The need for the I with a "real" upback, whether O'B's, Donovan's or Moorhead's offense!
- Thread starter emrtmakesshiteup
- Start date
A true FB that can run the ball well, catch the ball well, and is a good blocker is very tough to find which is one of the reasons the position has been fading away. Also, when the NCAA reduced scholarships in the 90's, it has made teams be more creative with that position. They have decided to use more TE's, or an OL in the backfield, or just simply more one back.
It has also become not a very glamorous position, as in basically a smaller OL in the backfield. A lot of D-1 teams just will have FB's walk on and then give a scholarship to the starter in their last 2 years on the team as long as they are contributing in the offense and special teams.
This is an issue at all levels of FB, just look at the FB's in the NFL, they play the majority of their plays on special teams, then just a little situationally on Offense.
Just how Football has evolved, for better or worse.
It has also become not a very glamorous position, as in basically a smaller OL in the backfield. A lot of D-1 teams just will have FB's walk on and then give a scholarship to the starter in their last 2 years on the team as long as they are contributing in the offense and special teams.
This is an issue at all levels of FB, just look at the FB's in the NFL, they play the majority of their plays on special teams, then just a little situationally on Offense.
Just how Football has evolved, for better or worse.
Even on the high school level the FB is disappearing. Thus, there just aren't that many true full backs to recruit. One realistic solution is find a true H blocking Tight End. Wilkerson was used back there some this season. Another solution is to put a couple quicker OL in the backfield with the RB. Sure, everybody in the stadium knows you are looking to run for one yard, but if the kids execute you can still do it at a high % rate.
I feel it would be useful. Maybe, a kid like Jake Cooper could help there. He played
FB at Archbishop Wood too.
Miles Jack-UCLA and Owen Marecic-Stanford helped out on offense. It doesn't appear Moorehead's
offense uses one. But, a short-yardage package with one wouldn't hurt.
FB at Archbishop Wood too.
Miles Jack-UCLA and Owen Marecic-Stanford helped out on offense. It doesn't appear Moorehead's
offense uses one. But, a short-yardage package with one wouldn't hurt.
I've always been a fan of the I, but I'm old-fashioned. As a blocker, I like an I formation fullback better than an H back. I like the fact that both the fullback and tailback hit the LOS with a head of steam and the back is right behind the fullback and can cut off his block when he makes contact. Similarly, If you're going with 1 back, I like the pistol better than the sidecar because the back again hits the LOS with more speed and he can go to the QB's right or left easier.
I have been saying that all year I am not a big fan of Penn State football with no fullback! From what I read Moorhead does not use one either but I cannot believe why as an offensive coach you would not use one similar to the way the Seahawks use one. They have mostly single back sets but also run out of the "I" on occasion.
At the d-1AA level they only have 63 scholarships, so as a matter of recruiting philosophy they will not scholarship a FB. So in short, yardage / GL situations they will bring in the back OT's and / or the TE's to be the Extra TE or lead "FB" on those plays. The reason is that the FB's at that level are just too slow, too small, or not a good enough athlete to compete with the Defensive players, or do all the things that the OC needs the FB to do. If they could they would get recruited up to the next level.
I think there are a lot of us who appreciate offenses which know how to utilize a FB (One of them right here....ME ME ME!
)....and would like to see it used more here at PSU. FWIW, BO'B did use some - a lot more than most contemporary coaches.The truth is that offenses that are designed to utilize and benefit from the FB are getting relatively scarce at just about every level from HS on up.....but, over time, this stuff does run in cycles to some degree. A handful of successful programs (at the NCAA or NFL level) start having a lot of success with an offensive scheme that utilizes the FB - and you will start to see more and more of it coming back. Right now (aside from the few triple option offenses left out there) there are probably only a couple of Top 50 level programs that use a FB much at all.
Harbaugh (HATE that whacko!) does use the FB quite a bit...and I like how he incorporates it into the offense. If he does have a high level of success with that offense over the next couple years.....I'd bet 1/2 the programs in the B1G start to copy at least parts of the "FB offense".
I didn't say we need a full-time FB. I said one in a short-yardage package would be useful. Bama
and LSU use one quite a bit. They doing aaight.
The bigger need for PSU on those short yardage situations is better blocking from the interior OL.
Interested to see how Moorhouse will handle short yardage.
Interested to see how Moorhouse will handle short yardage.
Definitely agree with the OP - we need a FB and it would make the world of difference. Imagine short yardage where we have a true blocking FB and two legit TE's. That would be a huge improvement.
By the way, per Rivals, the number 5 FB in the nation is a PA kid named Shaw, currently committed to Western Michigan, and happens to be HS teammate of Miles Sanders.
By the way, per Rivals, the number 5 FB in the nation is a PA kid named Shaw, currently committed to Western Michigan, and happens to be HS teammate of Miles Sanders.
I quite agree and I like having that athlete that can do all of the necessary things a great FB can do, Run with the ball, catch out of the backfield, and be a great lead blocker. Unfortunately it's just tough to find all of those skills in one individual. I liked watching some of the greats that have played here at PSU, Such as Franco, (although that was more of a wing-t FB that didn't block as much, Suhey, Williams, Gash, Guman, Milne, and I'm sure I'm leaving quite a few good ones out.
It would be nice to have that kind of weapon. Maybe there's a walk-on out there that can fill that role.
Zordo wasn't a "great" player.....but he was a valuable resource as a FB during his tenure here.
I guy that like can be really valuable in the right offense.
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q...&mid=3D915C98DEA9DE69CC633D915C98DEA9DE69CC63
http://www.bing.com/videos/search?q...47D43D9E908CC105C5DA47D43D9E908CC105C&fsscr=0
Last edited:
I like a split backfield with two tailbacks. The linebackers cannot key on only one back and it makes it rather easy for misdirection, even a triple option run, without bringing a WR across the backfield. It also provides an extra backfield blocker should the OL breakdown. It does mean one less WR but from what I've seen college QBs tend to look for just one or two receivers anyway, especially if there isn't much time given a weak OL.
How about the single-wing offense with the blocking back or 2 back whose responsibility is to lead block or pass protect?
Football evolves.
Yes, I was a 2 back in a single wing offense and yes, we wore leather helmets.
Football evolves.
Yes, I was a 2 back in a single wing offense and yes, we wore leather helmets.
you know maybe out in the field, but in Goal line/short yardage, I think there is a better way. After watching TCU and Oregon in their bowl game, on a short yardage (goal line?) play, the OT actually got behind the RB and pushed the whole pile forward. I started to think that was aiding the runner, and a penalty. Mack Brown said no!! Rule change and you are now allowed to push the runner forward. So now I propose instead of a lead blocker, a following pusher in short yardage situation. Go back and study that play, I bet we see it more.
LOL, yea I think thats the "Reggie Bush" rule.
Maybe it was always that way but like you I thought it was illegal, at least up until USC/ND
BBown- but it isn't illegal anymore, I think people are going to start coaching the push from behind for real. Put PP in the back field and have SB run straight ahead, and then have PP push him from behind. It's one thing for the LB to hit the lead back in the hole, it's another for the BC to take on the LB while having a 300# pusher behind him!LOL, yea I think thats the "Reggie Bush" rule.
Maybe it was always that way but like you I thought it was illegal, at least up until USC/ND
