- Messages
- 13,997
- Likes
- 47,484
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Welcome to The Platinum Board. We are a Nebraska Husker news source and fan community.
Sign Up Now!There's a place for fat RBs, but sparingly. Personal preference is the Y-off TE/H-back role.Just kidding... I hate fat RBs in this era of football. Feel like that is something @slattimer would say.
I would want a Vokolek or a Stoll type TE and then a Fidone or Allen type.There's a place for fat RBs, but sparingly. Personal preference is the Y-off TE/H-back role.
I agree. Satterfield incorporated his H-back at SCAR a good bitThere's a place for fat RBs, but sparingly. Personal preference is the Y-off TE/H-back role.
They already have for the most part as the last 5-6 years you've seen more and more of the hybrid TE - working the FB position in y-off. Creates gaps on either side of the formation and better PAP threat. Can still insert into the formation to create more gaps.I still think fullback is going to come back en vogue to at least some degree CFB offenses in the not-too-distant future, as nearly every defense overhauls their defense to be overwhelmingly coverage personnel, and the FB creates a physical mismatch. Just the way the cycle goes.
I would want a Vokolek or a Stoll type TE and then a Fidone or Allen type.
The only time I would really want a fat RB is goal line or short yardage. That way you can add a gap to either side and make it harder on the defense.
But if you are going too much with 22 and not with 2 RBs you are taking away a receiving threat.
fullbacks arent fat runningbacks, they are skinny left guardsJust kidding... I hate fat RBs in this era of football. Feel like that is something @slattimer would say.
If done properly, this is the TRUTHfullbacks arent fat runningbacks, they are skinny left guards