Am I incorrect in thinking that we do not utilize fullbacks anymore? I remember the hanrahan dixon combo was rather potent .. curious as to why we abandoned that.
honest question - why dont we use fullbacks?
- Thread starter 22yardpunt
- Start date
Fullback is my favorite position too. Who doesn't like to watch a 6' 250lbs guy get a 10 foot running start and TRUCK a defender significantly smaller than him to allow a 4.5 40 back behind him go for 10+? ULL got the #1 FB prospect in the nation a couple of years ago and it was because they were the only school to offer him a scholarship. We need to just shave a scholarship from one of our existing deepest positions in the upcoming signing class and offer a scholarship to the #1 FB. We used to have like 3 on our roster... one actually caught a TD against Auburn last year.
Last edited:
B/C Mullen is too hard-headed to switch to more of a pro-style offense. TR needs a FB to have our running game work..
Anyone who has played linebacker before agrees whole heartedly with this statement. You just think shump hits hard, wait till you have to have to see that 6'5" 250 lb man targeting you with a full head of steam whose only job is to put you on your ***. A good fullback can deliver twice the punishment of any running back.
FB compliments the run oriented spread really well, actually. Most of those teams choose to use a HB but it's essentially the same thing. I'll give you though that Mullen hasn't used 2 backs in a single set in a LONG time, and I think that has a lot to do with that.
I just wish he'd use a FB or put Griffin and Perk out there at the same time or something... OL sucks. We need as many blockers as possible.
Last edited:
Guess I'm not alone in this then. We don't have runningbacks that get yards after contact...wish wed find a guy that runs into the hole like a pissed off bull that loves contact. I just don't get it. I know we pull guards but it doesn't seem as effective to me
We tried to convince "Turtle" to move to FB this year but I've been told they gave him the option between TE and FB. Obviously he chose TE and is now a waste of a scholarship. That guy is a complete 17 up. Look no further than the closest watering hole in Starkville during the middle of the week. If you wait long enough he'll be there at some point in the night. I have no problem with that morally or anything but no one with a 100% athletic scholarship should be partying hardcore. It's the same problem I have with everyone on the basketball team.
My point is that they apparently wanted a FB to use this season, but someone (I've heard Keonning) gave him an out.
My point is that they apparently wanted a FB to use this season, but someone (I've heard Keonning) gave him an out.
Last edited:
Did you guys not pay attention on Saturday? We used a fullback several times in the first half with great success.
His name? Corvell Harrison-Gay. Looked pretty good out there.
His name? Corvell Harrison-Gay. Looked pretty good out there.
Since when do we give players the option to choose their position? If this is true, which I highly doubt, it is a major problem. As far as I'm concerned every scholarship athlete should play whatever position we tell them to. The coaching staff is going place each player wherever they feel like they can contribute the most. Of course we are going to disagree with some of their decisions, but they are positioning our players to give us the best shot at winning.
I love using a fullback. Justin Griffith, somewhat of a hybrid fb/hb, was one of my favorite players while at State. Nothings better than watching a monster FB layout a linebacker one play and then catch a pass over the middle the very next play.