I don't believe I'm alone in thinking that the loss of both Will Johnson and Nikita Whitlock really hurt the Giants last year. This year, they didn't sign a FB in free agency, nor did they draft one, but they did sign a UDFA FB after the draft - San Jose State's Shane Smith.
This is a big boy who put up some ridiculous numbers at his
Pro Day.
Ben McAdoo should appreciate the value of a good FB, having seen what John Kuhn did for Green Bay.
Yes, but that shouldn't preclude us from adding a pure Fullback. In 2011 we had Bear Pascoe and Henry Hynoski on the roster.
Ellison is not a fullback, that wouldn't make sense.
Let's hope this UDFA makes the roster. Not being able to line up in an I-Formation was a death knell for the Giants last year. Let's hope McAdoo learned his lesson and doesn't make the same error this year.
Here's his college bio.
Quote:
supposed to play some fullback
Ellison is not a fullback, that wouldn't make sense.
Let's hope this UDFA makes the roster. Not being able to line up in an I-Formation was a death knell for the Giants last year. Let's hope McAdoo learned his lesson and doesn't make the same error this year.
I think that Jones kid they have at center can play that role. We're not likely to line up that way more than a very few times per game.
Quote:
supposed to play some fullback
Ellison is not a fullback, that wouldn't make sense.
Except thats what he did for the Vikings. He often blocked for Adrian Peterson.
That is not to say that certain offensive formations will not use a lead blocker that, in previous periods, were performed by a FB.
In the current offensive schemes, the part time role of a FB is being performed more and more by the hybrid Tight End (TE).
The Giants have been steadily heading in that direction for years. Using the hybrid TE as a lead blocker and in multiple roles as dictated by down, distance and offensive schemes.
Last year the Giants plans were completely derailed by not having an effective hybrid TE on their roster.
The recent signings and draft choices only reinforce that. Perhaps the FB signed last weekend as a UDRFA signee can perform as a hybrid TE as well.
No, a pure full time FB will not be on the final 53 man roster. We will see 4 TEs to fulfill the hybrid TE functions.
The hybrid TE of today performs as the lead blocker.
A pure stand alone FB is a dinosaur - extinct in the NFL
The hybrid TE of today performs as the lead blocker.
A pure stand alone FB is a dinosaur - extinct in the NFL
Is that why Kyle Jusczyk got a four-year $21 million dollar contract from San Francisco? So they can call it Jusczyk Park?
Or were they just being stubborn?
Link - ( New Window )
There will be a good battle for the TE spots this year. I think Tye could be in jeopardy this year.
Seems to me, the Giants problem was that they planned on the fullback role being fulfilled by a fullback, and when the FB options went down, they were left without a backup plan
No offense to the OP - the question is a valid one. I was more referring to the manner in which some give their answers.
QB (3) - only way I see 2 is if they're confident Webb can be the backup which seems like a long shot given his "project" label
RB (4)
WR (6)
OL (8)
TE (3)
That totals 24. So they can keep a FB or add RB/OL/TE depth (don't see them keeping more than 3 QBs or 6 WRs). As of now, I can see 4 TEs with Engram, Ellison, Tye, and Adams. Especially if they plan to line Engram up outside often.
Plus Ellison and Engram (in college) both have experience at HB so it adds some flexibility (Tye does too, but you don't want him in a blocking role...)
I think they were horribly hamstrung last year by NOT having a Fullback.
And McAdoo NEVER said he didn't want a fullback. What he said recently was:
"I've heard that I don't want a fullback in my offense -- that's news to me."
I hope the team transitions away from the philosophy of running it up the gut with FB because
a) our o-line isn't build to push the other guy backwards, b) the odds that our talent takes a swing pass to the house is greater running it between the tackles.
That said, McAdoo's offense under TC had a FB, and the GB offense had a FB.
"And in college all I watched was Bear Pascoe film" - Ellison - ( New Window )
Link - ( New Window )
Link - ( New Window )
I think one of the reasons they signed Ellison is they see him as a multi-position guy, who can play FB, H-Back and TE. That way the defense does not know what is coming. You trot a FB out there in this offense, the defense basically knows you are going to run.
Seems to me, the Giants problem was that they planned on the fullback role being fulfilled by a fullback, and when the FB options went down, they were left without a backup plan
It's not fair to start a thread asking if the Giants will keep a Fullback, and when someone says that Fullbacks are going the way of the dinosaurs it's bad form to criticize that assertion using a high-priced free agent signing as an example? It's not fair to back that up with a page from Spotrac.com listing all of the Fullbacks in the league now (along with their contracts)? That's not fair? Tell me then, what is fair?
It is a numbers game right now. We will keep at least 3 TE maybe 4. I see 4 RB, 6 WR. 8-9 OL and 3 QB.
25 for offense: 3 QB, 4 RB, 3 TE, 6 WR, 9 OL
Bingo.
fullback is making a slight resurgence in the nfl the giants under coughlin and green bay,baltimore (who had 3 FB on their roster as i remember even matched an offer to vonta leech to prevent the giants signing him away) so i hope they do even to sell the run on playaction pass to engram at the goalline would be worth carrying one if they were thinking about blount that means they may have room for FB if they make the cut
if i had to choose i would cut geno to carry a FB,rather see what webb could do in the event eli went down because either way the season would be a wash .better to be a wash and see if webb is any good than a wash to see what we already know about geno anyway
IMO, the game has changed and the FB has mostly been phased out (yes, like the Dinosaur or Do Do bird) as a pure position on the 53 man rosters. This is due to the changing nature of the game and roster math. tough to keep a pure fullback who snap count is ever decreasing.
Last July I posted this. Time for a revisit. A year older and given time I could update the numbers to include the 2016 season.
In the 2015 season, Ten teams — the Arizona Cardinals, the Cincinnati Bengals, the Chicago Bears, the Denver Broncos, the San Diego Chargers, the Miami Dolphins, the Jacksonville Jaguars, the Indianapolis Colts, the St. Louis Rams and the Philadelphia Eagles — did not have a fullback listed on their roster.
Teams like the Bengals or Colts, which didn’t carry a fullback, lined up a tight end as an H-back, slightly offset behind the tackle’s hip, or motioned the HB into the backfield when a lead blocker was required. Other teams list a FB on the roster, but in truth are filled by Tight ends (e.g. the Bengals Ryan Hewitt, a second-year tight end from Stanford, and the Bears Tight End Zach Miller is listed as a fullback).
As with most NFL teams, the Giants offense has been trending more and more to a pass first offense, and that continues in 2016 with the change in head coach (Coughlin was still a run first traditionalist). With the arrival of McAdoo in 2014, I think the Giants were trying to break that traditional mindset and open up the offense. With McAdoo now in charge, any previous hesitations are gone and the offense will continue to evolve to a more open, quick pass style attack. In this scheme the traditional single role FB has limited value.
Consider the dramatic downward trend of the Giants use of the FB position over the last 4 seasons.
In the 2015 season, the NYG employed the FB in 11.85% of the teams total offensive snaps. (OC McAdoo)
In the 2014 season, the NYGs used the FB in 18.17% of the teams total offensive snaps. (OC McAdoo)
In the 2013 season, the NYGs used the FB in 26.19% of the teams total offensive snaps. (OC Gilbride)
In the 2012 season, the NYGs used the FB in 41.17% of the teams total offensive snaps. (OC Gilbride)
Source: Pro Football Reference
In place of the traditional blocking FB, the Giants will probably switch to a TE/HB who can perform multiple roles as required in a pass first, short passing attack similar to the current version of the west coast passing scheme.
It is no secret that the Giants have been seeking an upgrade at TE since at least 2012. The Giants are looking for a TE who is an effective in line blocker, capable of blocking from the backfield, and is also a credible receiving threat from out of the backfield, in line, or split out wide. The Giants did try to acquire this type of TE through FA signings and the draft, but most were not successful in fulfilling the role (e.g. Beckham, Meyers, Pascoe, Donnell, Robinson, Fells, Cunningham, and Tye). To be fair, in 2012, the Giants did have this type of player in Bennet, but his tenure was short lived.
Heading into the 2016, the Giants have taken the next series of steps to find the multi-role TE/HB they have been looking for. The 2016 TE/HB candidates (listed in order of who I think fits the Giants TE/HB needs best) include: (base scouting reports lifted from BBI)
Will Johnson. As many mentioned earlier, Johnson was a coveted, if not low profile, FA acquisition signed early in the FA period (4 April). Johnson’s scouting report shows his versatile and proven performance. In four seasons with the Steelers, Johnson only missed one regular-season game, and started 20 contests. He has 31 career receptions for 235 yards and two touchdowns. Johnson is versatile with the ability to play H-Back, tight end, and fullback. He is a good lead blocker who can also catch the football. Johnson is a solid special teams player. Johnson fits the versatile multi-role TE/HB position.
As we all know, Will Johnson did not work out for the Giants. Now it is Ellison's and Engram's turn
I'd keep 3 TEs and the FB. Ellison, Engram, and Adams, and maybe put Colin Thompson on the PS. Tye is awful. If he brought anything to the table either as a receiver or a blocker there would have been no need to sign Ellison and draft Engram. LaCosse hasn't made it out of camp healthy in two years. Enough is enough.
A civil discussion is welcome
Keep a player (outside of LS, K, and P) who plays so few snaps and is not versatile on offense or STs is the roster math challenge.
What benefit do you think a FB brings to this team?