The need for a Fullback?

The problem with this discussion is that people say "fullback" and just lump everybody with that designation together -- skewed towards a 1980s definition of the role.

Does this offense need a "fullback"? Probably. Does this offense need Juszczyk? Yeah.

Originally posted by PhillyNiner:
Wow...some of you guys will literally b***h about anything.

O
W
!

why don't we compare Harbaugh's FB (Red) vs Shanny's FB (Juiz)??

What most people see as a fullback



How Kyle Shanahan sees a fullback

Originally posted by 9moon:
I told you all before, the signing of the Juke was a JOKE, and wasted some money on him.. FB, we can find them everywhere.. we had RED under HarBaalke and he was pretty good.. until he became a wife beater!!

Why are you whining about "wasting money" on him? Which free agents did we miss out on because of Juice's salary bogging down the cap? We aren't even close to being in a disadvantageous cap position, so how exactly is this affecting the team negatively?

Who cares about preseason, Kyle loves it and he runs his offense well. End of story.

Absolutely there is a need for a FB. Teams just fell in love with the idea of the passing game mismatches good receiving TE's create. But, that doesn't mean that FB's aren't extremely valuable and create mismatches in the run game. This actually gives me an idea for a whiteboard video I might do next week. SWEET!

Originally posted by jonnydel:
Absolutely there is a need for a FB. Teams just fell in love with the idea of the passing game mismatches good receiving TE's create. But, that doesn't mean that FB's aren't extremely valuable and create mismatches in the run game. This actually gives me an idea for a whiteboard video I might do next week. SWEET!

Good deal. Looking forward to seeing that.

Originally posted by jonnydel:
Absolutely there is a need for a FB. Teams just fell in love with the idea of the passing game mismatches good receiving TE's create. But, that doesn't mean that FB's aren't extremely valuable and create mismatches in the run game. This actually gives me an idea for a whiteboard video I might do next week. SWEET!

Do it. Belichick talked about the differences between having a fullback versus having a 2nd TE. Both keep a defense's base personnel on the field, but they have pros and cons. Basically a FB adds versatility in the run game (movable gap) whereas a 2nd TE is better in the passing game (closer to the LoS, get into his route faster). The article with his comments was so old it's been removed from the internet, but here is a snippet below. I wish I had copied the entire article but didn't know it would be removed.

"But as far as your running gaps, I mean, you can put more width at the formation by having a guy on the line (inline TE), whether it's four on one side and two on the other side of the center, or three and three. You just have a wider front, which there are some advantages to that.

By having them in the backfield (FB, 21 personnel), you can create that same four-man surface or three-man surface after the snap so the defense doesn't know where the four-man surface or three-man surface is. The fullback has to –- he can build that from the backfield.
"And then there are also, let's say, a greater variety of blocking schemes with the fullback in the backfield because he can block different guys and come from different angles. He's not always behind the quarterback. He could be offset one way or the other and create different blocking schemes and angles that it's harder to get from the line of scrimmage.
https://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/niners/188281-49ers-sign-kyle-juice-juszczyk/page80/#post1194

Originally posted by jonnydel:

Absolutely there is a need for a FB. Teams just fell in love with the idea of the passing game mismatches good receiving TE's create. But, that doesn't mean that FB's aren't extremely valuable and create mismatches in the run game. This actually gives me an idea for a whiteboard video I might do next week. SWEET!

hope to see it soon!
JD>>>>>>>>Grant ConeHead.

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by jonnydel:
Absolutely there is a need for a FB. Teams just fell in love with the idea of the passing game mismatches good receiving TE's create. But, that doesn't mean that FB's aren't extremely valuable and create mismatches in the run game. This actually gives me an idea for a whiteboard video I might do next week. SWEET!

Do it. Belichick talked about the differences between having a fullback versus having a 2nd TE. Both keep a defense's base personnel on the field, but they have pros and cons. Basically a FB adds versatility in the run game (movable gap) whereas a 2nd TE is better in the passing game (closer to the LoS, get into his route faster). The article with his comments was so old it's been removed from the internet, but here is a snippet below. I wish I had copied the entire article but didn't know it would be removed.

"But as far as your running gaps, I mean, you can put more width at the formation by having a guy on the line (inline TE), whether it's four on one side and two on the other side of the center, or three and three. You just have a wider front, which there are some advantages to that.

By having them in the backfield (FB, 21 personnel), you can create that same four-man surface or three-man surface after the snap so the defense doesn't know where the four-man surface or three-man surface is. The fullback has to –- he can build that from the backfield.
"And then there are also, let's say, a greater variety of blocking schemes with the fullback in the backfield because he can block different guys and come from different angles. He's not always behind the quarterback. He could be offset one way or the other and create different blocking schemes and angles that it's harder to get from the line of scrimmage.
https://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/niners/188281-49ers-sign-kyle-juice-juszczyk/page80/#post1194

Yeah, this thread gave me all sorts of ideas about it and I've been drawing out all the potential run plays and blocking possibilities with a FB vs a 2nd TE. There's SOOOOO much more you can do with a FB than a TE.

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by jonnydel:

Absolutely there is a need for a FB. Teams just fell in love with the idea of the passing game mismatches good receiving TE's create. But, that doesn't mean that FB's aren't extremely valuable and create mismatches in the run game. This actually gives me an idea for a whiteboard video I might do next week. SWEET!

Do it. Belichick talked about the differences between having a fullback versus having a 2nd TE. Both keep a defense's base personnel on the field, but they have pros and cons. Basically a FB adds versatility in the run game (movable gap) whereas a 2nd TE is better in the passing game (closer to the LoS, get into his route faster). The article with his comments was so old it's been removed from the internet, but here is a snippet below. I wish I had copied the entire article but didn't know it would be removed.

"But as far as your running gaps, I mean, you can put more width at the formation by having a guy on the line (inline TE), whether it's four on one side and two on the other side of the center, or three and three. You just have a wider front, which there are some advantages to that.

By having them in the backfield (FB, 21 personnel), you can create that same four-man surface or three-man surface after the snap so the defense doesn't know where the four-man surface or three-man surface is. The fullback has to –- he can build that from the backfield.
"And then there are also, let's say, a greater variety of blocking schemes with the fullback in the backfield because he can block different guys and come from different angles. He's not always behind the quarterback. He could be offset one way or the other and create different blocking schemes and angles that it's harder to get from the line of scrimmage.
https://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/niners/188281-49ers-sign-kyle-juice-juszczyk/page80/#post1194

The TE and Fullback were the two most critical pieces in the old Green Bay gap blocking sweep play. It doesn't surprise me that Bellicheat and Kyle know how important those two pieces are in a for example, a lateral zone run play. I kind of view Kyle's outside zone run similar to the green bay sweep. It's just that crack back blocking is (in a sense) outlawed nowadays -- and so the zone run blocking is more rules friendly than the TE down blocking on the big end, in my opinion. But the importance of both players (TE and Fullback) in a run play to the outside is clearly seen in Kyle's offense, from a scheme blocking point of view.

Originally posted by thl408:

Originally posted by jonnydel:

Absolutely there is a need for a FB. Teams just fell in love with the idea of the passing game mismatches good receiving TE's create. But, that doesn't mean that FB's aren't extremely valuable and create mismatches in the run game. This actually gives me an idea for a whiteboard video I might do next week. SWEET!

Do it. Belichick talked about the differences between having a fullback versus having a 2nd TE. Both keep a defense's base personnel on the field, but they have pros and cons. Basically a FB adds versatility in the run game (movable gap) whereas a 2nd TE is better in the passing game (closer to the LoS, get into his route faster). The article with his comments was so old it's been removed from the internet, but here is a snippet below. I wish I had copied the entire article but didn't know it would be removed.

"But as far as your running gaps, I mean, you can put more width at the formation by having a guy on the line (inline TE), whether it's four on one side and two on the other side of the center, or three and three. You just have a wider front, which there are some advantages to that.

By having them in the backfield (FB, 21 personnel), you can create that same four-man surface or three-man surface after the snap so the defense doesn't know where the four-man surface or three-man surface is. The fullback has to –- he can build that from the backfield.
"And then there are also, let's say, a greater variety of blocking schemes with the fullback in the backfield because he can block different guys and come from different angles. He's not always behind the quarterback. He could be offset one way or the other and create different blocking schemes and angles that it's harder to get from the line of scrimmage.
https://www.49erswebzone.com/forum/niners/188281-49ers-sign-kyle-juice-juszczyk/page80/#post1194

Ok!

Point taken. Great breakdown btw

Originally posted by 9moon:
you mean, WHAT fullback in the NFL or late rounders that CAN'T be an all pro blocker who can catch and understand our offense..

FB is the easiest position in football.. and no one OVERPAYS them..

Show me a FB that can block the best pass rusher in the NFL one play...


Then run down the seam the next play...


Slow your roll in juice, moon...I feel like you don't understand how Kyle's scheme goes and why he's such an important part of it.