/article-2/Jim-Dray-Finds-His-Niche/a30f2e16-dda7-4a51-b626-c6339db78bb3
Bottom line: Shanahans utilize low-priced, versatile and athletic players for their FBs. Having a guy who can move around and play multiple positions, and STs effectively is a highly desired commodity when it comes to numbers-crunching to get the roster down to 53.
I get it that you guys like Vickers, and I did too, but it's time to move on. That ship has sailed. The running game is going to be better this year without a big-name FB signing, just wait and see.
Per that first article...."We game plan for everythin in the running back room. Evan Royster might play fullback, you never know....He pass blocks the same guy, why can't he block him in the running game?"
That wasn't a quote from Shanahan but from one of the Redskin tailbacks who was presumably relating how the RB coaches, with Shanahans blessing, view the running game. We could be in a lot of trouble if Shanahan still considers that a valid backfield strategy. Pass blocking is not the same as run blocking. A FB doing run block needs to basically "tackle" guys out of the hole without actually wrapping up. This is a far far cry from standing infront of someone and trying to shunt them around the edge or cutting a blitzing inside LB'er. Per that article Shanahan believes guys lower on the depth chart at RB are perfectly capable of blowing up ILB"ers.
This is good news for the rest of the AFC cause there will be more running plays with Chris Obonnaya leading for Tate. Something Tate apparently doesn't want to see either cause he's kind of calling for a dedicated FB himself. The Skins running game didnt' need a FB cause they had RG doing the read option to Morris. We don't have RG, there is no RG in the draft either. So without that read freezing the edge we need to be old school in the run game. Get a fucking FB. THere's plenty out there you can get for next to nothing.
Did you just accidentally start another Manziel rumor?Per that first article...."We game plan for everythin in the running back room. Evan Royster might play fullback, you never know....He pass blocks the same guy, why can't he block him in the running game?"
That wasn't a quote from Shanahan but from one of the Redskin tailbacks who was presumably relating how the RB coaches, with Shanahans blessing, view the running game. We could be in a lot of trouble if Shanahan still considers that a valid backfield strategy. Pass blocking is not the same as run blocking. A FB doing run block needs to basically "tackle" guys out of the hole without actually wrapping up. This is a far far cry from standing infront of someone and trying to shunt them around the edge or cutting a blitzing inside LB'er. Per that article Shanahan believes guys lower on the depth chart at RB are perfectly capable of blowing up ILB"ers.
This is good news for the rest of the AFC cause there will be more running plays with Chris Obonnaya leading for Tate. Something Tate apparently doesn't want to see either cause he's kind of calling for a dedicated FB himself. The Skins running game didnt' need a FB cause they had RG doing the read option to Morris. We don't have RG, there is no RG in the draft either. So without that read freezing the edge we need to be old school in the run game. Get a fucking FB. THere's plenty out there you can get for next to nothing.
-
@mike-h said:
Article on Shanahan and FBs from last preseason:http://www.csnwashington.com/football-washington-redskins/talk/redskins-will-test-plan-b-fullback-vs-bucs
Jim Dray can play FB: http://www.azcardinals.com/news-and-events/article-2/Jim-Dray-Finds-His-Niche/a30f2e16-dda7-4a51-b626-c6339db78bb3
Bottom line: Shanahans utilize low-priced, versatile and athletic players for their FBs. Having a guy who can move around and play multiple positions, and STs effectively is a highly desired commodity when it comes to numbers-crunching to get the roster down to 53.
I get it that you guys like Vickers, and I did too, but it's time to move on. That ship has sailed. The running game is going to be better this year without a big-name FB signing, just wait and see.
Per that first article...."We game plan for everythin in the running back room. Evan Royster might play fullback, you never know....He pass blocks the same guy, why can't he block him in the running game?"
That wasn't a quote from Shanahan but from one of the Redskin tailbacks who was presumably relating how the RB coaches, with Shanahans blessing, view the running game. We could be in a lot of trouble if Shanahan still considers that a valid backfield strategy. Pass blocking is not the same as run blocking. A FB doing run block needs to basically "tackle" guys out of the hole without actually wrapping up. This is a far far cry from standing infront of someone and trying to shunt them around the edge or cutting a blitzing inside LB'er. Per that article Shanahan believes guys lower on the depth chart at RB are perfectly capable of blowing up ILB"ers.
This is good news for the rest of the AFC cause there will be more running plays with Chris Obonnaya leading for Tate. Something Tate apparently doesn't want to see either cause he's kind of calling for a dedicated FB himself. The Skins running game didnt' need a FB cause they had RG doing the read option to Morris. We don't have RG, there is no RG in the draft either. So without that read freezing the edge we need to be old school in the run game. Get a fucking FB. THere's plenty out there you can get for next to nothing.
I don't doubt we get a fullback. But Vickers isn't the answer regardless.Per that first article...."We game plan for everythin in the running back room. Evan Royster might play fullback, you never know....He pass blocks the same guy, why can't he block him in the running game?"
That wasn't a quote from Shanahan but from one of the Redskin tailbacks who was presumably relating how the RB coaches, with Shanahans blessing, view the running game. We could be in a lot of trouble if Shanahan still considers that a valid backfield strategy. Pass blocking is not the same as run blocking. A FB doing run block needs to basically "tackle" guys out of the hole without actually wrapping up. This is a far far cry from standing infront of someone and trying to shunt them around the edge or cutting a blitzing inside LB'er. Per that article Shanahan believes guys lower on the depth chart at RB are perfectly capable of blowing up ILB"ers.
This is good news for the rest of the AFC cause there will be more running plays with Chris Obonnaya leading for Tate. Something Tate apparently doesn't want to see either cause he's kind of calling for a dedicated FB himself. The Skins running game didnt' need a FB cause they had RG doing the read option to Morris. We don't have RG, there is no RG in the draft either. So without that read freezing the edge we need to be old school in the run game. Get a fucking FB. THere's plenty out there you can get for next to nothing.
I agree it isn't that hard to find one.
-
Did you just accidentally start another Manziel rumor?Per that first article...."We game plan for everythin in the running back room. Evan Royster might play fullback, you never know....He pass blocks the same guy, why can't he block him in the running game?"
That wasn't a quote from Shanahan but from one of the Redskin tailbacks who was presumably relating how the RB coaches, with Shanahans blessing, view the running game. We could be in a lot of trouble if Shanahan still considers that a valid backfield strategy. Pass blocking is not the same as run blocking. A FB doing run block needs to basically "tackle" guys out of the hole without actually wrapping up. This is a far far cry from standing infront of someone and trying to shunt them around the edge or cutting a blitzing inside LB'er. Per that article Shanahan believes guys lower on the depth chart at RB are perfectly capable of blowing up ILB"ers.
This is good news for the rest of the AFC cause there will be more running plays with Chris Obonnaya leading for Tate. Something Tate apparently doesn't want to see either cause he's kind of calling for a dedicated FB himself. The Skins running game didnt' need a FB cause they had RG doing the read option to Morris. We don't have RG, there is no RG in the draft either. So without that read freezing the edge we need to be old school in the run game. Get a fucking FB. THere's plenty out there you can get for next to nothing.
Fuck my ass running if I did.
XxDaBuckeyexX said:
Did you just accidentally start another Manziel rumor?
-
I don't doubt we get a fullback. But Vickers isn't the answer regardless.Per that first article...."We game plan for everythin in the running back room. Evan Royster might play fullback, you never know....He pass blocks the same guy, why can't he block him in the running game?"
That wasn't a quote from Shanahan but from one of the Redskin tailbacks who was presumably relating how the RB coaches, with Shanahans blessing, view the running game. We could be in a lot of trouble if Shanahan still considers that a valid backfield strategy. Pass blocking is not the same as run blocking. A FB doing run block needs to basically "tackle" guys out of the hole without actually wrapping up. This is a far far cry from standing infront of someone and trying to shunt them around the edge or cutting a blitzing inside LB'er. Per that article Shanahan believes guys lower on the depth chart at RB are perfectly capable of blowing up ILB"ers.
This is good news for the rest of the AFC cause there will be more running plays with Chris Obonnaya leading for Tate. Something Tate apparently doesn't want to see either cause he's kind of calling for a dedicated FB himself. The Skins running game didnt' need a FB cause they had RG doing the read option to Morris. We don't have RG, there is no RG in the draft either. So without that read freezing the edge we need to be old school in the run game. Get a fucking FB. THere's plenty out there you can get for next to nothing.
I agree it isn't that hard to find one.
I don't doubt we get a fullback. But Vickers isn't the answer regardless.
I agree it isn't that hard to find one.
I think Greg Jones was making 800k or something. I mean all of those guys are ridiculous athletes...jones, leach and mcclain. All of them are versatile and can catch out of the backfield. Hell, I'd give all of them the ball in short ydge situations and put Winn or Kitchens infront of em as the FB. That is the meat wagon coming downhill.
-
@mike-h said:
Article on Shanahan and FBs from last preseason:http://www.csnwashington.com/football-washington-redskins/talk/redskins-will-test-plan-b-fullback-vs-bucs
Jim Dray can play FB: http://www.azcardinals.com/news-and-events/article-2/Jim-Dray-Finds-His-Niche/a30f2e16-dda7-4a51-b626-c6339db78bb3
Bottom line: Shanahans utilize low-priced, versatile and athletic players for their FBs. Having a guy who can move around and play multiple positions, and STs effectively is a highly desired commodity when it comes to numbers-crunching to get the roster down to 53.
I get it that you guys like Vickers, and I did too, but it's time to move on. That ship has sailed. The running game is going to be better this year without a big-name FB signing, just wait and see.
I found it interesting that it says Shannahan used a FB on 30% of snaps which is a lot more than I expected... wonder if they counted 4th downs on those snaps?
I agree that he tends to use the versatile fullbacks over the road grade type which is probably what most of us are wanting.
-
@mike-h said:
Manziel or bust
@mike-h said:
I hope they draft him, both because I think hell be a good pro, and because of how angry some people get.
If they take Watkins, I'm equally as happy.
Just cant see Robinson or Mack. Don't see it.
According to former GM Charlie Casserly- He’s not consistent as a pocket passer,” Casserly said. “His biggest issue is he doesn’t stay with the reads, he takes off and runs too soon. (In the private workouts) you’re going to try to figure out what this guy sees and how he sees things.
“Russell Wilson was miles ahead of him in college. Russell Wilson (5-foot-11) had first-round talent and third-round height. He was a far better prospect than Manziel."There is a risk with Manziel. Can he physically hold up and can he convert into a successful NFL quarterback? That running around and throwing the ball up for grabs is not going to make it in the NFL. He can definitely make plays outside the pocket, but the plays he makes in college aren’t always there in the NFL.”
Great minds think alike Mike. Pretty much the same stuff I already said, except for Russell Wilson.
-
This thread is about FB's and which ones the Browns should go after, plenty of manziel threads to go around.
-
If Mack can be used as an ILB, I can see it. Especially if Watkins is already taken and a QB is not valued at #4.
-
athletically he's more gifted than Ray was coming out of college. He obviously can be used as an ILB. What I want to know is if he's smart enough to become the leader of the defense. If he can, we cannot pass up on his athletic gifts. He's a beast. His exp rushing the passer off the edge in college means he's going to have a nasty ability to blitz the qb as an ILB. We haven't had a good blitzing ILB in forever.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login