Reese permanent move to RB?

holyghost · Joined: 18 Jan 2007 Posts: 5307

I support Reece to RB. I really don't see Reece at FB as an extra weapon and I will tell you why.

There's just not a ton of ways to get a FB involved. Once he goes into the line whether it's a run or a play action, it severely limits how he can get the ball because then he has to pick through the line to get to his spot. If he's out playing fullback then swing passes and screens are about all we can see out of him.
Most of his receiving plays at FB, before he went to RB, were split out wide, or in motion, but very few came while he was actually playing fullback. Which means he was not actually playing fullback at the time. He's wasted at fullback and not such a great blocker anyway where he's needed there. I never supported or understood the move to fullback in the first place considering his game has always been his extraordinary receiving ability.

I say a move to RB or even a multi use TE like Aaron Hernandez is absolutely in order for this guy. Say goodbye to Schmitt, and get one or two legit blocking fullbacks in here this offseason. Schmitt is horrendous by the way. Can't run short yardage, can't barely block. Can drink beer, that's about it.

Silver&Black88 · Joined: 24 Feb 2009 Posts: 24644 Location: Rochester, NY

Ugh, hell to the no. Sure, let him run more often but as the starting running back? You serious, bro?
_________________

ZoomWaffle · Joined: 25 Apr 2010 Posts: 4578 Location: AZ

DOCLEW 28 · Joined: 10 Nov 2006 Posts: 10587 Location: East Oakland

holyghost · Joined: 18 Jan 2007 Posts: 5307

If anyone said Starting running back, that's not what I meant. I thought the thread was about a move to RB, not to start him there.

Agreed on some of the points of the last post, but half of what you said is what I am saying.
Being at FB he can catch in the flats, and screens. Noone said he couldn't and we all know he can. But that's just about all you can do with a fullback in a fullback formation without motion or splitting him wide. I'm all for a 2 back set with him, then any sort of motion can be devised to move either guy anywhere. Will they do that? I think that one is above Knapp and Allen's heads, and 11 games into the season we won't see a major offensive shift made like that.

So my point is if all you do to get him involved is move out of the fullback position in some way, why keep him there? He's a mismatch any way you slice it, you don't have to have him at fullback to make that happen. Anyone covering him is either too small or too slow, anyone tackling him same story..

Seems to me he gets the ball alot less at fullback and I think it's because of the points I stated. Well I want to see, and I think we all want to see, him getting the ball more. If that means a move to RB then move him. It's not like there will be a transition period, the dude has moved seamlessly from position to position. If we're going back to having him touch the ball twice a game at fullback, then I'm dead set against the guy at fullback. I would have to be led to believe the offense does not have very many plays designed for the fullback. Change the offense mid season or just move the guy? I doubt this team's ability to design a super creative offense in the offseason, much less midseason, so the easy answer is to move the guy.

And once again, let me reiterate I don't even know why they moved him to fullback to begin with. Wasted 3 years of his career, 2 to even make the team, and now that we see he can play just about any skill position whether it's RB, WR, TE, HB, or FB, fullback is the least impactful position of all of them. So the question is why is Reece at fullback NOT a dumb move? Waste 2 years of his career teaching him a position that isn't really important at all, only to find out in his 4th year that it will take him a week to learn a new position of far greater impact. SMH.

I know, mismatch. Like I said, he's a mismatch at any position. At fullback, he goes from being a mismatch to a decoy because he barely touches the ball. Playing decoy with a mismatch is an error, because a mismatch can't be accounted for. Therefore the opponent won't fall hard for the decoy because they can't handle the mismatch in the first place!?

When the opponent bends over backwards trying to stop the bleeding cased by the mismatch, that's when you employ it as a decoy. Not willy nilly, just because..

I swear I have never seen a team waste the years of it's players the way the Raiders do. Every guy taes 3 years to develop, then 8 years into his career someone finally figures out to move Huff to CB. 4 years into his career someone finally figures out Reece is a mismatch and can play 5 positions. After they train him to be a fullback for 2 years, aduh. There's no talent recognition going on here, but at least the new regime seems to be a bit quicker on figuring these things out..