no content
AdBlocker active?
It seems you are using software to block advertisements. You could help us if you could switch it off when visiting redzoneaction.org.
The reason is very simple: Advertisements help us running the site, to offer you the game in a good quality for free. So if you like the game, please support us by purchasing a Supporter Account or disabling the AdBlocker on this site.
Thank you very much!
| Main / Suggestions / Running backs Search Forum | |
| Navigation: |< >| | |
| Rating: | |
| Poster | Message |
|
JeremiahK
|
posted: 2012-05-29 10:58:26 (ID: 42781) Report Abuse |
|
This came up in another thread so I am posting here as a suggestion.
The term Running Back is at the moment a roster position. It is usually used as a catchall phrase to describe all the players that line up in the backfield inside the box. Currently we have both Runningbacks and Fullbacks split on the roster. I believe both Runningbacks and Fullbacks should come under one banner and are then assigned on the depth chart as either Halfback (ball carrier) or Fullback (blocker) depending on the skill sets they have, much the same way the Safeties are now implemented. Many NFL teams no longer carry Fullbacks on the roster and often use Tight Ends (another story for later) in the Fullback role on occasion. Also there are some teams like Green Bay who use their Fullback in this case John Kuhn in single back sets. Particularly for that stretch when they had depth problems at HB. I'm basically saying that (RB/HB) and FB's should be interchangeable and not suffer performance penalties apart from the fact their skill sets would affect their play as they differ a bit (blocking vs carrying etc). Both Free and Strong safeties have been grouped together on the roster under SF I think the Halfbacks and Fullbacks should be as well...under RB. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
preachie
|
posted: 2012-05-29 11:22:57 (ID: 42782) Report Abuse |
|
Honestly I don't see a big benefit from that suggested change, I just see the big impact it would have. Instead of 2 coaches you would have only 1, so everything has to be changed there. I don't know the training backgrounds but I can imagine that this change would also require some changes there.
Additionally I see the two groups with different skill sets (a HB would be more speed/agility/carrying and a FB strength/blocking/carrying) where SS/FS are more similar. The only thing I would support is to rename all RB occurences to HB, so it might be less confusing when talking about RB/HB/FB 
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
Buffalo
|
posted: 2012-05-29 11:41:54 (ID: 42783) Report Abuse |
|
|
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
preachie
|
posted: 2012-05-29 11:54:49 (ID: 42784) Report Abuse |
|
Thanks for bringing this up - that was far before my time here
 |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
JeremiahK
|
posted: 2012-05-29 12:53:59 (ID: 42790) Report Abuse |
|
Fine.
Still as far as I am concerned the NFL barely differentiates HB's and FB's any longer. In fact lumps most of the defensive backfield together as well. My main point which is really not touched on in the other thread is there should not be a titanic drop off in production if you have to play a FB at HB or vice versa because of injury or whatever. Yes their skill set won't help as much at the other position but a positional penalty is probably too much. At the very least make the roster and depth chart consistent either both HB or both RB. And never ever introduce Tailbacks into the "Runningbacks" group if that was something on the books to do. Halfback and Tailback mean exactly the same thing and is a totally interchangeable term in football, it's semantics / terminology not a different player type and anyone who talks about a tailback being different to a halfback in any way should have their account deleted taken outside and shot. Last edited on 2012-05-29 12:58:11 by JeremiahK |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| posted: 2012-05-29 14:03:31 (ID: 42791) Report Abuse | |
|
JeremiahK wrote:
... and anyone who talks about a tailback being different to a halfback in any way should have their account deleted taken outside and shot. I would like to say something, but...  |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
JeremiahK
|
posted: 2012-05-29 22:13:24 (ID: 42858) Report Abuse |
|
Sorry....... I realize that you mentioned in the other thread the reason RB is still RB is because you might introduce Tailback as a position possibly later. I was having a light hearted jab at that.
But seriously everything else I said I stand by. If your looking to add more formations and things like that. (HB/RB/FB) can play in a variety of positions in the backfield. Keep it to just the two positions you have. It's plenty and let them play other positions. My main point which I will hammer home is look at the position penalty of FB and HB playing the other posiiton at some point. To me the penalty should basically come from their attribute build. In fact maybe look at scaling the penalties for a variety of out of position play, with massive penalties for a DL playing at CB for example while a smaller penalty for S playing at CB etc........ I guess this would only come into force more so if there are alot of injuries. BTW I am more impressed by this game than I thougt I would be coming from (you know where). Either way keep up the good work. |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
|
sfniner08
|
posted: 2012-06-03 12:01:27 (ID: 43347) Report Abuse |
|
Well....
Every team in the NFL has a fullback. Some rush a little, some rush often, and many rush once in while usually in a goal line situation. Funny enough the goalline offense has a fb not a hb. I would imagine that most managers here train carrying on their fb's. FB's don't rush too often (unless it is by design in which case just move your hb to fb) so carrying trait wouldn't be used all that often. I don't see the big need to make the change. If a change was made it wouldn't bother me, but I just don't see why it needs to happen. What impact is there in training and coaches by making the change? |
|
| Quote Reply Edit | |
| reply Mark this thread unread | |
| Navigation: |< >| | |
| Main / Suggestions / Running backs | |
