Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345
Results 41 to 49 of 49
  1. #41
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,899

    Re: Well it looks like we are takin a Fullback in the draft

    "Mr" wrote:
    A two WR set doesn't really do us any favors, at least not with our WRs. We need a wideout who demands safety respect before we can run effectively in 2 WR sets again.



























    S





    S























    OLB


    MLB



    OLB

    CB


















    DE



    DT



    DT



    DE
















    CB
    WR


















    LT


    LG

    C


    RG

    RT

    TE














    WR





























    QB






























    FB






























    RB

    2 safeties + 3 LBs + 4 Down linemen= 9 in the box.

    However if we come out in a 3 WR, we can get down to 8. My preference here is dropping the TE in favor of the 3rd WR while keeping the fullback in the game.





























    S


























































    OLB


    MLB



    OLB

    CB


















    DE



    DT



    DT




    DE









    S






    CB
    WR


















    LT


    LG

    C


    RG


    RT









    WR





    WR





























    QB






























    FB






























    RB
    There's 8 in the box. What I would do here is run to the weak side(left, with 1 WR)

    I'd start by making the split between Hererra(RG) and Cook(RT) very wide, this is so a (very) speedy backside DE can't blow up the play in the backfield.

    Then you pull the right guard through the 3 hole(between LG and LT, Hutch and McKinnie who are blocking in opposite directions, McKinnie's pushing his man towards the sideline and Hutch the center of the field the combo of Blocking between Hutch, Birk, and whoever picks up the MLB(FB or RG) is called sealing the backside) and hitting the first man he sees. Birk blocks the DT that was on Hererra.

    The fullback then follows through picking up another LB.

    Cook chips the Defensive end, just to slow him down and forcing him a little further outside, but he has a lot of ground to cover, and it's difficult to run down an Adrian Peterson from the backside. If totally necessary, TJack can try to slow him
    down a bit too. After the chip, Cook tries to go to the next level and pick up anyone he can get his hands on(always fun as a lineman... hitting little people is a great feeling after pushing around monsters). If he can't, we still have a solid gain, if he does, it's probably a touchdown.

    I chose to run to the weakside because it puts the safety they took out of the box on the opposite side of the field.






























    S






















































    [s]OLB[/s]


    RB




    [s]MLB[/s]


    OLB(hopefully Cook can get to him)

















    |




















    FB


    |


    RG





    RT
    CB

















    [s]DE[/s]


    |


    [s]DT[/s]



    [s]DT[/s]














    S






    CB
    WR


















    LT

    |

    LG



    C













    WR





    WR

























    \














    DE(Chipped, pursuing from backside)

































    \



























    \










    QB(Can attempt to pick up DE if he poses a major threat)

    Bold = Our guys creating the hole.
    [s]Strikethrough[/s] = Guys being blocked to create the hole.
    Purple = Purple Jesus

    As you can see, this leaves AD one on one with a safety who's about to look really stupid *cough* Kennoy Kennedy, Archuleta, Daniel Manning, Marlon McCree*cough*




    I love doing these with you.

    ;D

    Two things.......

    1.
    Most people don't understand the concept of Chipping with a T and then primarily blocking with a TE.
    Rember the last time they tried that and Cook googed and Shank wound up taking on the LDE all by himself.

    I thought this place was gonna come down with people beyatching about us trying to use a TE to block a DE. Anyway, I like to do this out of a set with 2 TE's.

    Anyway, I like the flexibility that a Double TE set gives you with respect to trying to exploit the cover 3 that we seem to see alot.



























    S





    S























    OLB


    MLB



    OLB

    CB


















    DE



    DT



    DT



    DE
















    CB
    WR


















    LT


    LG

    C


    RG

    RT

    TE














    WR



















    TE







    QB






























    RB

    This play can really work on either side but I think it would work best on this offense just because of the percieved threat that we run more to Hutch/Mckinnies side.

    I would put my best WR on the left side and send him deep.
    That would draw the CB and S (in the cover 3) out of the zone.
    I would chip with my Left Side TE on the RDE and then send him out to the flats in a skinny post (seam route and fake the handoff to AD/CT.

    With the right WR taking the CB and S deep and the TE taking the OLB with him (should be a mismatch) into the seam that would leave the outside flats to the RB for the traditional WCO dump off as the 3rd Read.

    1rst read should be your WR on the Right side who should get Single coverage with only the Left Side CB, with your 2nd Read being the RTE who is also chipping/helping on the LDE.
    If he is engaged your 3rd read should either be the deep guy (based on what the deep safety did) or your RB in the flats.

    Again, a 2 TE set gives you more options of using the Play action off of the running game.

    Another way to do it is to put your TE in at the FB position and then put him in motion to either a Double TE set Left or Right.
    (We say that a couple of times) or just leave him in the backfield and let him go to the flat and draw the LB out as well opening the flats for the RB to exploit as well.




























    S





    S























    OLB


    MLB



    OLB

    CB


















    DE



    DT



    DT



    DE
















    CB
    WR


















    LT


    LG

    C


    RG

    RT

    TE














    WR




























    QB






























    TE





























    RB
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  2. #42
    COJOMAY is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    7,005

    Re: Well it looks like we are takin a Fullback in the draft

    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "Mr" wrote:
    A two WR set doesn't really do us any favors, at least not with our WRs. We need a wideout who demands safety respect before we can run effectively in 2 WR sets again.



























    S




    S























    OLB


    MLB


    OLB

    CB

















    DE



    DT



    DT



    DE















    CB
    WR

















    LT

    LG

    C

    RG

    RT
    TE














    WR




























    QB





























    FB





























    RB

    2 safeties + 3 LBs + 4 Down linemen= 9 in the box.

    However if we come out in a 3 WR, we can get down to 8. My preference here is dropping the TE in favor of the 3rd WR while keeping the fullback in the game.




























    S

























































    OLB


    MLB


    OLB

    CB

















    DE



    DT



    DT



    DE








    S






    CB
    WR

















    LT

    LG

    C

    RG

    RT









    WR




    WR




























    QB





























    FB





























    RB
    There's 8 in the box. What I would do here is run to the weak side(left, with 1 WR)

    I'd start by making the split between Hererra(RG) and Cook(RT) very wide, this is so a (very) speedy backside DE can't blow up the play in the backfield.

    Then you pull the right guard through the 3 hole(between LG and LT, Hutch and McKinnie who are blocking in opposite directions, McKinnie's pushing his man towards the sideline and Hutch the center of the field the combo of Blocking between Hutch, Birk, and whoever picks up the MLB(FB or RG) is called sealing the backside) and hitting the first man he sees. Birk blocks the DT that was on Hererra.

    The fullback then follows through picking up another LB.

    Cook chips the Defensive end, just to slow him down and forcing him a little further outside, but he has a lot of ground to cover, and it's difficult to run down an Adrian Peterson from the backside. If totally necessary, TJack can try to slow him
    down a bit too. After the chip, Cook tries to go to the next level and pick up anyone he can get his hands on(always fun as a lineman... hitting little people is a great feeling after pushing around monsters). If he can't, we still have a solid gain, if he does, it's probably a touchdown.

    I chose to run to the weakside because it puts the safety they took out of the box on the opposite side of the field.





























    S





















































    [s]OLB[/s]

    RB



    [s]MLB[/s]

    OLB(hopefully Cook can get to him)

















    |




















    FB

    |


    RG




    RT
    CB

















    [s]DE[/s]

    |


    [s]DT[/s]



    [s]DT[/s]













    S






    CB
    WR

















    LT

    |
    LG



    C













    WR




    WR

























    \














    DE(Chipped, pursuing from backside)

































    \


























    \









    QB(Can attempt to pick up DE if he poses a major threat)

    Bold = Our guys creating the hole.
    [s]Strikethrough[/s] = Guys being blocked to create the hole.
    Purple = Purple Jesus

    As you can see, this leaves AD one on one with a safety who's about to look really stupid *cough* Kennoy Kennedy, Archuleta, Daniel Manning, Marlon McCree*cough*



    I love doing these with you.
    ;D

    Two things.......

    1.
    Most people don't understand the concept of Chipping with a T and then primarily blocking with a TE.
    Rember the last time they tried that and Cook googed and Shank wound up taking on the LDE all by himself.

    I thought this place was gonna come down with people beyatching about us trying to use a TE to block a DE. Anyway, I like to do this out of a set with 2 TE's.

    Anyway, I like the flexibility that a Double TE set gives you with respect to trying to exploit the cover 3 that we seem to see alot.



























    S




    S























    OLB


    MLB


    OLB

    CB

















    DE



    DT



    DT



    DE















    CB
    WR

















    LT

    LG

    C

    RG

    RT
    TE














    WR



















    TE







    QB





























    RB

    This play can really work on either side but I think it would work best on this offense just because of the percieved threat that we run more to Hutch/Mckinnies side.

    I would put my best WR on the left side and send him deep.
    That would draw the CB and S (in the cover 3) out of the zone.
    I would chip with my Left Side TE on the RDE and then send him out to the flats in a skinny post (seam route and fake the handoff to AD/CT.

    With the right WR taking the CB and S deep and the TE taking the OLB with him (should be a mismatch) into the seam that would leave the outside flats to the RB for the traditional WCO dump off as the 3rd Read.

    1rst read should be your WR on the Right side who should get Single coverage with only the Left Side CB, with your 2nd Read being the RTE who is also chipping/helping on the LDE.
    If he is engaged your 3rd read should either be the deep guy (based on what the deep safety did) or your RB in the flats.

    Again, a 2 TE set gives you more options of using the Play action off of the running game.

    Another way to do it is to put your TE in at the FB position and then put him in motion to either a Double TE set Left or Right.
    (We say that a couple of times) or just leave him in the backfield and let him go to the flat and draw the LB out as well opening the flats for the RB to exploit as well.




























    S




    S























    OLB


    MLB


    OLB

    CB

















    DE



    DT



    DT



    DE















    CB
    WR

















    LT

    LG

    C

    RG

    RT
    TE














    WR




























    QB





























    TE




























    RB
    The scheme of yours that I bolded I love. I love the fact that it gives us some versitility that the tight end can block the DE on the right side and then just flow out for a pass in the right flat that would be entirely open if the outside LB are blitzing. Could you not set that up also with only one TE and have the fullback blocking in place of the TE in the backfield? Whoever is the better blocker. The beauty of the formation is that
    with a slightly altered blocking scheme the left side
    is open for a run.
    Kentucky Vikes Fan

    When you require nothing, you get nothing; when you expect nothing, you will find nothing; when you embrace nothing, all you will have is nothing.

  3. #43
    aaeyers's Avatar
    aaeyers is offline Pro-Bowler
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    436

    Re: Well it looks like we are takin a Fullback in the draft

    On the subject of fullbacks, I've always wondered how they got their name. It seems to me they should be called halfbacks, because they are half the way back compared to the runningback (who, if looked at logically, could be called the fullback). It seems to me if you have a quarterback who is a quarter of the way in the backfield, and a running back that is all the way in the backfield, the person in-between them should be called the halfback.. Can someone enlighten me on how this naming convention came to be?

  4. #44
    COJOMAY is offline Jersey Retired
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    7,005

    Re: Well it looks like we are takin a Fullback in the draft

    "aaeyers" wrote:
    On the subject of fullbacks, I've always wondered how they got their name. It seems to me they should be called halfbacks, because they are half the way back compared to the runningback (who, if looked at logically, could be called the fullback). It seems to me if you have a quarterback who is a quarter of the way in the backfield, and a running back that is all the way in the backfield, the person in-between them should be called the halfback.. Can someone enlighten me on how this naming convention came to be?
    See http://www.answerbag.com/q_view/927
    Kentucky Vikes Fan

    When you require nothing, you get nothing; when you expect nothing, you will find nothing; when you embrace nothing, all you will have is nothing.

  5. #45
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,899

    Re: Well it looks like we are takin a Fullback in the draft

    "COJOMAY" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:
    "Mr" wrote:
    A two WR set doesn't really do us any favors, at least not with our WRs. We need a wideout who demands safety respect before we can run effectively in 2 WR sets again.



























    S





    S























    OLB


    MLB



    OLB

    CB


















    DE



    DT



    DT



    DE
















    CB
    WR


















    LT


    LG

    C


    RG

    RT

    TE














    WR





























    QB






























    FB






























    RB

    2 safeties + 3 LBs + 4 Down linemen= 9 in the box.

    However if we come out in a 3 WR, we can get down to 8. My preference here is dropping the TE in favor of the 3rd WR while keeping the fullback in the game.





























    S


























































    OLB


    MLB



    OLB

    CB


















    DE



    DT



    DT




    DE









    S






    CB
    WR


















    LT


    LG

    C


    RG


    RT









    WR





    WR





























    QB






























    FB






























    RB
    There's 8 in the box. What I would do here is run to the weak side(left, with 1 WR)

    I'd start by making the split between Hererra(RG) and Cook(RT) very wide, this is so a (very) speedy backside DE can't blow up the play in the backfield.

    Then you pull the right guard through the 3 hole(between LG and LT, Hutch and McKinnie who are blocking in opposite directions, McKinnie's pushing his man towards the sideline and Hutch the center of the field the combo of Blocking between Hutch, Birk, and whoever picks up the MLB(FB or RG) is called sealing the backside) and hitting the first man he sees. Birk blocks the DT that was on Hererra.

    The fullback then follows through picking up another LB.

    Cook chips the Defensive end, just to slow him down and forcing him a little further outside, but he has a lot of ground to cover, and it's difficult to run down an Adrian Peterson from the backside. If totally necessary, TJack can try to slow him
    down a bit too. After the chip, Cook tries to go to the next level and pick up anyone he can get his hands on(always fun as a lineman... hitting little people is a great feeling after pushing around monsters). If he can't, we still have a solid gain, if he does, it's probably a touchdown.

    I chose to run to the weakside because it puts the safety they took out of the box on the opposite side of the field.






























    S






















































    [s]OLB[/s]


    RB




    [s]MLB[/s]


    OLB(hopefully Cook can get to him)

















    |




















    FB


    |


    RG





    RT
    CB

















    [s]DE[/s]


    |


    [s]DT[/s]



    [s]DT[/s]














    S






    CB
    WR


















    LT

    |

    LG



    C













    WR





    WR

























    \














    DE(Chipped, pursuing from backside)

































    \



























    \










    QB(Can attempt to pick up DE if he poses a major threat)

    Bold = Our guys creating the hole.
    [s]Strikethrough[/s] = Guys being blocked to create the hole.
    Purple = Purple Jesus

    As you can see, this leaves AD one on one with a safety who's about to look really stupid *cough* Kennoy Kennedy, Archuleta, Daniel Manning, Marlon McCree*cough*




    I love doing these with you.

    ;D

    Two things.......

    1.
    Most people don't understand the concept of Chipping with a T and then primarily blocking with a TE.
    Rember the last time they tried that and Cook googed and Shank wound up taking on the LDE all by himself.

    I thought this place was gonna come down with people beyatching about us trying to use a TE to block a DE. Anyway, I like to do this out of a set with 2 TE's.

    Anyway, I like the flexibility that a Double TE set gives you with respect to trying to exploit the cover 3 that we seem to see alot.



























    S





    S























    OLB


    MLB



    OLB

    CB


















    DE



    DT



    DT



    DE
















    CB
    WR


















    LT


    LG

    C


    RG

    RT

    TE














    WR



















    TE







    QB






























    RB

    This play can really work on either side but I think it would work best on this offense just because of the percieved threat that we run more to Hutch/Mckinnies side.

    I would put my best WR on the left side and send him deep.
    That would draw the CB and S (in the cover 3) out of the zone.
    I would chip with my Left Side TE on the RDE and then send him out to the flats in a skinny post (seam route and fake the handoff to AD/CT.

    With the right WR taking the CB and S deep and the TE taking the OLB with him (should be a mismatch) into the seam that would leave the outside flats to the RB for the traditional WCO dump off as the 3rd Read.

    1rst read should be your WR on the Right side who should get Single coverage with only the Left Side CB, with your 2nd Read being the RTE who is also chipping/helping on the LDE.
    If he is engaged your 3rd read should either be the deep guy (based on what the deep safety did) or your RB in the flats.

    Again, a 2 TE set gives you more options of using the Play action off of the running game.

    Another way to do it is to put your TE in at the FB position and then put him in motion to either a Double TE set Left or Right.
    (We say that a couple of times) or just leave him in the backfield and let him go to the flat and draw the LB out as well opening the flats for the RB to exploit as well.




























    S





    S























    OLB


    MLB



    OLB

    CB


















    DE



    DT



    DT



    DE
















    CB
    WR


















    LT


    LG

    C


    RG

    RT

    TE














    WR




























    QB






























    TE





























    RB
    The scheme of yours that I bolded I love. I love the fact that it gives us some versitility that the tight end can block the DE on the right side and then just flow out for a pass in the right flat that would be entirely open if the outside LB are blitzing. Could you not set that up also with only one TE and have the fullback blocking in place of the TE in the backfield? Whoever is the better blocker. The beauty of the formation is that
    with a slightly altered blocking scheme the left side
    is open for a run.
    Yes you could especially if you have a FB that can catch a ball.
    Fact is T-rich and Dugan were targets quite a bit this year (considering how many times we actually threw this year) if people remember.

    Again, why I think the staff will move Mills to FB this year.
    His build is more along the lines of a FB than a TE (compare him to T-rich).


    Gets him on the roster and won't cost us a roster spot at TE allowing us to keep everyone we have there.
    Bad thing is we might have to lose T-rich over it.
    :'(
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  6. #46
    aaeyers's Avatar
    aaeyers is offline Pro-Bowler
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    436

    Re: Well it looks like we are takin a Fullback in the draft

    "Marrdro" wrote:
    Yes you could especially if you have a FB that can catch a ball.
    Fact is T-rich and Dugan were targets quite a bit this year (considering how many times we actually threw this year) if people remember.

    Again, why I think the staff will move Mills to FB this year.
    His build is more along the lines of a FB than a TE (compare him to T-rich).


    Gets him on the roster and won't cost us a roster spot at TE allowing us to keep everyone we have there.
    Bad thing is we might have to lose T-rich over it.

    :'(
    As long as Richardson doesn't retire, I don't see how we could possibly let him go. He is a great fullback, and an even better person to have around in the locker room. I could very well see us carrying a FB and 4 TEs on the roster.

    Tight Ends can do everything, they can block, they can catch, they can play special teams, they can carry the ball.. Especially with our smashmouth offense, tight ends are very important (and so is depth at that position).

    Though I agree, and think that Mills would make an awesome fullback. I hope that when Richardson retires that Mills is still here, and gets a shot in the backfield. In my mind, there really isn't a difference between a tight end and a fullback, they both basically do the same things.

  7. #47
    ThorSPL's Avatar
    ThorSPL is offline Team Alumni
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Location
    Omaha, NE
    Posts
    3,422

    Re: Well it looks like we are takin a Fullback in the draft

    "aaeyers" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:
    Yes you could especially if you have a FB that can catch a ball.
    Fact is T-rich and Dugan were targets quite a bit this year (considering how many times we actually threw this year) if people remember.

    Again, why I think the staff will move Mills to FB this year.
    His build is more along the lines of a FB than a TE (compare him to T-rich).


    Gets him on the roster and won't cost us a roster spot at TE allowing us to keep everyone we have there.
    Bad thing is we might have to lose T-rich over it.
    :'(
    As long as Richardson doesn't retire, I don't see how we could possibly let him go. He is a great fullback, and an even better person to have around in the locker room. I could very well see us carrying a FB and 4 TEs on the roster.

    Tight Ends can do everything, they can block, they can catch, they can play special teams, they can carry the ball.. Especially with our smashmouth offense, tight ends are very important (and so is depth at that position).

    Though I agree, and think that Mills would make an awesome fullback. I hope that when Richardson retires that Mills is still here, and gets a shot in the backfield. In my mind, there really isn't a difference between a tight end and a fullback, they both basically do the same things.
    I would say Childress agrees with you, as he has a plethora of hybrid FB/TE players on the roster...


    Trust me, I'm a doctor.

    www.twitter.com/ThorSPL

  8. #48
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,899

    Re: Well it looks like we are takin a Fullback in the draft

    "aaeyers" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:
    Yes you could especially if you have a FB that can catch a ball.
    Fact is T-rich and Dugan were targets quite a bit this year (considering how many times we actually threw this year) if people remember.

    Again, why I think the staff will move Mills to FB this year.
    His build is more along the lines of a FB than a TE (compare him to T-rich).


    Gets him on the roster and won't cost us a roster spot at TE allowing us to keep everyone we have there.
    Bad thing is we might have to lose T-rich over it.

    :'(
    As long as Richardson doesn't retire, I don't see how we could possibly let him go. He is a great fullback, and an even better person to have around in the locker room. I could very well see us carrying a FB and 4 TEs on the roster.

    Tight Ends can do everything, they can block, they can catch, they can play special teams, they can carry the ball.. Especially with our smashmouth offense, tight ends are very important (and so is depth at that position).

    Though I agree, and think that Mills would make an awesome fullback. I hope that when Richardson retires that Mills is still here, and gets a shot in the backfield. In my mind, there really isn't a difference between a tight end and a fullback, they both basically do the same things.
    I hear ya and don't want him to leave either, however, at some point you have to let players go no matter how good they were/are.

    Truth be told, if you look at the TE's and FB's we carry it is a high number compared to most teams.

    To get Mills on the roster, someone has to go.
    Believe it or not, T-rich is probably the best candidate even though (me included) would love to see him stay another year.
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

  9. #49
    Marrdro's Avatar
    Marrdro is offline Beware My Spreadsheet, Bitches!
    Join Date
    Dec 1969
    Posts
    43,899

    Re: Well it looks like we are takin a Fullback in the draft

    "ThorSPL" wrote:
    "aaeyers" wrote:
    "Marrdro" wrote:
    Yes you could especially if you have a FB that can catch a ball.
    Fact is T-rich and Dugan were targets quite a bit this year (considering how many times we actually threw this year) if people remember.

    Again, why I think the staff will move Mills to FB this year.
    His build is more along the lines of a FB than a TE (compare him to T-rich).


    Gets him on the roster and won't cost us a roster spot at TE allowing us to keep everyone we have there.
    Bad thing is we might have to lose T-rich over it.

    :'(
    As long as Richardson doesn't retire, I don't see how we could possibly let him go. He is a great fullback, and an even better person to have around in the locker room. I could very well see us carrying a FB and 4 TEs on the roster.

    Tight Ends can do everything, they can block, they can catch, they can play special teams, they can carry the ball.. Especially with our smashmouth offense, tight ends are very important (and so is depth at that position).

    Though I agree, and think that Mills would make an awesome fullback. I hope that when Richardson retires that Mills is still here, and gets a shot in the backfield. In my mind, there really isn't a difference between a tight end and a fullback, they both basically do the same things.
    I would say Childress agrees with you, as he has a plethora of hybrid FB/TE players on the roster...
    He sure loves players that are a bit versatile.
    I also love the flexibilty they have with a double TE set or a FB in the backfield that can go in motion or catch a ball after facking a lead block in a Play action type of play.
    Many many thanks to my talented friend Jos for the new Sig.http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v343/josdin00/Vikings/Marrdro_sig.jpg

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst ... 345

Similar Threads

  1. AP with and without a fullback
    By StillPurple in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 11-15-2008, 10:52 AM
  2. Our Next Fullback: Owen Schmitt
    By Mr Anderson in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 09-23-2007, 10:06 AM
  3. Search is on for fullback - Dugan moves to fullback
    By singersp in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 11-18-2006, 05:46 PM
  4. One on one with fullback Tony Richardson
    By singersp in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 10-10-2006, 09:51 AM
  5. Backup Fullback position
    By beejry in forum Vikings Fan Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 08-23-2006, 02:04 PM

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •