The Fullbacks

[KYPack]

We've yelled at the DLine, moaned about the OLine and play calling. Forum posters have pointed out problems in almost all phases of team activity, but one area of play that has flown under the radar is the lack of production from the backfield by the fullbacks. It's gone from an area bright with potential to a big weakness. We need to get some help at this position.

In 06' William Henderson was cut, Vonta Leach was found to be wanting and sent on his way, leaving GB with no one to play fullback. But GM Ted Thomson filled the FB spot with a couple finds in '07.

Linebacker Korey Hall was drafted in the 6th round out of Boise State. He was converted to FB when he was drafted. Many observers felt that Hall was drafted based on a recommendation from ST coach Mike Stock (there's that name again). The Redskins drafted a Boise State LB named Bryan Johnson in 2000, when Stock was the ST Coach for Washington. Johnson blossomed into a solid FB and special team's terror for the Skins. In the early going of '07, it looked like the same trick worked twice. Not only was Hall a decent blocker, but he showed both skill and potential as a pass receiver and runner. Hall also did the job on ST and made several good plays in that capacity. Hall's first year was marred by injury, but he seemed to be a guy who had the ability to both be productive and improve his play.

Hall's back-up was John Kuhn. Kuhn was snapped up off the waiver wire from the Steelers. Kuhn had some experience and could play effective ST, in addition to being a strong blocker. Kuhn is much more limited in his ability to run with the ball or catch passes, but a back-up can't do everything, can he? Kuhn isn't much as a pass receiver or runner, but has the ability to throw devastating lead blocks.

The Packers finished '07 with two new FB's, both with different skills and abilities. The future looked rosy with two young maniacs at FB that could only improve with time.

Then came the '08 season. It opened OK for the team at FB. Hall made a beautiful catch against the Vikes in a win for a big TD. As the season began to progress, however, the lack of production from the FB position became somewhat glaring. Hall repeated failed to deliver on his blocking assignments. His production as a pass receiver and runner were also non-existent. This combined with some nagging injuries, moved Hall to the bench.

Kuhn came in and showed that he is the dominant blocker of the two players. Sometimes, that is. He is also a stiff, clumsy bugger. He can blow people up on one play, and then fall on his nose, diving into the turf on the next. Kuhn is a non-factor as a pass receiver or runner. For some goofy reason, he was used by McCarthy in key 4th and short situations. Kuhn showed he can be consistent in some phases of the game; he failed miserably on both occasions.

One of the big problems with both FB's is their ineptitude at ST. Both showed the ability to run the field and make ST plays all over the place in '07. That talent is seemingly is gone in both men. Neither of 'em is any factor at all on ST. Is it injuries, complacency, lack of coaching, who knows? What is known is both players have fallen off the map. ST play is all attitude and Hall/Kuhn must have bad attitudes, their play at ST is now almost non-existent

The conclusion of the miserable '08 season finds us in a puzzle at the FB. Sub .500 NFL teams can't afford to stand pat. Should we chalk this year up as a bummer and give these two a chance to rebound? Yeah, maybe. But at least one of 'em has to improve. I'd think they need to bring in some good competition and come up with two players at the position. Neither of these guys has earned any right to think they have any job security.

[rbaloha1]

Nice analysis.

FBs are adequate. Probably not in the Wil Henderson category but dudes we can still win with.

IMO FBs are not a major priority for the Packers.

[KYPack]

Nice analysis.

FBs are adequate. Probably not in the Wil Henderson category but dudes we can still win with.

IMO FBs are not a major priority for the Packers.

They may not be a priority, but they should be a big concern.

We've got one guy who can only block and can't even do that consistently. The other guy is a poor blocker and hurt more than healthy.

These two aren't hacking the program and a change must be made.

It would help both runand pass blocking to get a more effective FB. If we can get a guy to do that and help with a little offensive production, it would help spark the offense.

We could use that spark

[sharpe1027]

Thanks for the analysis and I think this is a great topic. I must admit that I do not consistently watch the fullbacks, usually I only notice a key block (or miss) on a replay. Still, I had not heard anyone provide such a negative review of the fullbacks.

I must admit that I'm not sold on your conclusions that they performed so poorly this year. A fullbacks job is often like an offensive lineman's in that the less you hear of them, the better they are doing. I haven't heard much from our fullbacks so I had assumed that they were making their assignments. How did you reach your conclusions?

[Patler]

Hall does seem to have a problem staying healthy.
Both are very raw as blockers, Hall having been a linebacker and Kuhn actually having been a featured back carrying and receiving, with not a lot of lead block experience. Kuhn had a bunch of school and conference records as a ball carrier. Maybe neither one will really "get it".

The special teams situation screams for a coaching change. Something just is not working. They have lots of players with past ST success and/or with the physical qualities that should make them successful. Somehow the coaches just haven't gotten through to this group, or are not giving them the right tools with which to succeed. Since you can't replace ALL the players, maybe a coaching change would have benefit.

[Guiness]

I miss Hendo's catches out of the backfield. Then making a CB or safety PAY for tackling him (after he jumped over the first guy...)

A fair number of NFL teams don't even carry a back that would qualify as a true FB anymore. I thought one of the reasons we kept one was because we were effective in throwing the swing pass to them.

Leach looked real good against us on a couple of plays. Was it a mistake letting him go?

[Pacopete4]

:twisted: they played well for Favre last year.... hehe

[Gunakor]

:twisted: they played well for Favre last year.... hehe

They played well for Rodgers to open this year too. What's your point?

By the way, let this be entered into evidence as exhibit A that it is NOT just the Rodgers supporters that bring up Favre's name. And call it exhibit A only because I lack the desire to dig up all the other times it has happened.

[MOBB DEEP]

:twisted: they played well for Favre last year.... hehe

They played well for Rodgers to open this year too. What's your point?

By the way, let this be entered into evidence as exhibit A that it is NOT just the Rodgers supporters that bring up Favre's name. And call it exhibit A only because I lack the desire to dig up all the other times it has happened.

yeah, no need for that pete

[Pacopete4]

:twisted: they played well for Favre last year.... hehe

They played well for Rodgers to open this year too. What's your point?

By the way, let this be entered into evidence as exhibit A that it is NOT just the Rodgers supporters that bring up Favre's name. And call it exhibit A only because I lack the desire to dig up all the other times it has happened.

yeah, no need for that pete it was a god damn joke people... they are fullbacks... big f'in deal... haha god ur a woman gunkor

[Gunakor]

:twisted: they played well for Favre last year.... hehe

They played well for Rodgers to open this year too. What's your point?

By the way, let this be entered into evidence as exhibit A that it is NOT just the Rodgers supporters that bring up Favre's name. And call it exhibit A only because I lack the desire to dig up all the other times it has happened.

yeah, no need for that pete it was a god damn joke people... they are fullbacks... big f'in deal... haha god ur a woman gunkor

It's not the joke that irked me. All I asked about your joke was what your point was.

What irked me here was you bringing up Favre where it wasn't needed. And I called you out on it because you and your fellow Favre fanatics have constantly said that it is only the pro-Rodgers crowd that brings up Favre in discussion. I've known that to be patently false for quite some time, but I haven't bothered to respond. Well now I have. Eat it.

And what the hell is "god you're a woman Gunakor" supposed to mean? There are a bunch of women here that might take serious offense to that, as much or more than I do. Think before you type. Grow up.

[cpk1994]

:twisted: they played well for Favre last year.... hehe

They played well for Rodgers to open this year too. What's your point?

By the way, let this be entered into evidence as exhibit A that it is NOT just the Rodgers supporters that bring up Favre's name. And call it exhibit A only because I lack the desire to dig up all the other times it has happened.

yeah, no need for that peteWow, this is mindboggling. Mobb telling someone not to sitr the shit. :shock:

[cpk1994]

:twisted: they played well for Favre last year.... hehe

They played well for Rodgers to open this year too. What's your point?

By the way, let this be entered into evidence as exhibit A that it is NOT just the Rodgers supporters that bring up Favre's name. And call it exhibit A only because I lack the desire to dig up all the other times it has happened.

yeah, no need for that pete it was a god damn joke people... they are fullbacks... big f'in deal... haha god ur a woman gunkorYOu are the one to talk. SOmeone makes a joke you don't like and you throw a tantrum like a 4 year old. Pot meet kettle.

[KYPack]

Thanks for the analysis and I think this is a great topic. I must admit that I do not consistently watch the fullbacks, usually I only notice a key block (or miss) on a replay. Still, I had not heard anyone provide such a negative review of the fullbacks.

I must admit that I'm not sold on your conclusions that they performed so poorly this year. A fullbacks job is often like an offensive lineman's in that the less you hear of them, the better they are doing. I haven't heard much from our fullbacks so I had assumed that they were making their assignments. How did you reach your conclusions?

Watching tape.

When I can get a video of the game, I watch it one or two times with Tivo to get the things it's tough to see on a first viewing. I've watched the FB's quite a bit, bc I've seen a lot of missed blocks on my first viewing.

I'm not going on an agenda here, just posting what I've seen.

The level of execution has to improve from the FB's.

Paco,

You are a stupid shit.

[Fritz]

I sometimes wonder, if innovation isn't the key to improvement and success in the NFL, why somebody - the Pack, perhaps? - doesn't try to re-invent the fullback position. People talk about shuttling tailbacks in and out now, using a two back system - what about two featured backs that are both in the backfield at the same time, one of whom is a fullback?

The investment would be minimal draft-wise. When was the last time a fullback was drafted in even the second round? If there is one, it's probably only one. The point is, you could have your pick of the litter. Then maybe design some carries for the guy, so defenses have to actually guard the guy instead of treating him like a sixth lineman.

Short of all that, I think KY's above post is spot on. On all counts.

[KYPack]

I sometimes wonder, if innovation isn't the key to improvement and success in the NFL, why somebody - the Pack, perhaps? - doesn't try to re-invent the fullback position. People talk about shuttling tailbacks in and out now, using a two back system - what about two featured backs that are both in the backfield at the same time, one of whom is a fullback?

The investment would be minimal draft-wise. When was the last time a fullback was drafted in even the second round? If there is one, it's probably only one. The point is, you could have your pick of the litter. Then maybe design some carries for the guy, so defenses have to actually guard the guy instead of treating him like a sixth lineman.

Short of all that, I think KY's above post is spot on. On all counts.

Fritz for leader.

I've thought the exact same thing.

For too many seasons now, the fullback has become a guard in the backfield. The idea that you can take a college LB and make him a NFL FB is somewhat silly. The FB position has become a waste. Why not have your tailback fronted by a guy who runs a circle route now and then for a 15 yard gain? Make the D account for the guy instead of a charging bull that does the same thing play after play.

Kuhn is a guy who could stand to be a little lighter on his feet. When he has trouble in pass pro, it's against move men.

The "Wild hog" showed NFL OC's that new ideas could work, why not go with two backs working in concert?

(Post edited for illiteracy)

[digitaldean]

Ever imagine how many yards, Grant could have if our FBs were even HALF as good as Hendo, Lorenzo Neal or Tony Richardson. They could pound the rock ad nauseum and beat the opponents into submission.

[Pugger]

:twisted: they played well for Favre last year.... hehe

They played well for Rodgers to open this year too. What's your point?

By the way, let this be entered into evidence as exhibit A that it is NOT just the Rodgers supporters that bring up Favre's name. And call it exhibit A only because I lack the desire to dig up all the other times it has happened.

yeah, no need for that pete it was a god damn joke people... they are fullbacks... big f'in deal... haha god ur a woman gunkorYOu are the one to talk. SOmeone makes a joke you don't like and you throw a tantrum like a 4 year old. Pot meet kettle.

Boys, boys!! Stop the bickering. :no: I do agree we don't need to bring Brett into EVERY COTTON PICKIN' THREAD but let's not be childish and act like the creeps on the Green Bay Press-Gazette forums! :butt:

I think FB is a dying breed. How many guys in HS or college chose to play this position? Most fellas that play in the backfield would rather be the featured back and not the blocker. Heck, we had to convert a LB to play this position! :?

[hoosier]

The special teams situation screams for a coaching change. Something just is not working. They have lots of players with past ST success and/or with the physical qualities that should make them successful. Somehow the coaches just haven't gotten through to this group, or are not giving them the right tools with which to succeed. Since you can't replace ALL the players, maybe a coaching change would have benefit.

A recent JSO article about the dismal punting situation in GB this year quoted Stock (not sure if it was recent or old material) on the decision to cut Ryan at the end of camp. It sounded like Ryan's agent was encouraging him to seek a "second opinion" from a punting specialist to correct some mechanical flaws and that Stock was discouraging him, and from the sounds of it getting a little bent out of shape because someone would have the gall to think Stock didn't have the answer to everything. Stock came off sounding petty, arrogant and very closed in his thinking. It would be nice to see what someone else could do with this bunch.

[sharpe1027]

Watching tape.

When I can get a video of the game, I watch it one or two times with Tivo to get the things it's tough to see on a first viewing. I've watched the FB's quite a bit, bc I've seen a lot of missed blocks on my first viewing.

I'm not going on an agenda here, just posting what I've seen.

The level of execution has to improve from the FB's.

Paco,

You are a stupid shit.

Thanks. I appreciate your take on it because I really haven't made a point to watch the FBs.

[KYPack]

Hall does seem to have a problem staying healthy.
Both are very raw as blockers, Hall having been a linebacker and Kuhn actually having been a featured back carrying and receiving, with not a lot of lead block experience. Kuhn had a bunch of school and conference records as a ball carrier. Maybe neither one will really "get it".

The special teams situation screams for a coaching change. Something just is not working. They have lots of players with past ST success and/or with the physical qualities that should make them successful. Somehow the coaches just haven't gotten through to this group, or are not giving them the right tools with which to succeed. Since you can't replace ALL the players, maybe a coaching change would have benefit.

Great point. You've got guys who CAN do it, why didn't they get it done this season? Stock obviously has some expertise and there are many teams that must envy our return teams with the brilliant Wil Blackmon.

There are many ST areas that have been a disaster. It's now obvious that Stock was behind the ouster of Ryan and the hiring of Frost. That went well, eh? Our punt and kick teams were down at the beginning and fell off the charts when Tracy White was cut. Kuhn and Hall weren't the only guys not getting after it on ST.

All the groups lost some fire.

Yeah, run Mike Stock off and bring in a new coach and some guys who want to light people up.

We can use it.