Thread: Running Backs

Fullback dive on 3rd and 7!

We should keep the FB because we're running an offense with a limited QB. And before anyone goes off the handles on that, that's the consensus about Keenum pretty much everywhere else, even his supporters.

The Vikings ran the ball a lot last year even though they were averaging under 4.0 YPC.

Originally Posted by King87

We should keep the FB because we're running an offense with a limited QB. And before anyone goes off the handles on that, that's the consensus about Keenum pretty much everywhere else, even his supporters.

The Vikings ran the ball a lot last year even though they were averaging under 4.0 YPC.

I agree with this statement. The other part is wait & see.

I love me a good fullback.

Originally Posted by Nomad

I agree with this statement. The other part is wait & see.

Then you would want to wait-and-see if keeping the FB is useful, you scoundrel!

Originally Posted by Nomad

I love me a good fullback.

You also love rotary phones, pagers, floppy disks, and horse and buggies.

Originally Posted by MOtorboat

The Broncos are carrying five running backs (Royce Freeman, Phillip Lindsay, Dave Williams, Devontae Booker and De’Angelo Henderson) and a fullback (Andy Janovich).

How does this shape up for the opener?

My guess:
Starter: Freeman
Backup: Booker
Third/Special Teams: Henderson/Lindsay

I don’t see how Janovich fits if Lindsay really is impressing as much as it sounds, but it’s hard to know what Musgrove’s scheme is going to look like. If he insists on a fullback they would probably try to get Lindsay to the practice squad. Williams is headed to the practice squad, IMO.

Janovich's spot will come by cutting one of the TEs, not a RB. I.e. they will either keep 3 TEs and Andy Janovich or else 4 TEs and no Jano.

They are still going to have to keep 4 RBs because NONE of them is an established veteran and it's too risky to just roll with Booker (who has never done anything), Royce Freeman who's a rookie, and one of Lindsay/Williams/Henderson.

They want to keep two backs from that trio because both Lindsay and Williams can play.

Originally Posted by Cugel

Janovich's spot will come by cutting one of the TEs, not a RB. I.e. they will either keep 3 TEs and Andy Janovich or else 4 TEs and no Jano.

They are still going to have to keep 4 RBs because NONE of them is an established veteran and it's too risky to just roll with Booker (who has never done anything), Royce Freeman who's a rookie, and one of Lindsay/Williams/Henderson.

They want to keep two backs from that trio because both Lindsay and Williams can play.

If they keep four running backs it will be because Lindsay is the returner. Janovich could be squeezed by either good running back play or good tight end play.

Originally Posted by MOtorboat

If they keep four running backs it will be because Lindsay is the returner. Janovich could be squeezed by either good running back play or good tight end play.

And both positions are huge question marks.

Originally Posted by Al Wilson 4 Mayor

And both positions are huge question marks.

They are.

Originally Posted by King87

We should keep the FB because we're running an offense with a limited QB. And before anyone goes off the handles on that, that's the consensus about Keenum pretty much everywhere else, even his supporters.

The Vikings ran the ball a lot last year even though they were averaging under 4.0 YPC.

Janovich is definitely making the team, dude's one of the best fullback in the league, he block's, he runs, he pass protects so I don't know how we cut him especially since like you said we're going to run the rock.

Originally Posted by MOtorboat

If they keep four running backs it will be because Lindsay is the returner. Janovich could be squeezed by either good running back play or good tight end play.

Lindsay will have too step his game up because right now ue isn't beating out McKenzie as a returner right now.

Originally Posted by ChubbNYiadom

Janovich is definitely making the team, dude's one of the best fullback in the league, he block's, he runs, he pass protects so I don't know how we cut him especially since like you said we're going to run the rock.

He's a special teams ace also. He makes the team.

Originally Posted by Al Wilson 4 Mayor

And both positions are huge question marks.

This is exactly the point. If Jake Butt for instance was an established veteran starter, then you could simply get away with 3 TEs meaning Butt, plus two backups who will only play due to injury or in two TE sets.

But, with no established veteran (having got rid of Virgil Green) they basically have no idea who their starter and backups will be. They hope it's Butt as starter, but who will win the backup job? With no reliable veterans they have to have as many possible candidates as possible.

Same thing with RBs after they got rid of CJ Anderson.

That's why Jano is on the hot seat. Something has to give if they keep 4 Rbs and 4 TEs.

Default
Quote Originally Posted by ChubbNYiadom View Post
Janovich is definitely making the team, dude's one of the best fullback in the league, he block's, he runs, he pass protects so I don't know how we cut him especially since like you said we're going to run the rock.

Many teams in the league don't have a FB at all, the league is moving away from the FB. The question is whether you could use a TE to do some of the things Jano does in blocking. They are trying to see whether they can get away with that or not. If nobody steps into that role they might be forced to keep him and sacrifice a TE spot.

But, this is undecided at present. He's totally on the bubble. If they feel they can afford to get rid of him they will because it makes other roster decisions much easier. They can probably keep both 4 RBs and 4 TEs if they let Jano go.

booker is still trash. . . freeman is a better NFL player right now, today. . .