FB / TE discussion

Share
avatar
chrebet1024
Admin

Posts : 1728
Join date : 2013-09-06
20140222

FB / TE discussion

Post by chrebet1024

Today G_A_CERTIFIED brought up a great point about the FB / TE depth chart guidelines.

We CAN interchange FB's and TE's on our depth chart.  Those 2 positions are very similar.  A lot of NFL team's don't even have a FB on their roster.  TE's play in the backfield all the time.  Now as far as FB playing TE.....nah it doesn't really happen much (yes a FB does slide up sometimes to play a "Wing" position) but they rarely get on the line.

...and honestly....FB's NEVER are good enough to play TE...so it hardly happens.  EXCEPT for Marcel Reese.  That mother effer CAN play TE in real life.  He could play all 3 positions (HB, FB, TE).

****BUT G_A_'s point was this:  if he has Reece at TE...then EVERY play he calls the DEFENSE WILL SEE the personnel as kind of MESSED UP.

You'll see this:  1 QB, 3 RB, 2 WR...instead of 1 QB, 2 RB, 1 TE and 2 WR's like normal.

great point when trying to match personnel.  Yes should you KNOW that reece is playing TE...yes.  BUT we're going to make a little change.

No longer can a FB START AT THE TE SPOT (aside from Reece which we'll have zeemen CHANGE HIS POSITION IN THE OFFSEASON).

Changes to the depth chart to come.


_________________
chrebet1024
845-820-2499

Share this post on: diggdeliciousredditstumbleuponslashdotyahoogooglelive

Post on Sat 22 Feb 2014, 8:10 pm by Zeemen

Both will warrant a 3-4 or a 4-3 though a base defense so at least thete is not like a personnel matchup disadvantage bc I have seen the proper personnel every situation I had him in. And yes would like to move him to TE. And your right he can play any position even hb but if we move him to TE I don't think I can put him in at hb any longer. That's what I'm guessing. I'm totally cool with it.

Post on Sat 22 Feb 2014, 10:02 pm by omgahamsandwich

reese is one of my fav players, I am probably in a short list of players who use their FB as a passing weapon. That elite speed could be quite useful. Wanted that 90 some odd speed fb that was in the draft but Q drafted him in the second round Sad

Post on Sat 22 Feb 2014, 10:30 pm by deathbyeagle

there are alot of teams in the nfl that dont carry a FB anymore. I know the Eagles for example dont carry a FB, they have all TEs. Madden however cause of the dumb roster reqs put Eagles best TE at FB(James Casey). I dont see a diff if a FB plays TE or a TE plays FB. Now a days players play all over the field. I dont think it will change anyone game plan or play seeing a FB at TE. Me personaly i dont use many if any TE sets so dont matter to me. But they are 100% inter changable in my mind. Hell I see see HBs out wide, wrs in back fields, nfl is changing alot. Funny part is u can pick a 3/4 wr sets and people still pick 46 or 5-2, 44, 3-4. So not sure why anyone would complain really. Just my 2 cents
avatar

Post on Sat 22 Feb 2014, 10:48 pm by chrebet1024

....I agree that usually ONLY the WR's determine matching personnel with some guys....BUT thinking about an ELITE TE is also huge with matching personnel....and could be considered a WR in essence when matching.

So when you see that 3 RB's are in the personnel and it's only 2...kinda throws you off if you're not thinking about it every time.

Or say it shows 2 RB's ...but in essence it's only 1....it does make a difference for the ultimate strategist.  Depending on a 1 back or 2 back set.

Post on Sat 22 Feb 2014, 11:18 pm by Lord_Deniki

You should be aware of your opponents roster imo...if it says 3rbs and you know he has Reece or even any other elite receiving hb you should be ready for it. Maybe it suprises you a little the first time, but I see nothing wrong with him staying at fb.
avatar

Post on Sun 23 Feb 2014, 12:21 am by chrebet1024

I see that point of view too.  I think what swayed me in altering the depth chart is this:  TE's play FB a lot....but FB's don't really play TE at all.  Allowing FB's to be at #2 and #3 on TE slot is fine, but the starter we'll stop doing.

I remember FB Jim Kleinsasser (#40) was technically a FB for the Vikings years back....but he played TE more.  I really can't think of any other FB's that played TE.

Post on Sun 23 Feb 2014, 4:15 am by G_A_CERTIFIED

1st and foremost I would like to say Zeeman played a great gm and clearly outplayed me in several aspects of the gm, but I also wanted to point out the 3 rbs I seen every play I started to think it was repetitive play calling but then I realized that it was different formations or plays so it was totally throwing my defensive calls off. I also agree that u should be aware of ur oppts roster which I do every gm and look @ their season stats which is why I knew Reece would was @ TE but its still hard to defend it even knowing that bc he could be running full house, pistol or some sort of shotgun.. I wasn't trying to complain but imo it is a slight advantage to the offense, kinda like running a heavy panther formation that in most cases seems like a goal line play but in fact is out of shotgun formation. I spoke with commish and Zeeman about it prior to this post and had a great discussion about this and really appreciate the open discussion about this vs turning into a argument. Makes me like this community even more!!!! =)
avatar

Post on Sun 23 Feb 2014, 11:39 am by chrebet1024

yes sir G_A_.  An open forum for anything and everything is the way to go.  Everybody has a voice...and if we discuss it openly we find out who are the hot heads and who can discuss things the right way.

Post  by Sponsored content


    Current date/time is Tue 25 Sep 2018, 4:42 am