Rothlisberger Talks About Not Needing a True Fullback

Ben Rothlisberger Doesn't Think The Steelers Need a Fulllback.

http://www.steelersdepot.com/2012/04/be ... -fullback/

Ben so far has done all the talking about what he thinks the Steelers offense should be like under Haley. However the writer of the article said: There still isn't any clarity on weather Haley will use a Fullback in the offense but, he thinks all that Ben is saying is going in one ear of Haley and out the other.

I also believe that Haley is not listening to what Ben is saying and that Haley is going to do what he thinks is best for the offense. Ben was use to having his way with Arians as the OC, but now, Haley will be in charge and if he thinks a Fullback is needed, then they will have one. I think Tomlin will back Haley. I for one am in favor of having a true Fullback in the offense rather then all those TE's as blockers. I think most of Steeler Nation feels the same way. We never wanted to see the Dan Krieder's and John Kuhn's get booted out of town.

What Ben was saying about all those first downs they got in short yardage was some BS. How about the Cleveland game when Arians called Mendenhall's number four straight times and couldn't get into the endzone. How about our redzone situation? I hope that Haley is just sitting back and putting his offense together and laughing at what Ben is saying to the media. As long as we are capcble of running the ball in short yardage situations, and in the redzone I am fine with what Haley does. If Ben has his way, they will be throwing the ball all over the yard 50 times a game. (I don't think so under Haley)

 

Three yards and a cloud of dust...........STEELERS football!!......You can still win with a good running game in this league. As long as you can play some D!!

 

Ben's a great quarterback, but an idiot. He always has been and now that he's on the wrong side of 30 I think it's safe to say he always will be. Pittsburgh uses a fullback, named David Johnson. Ben's clearly satisfied with Johnson's lead blocking. But what drives me so nuts about all of these morons -- yes, morons -- is that they are not getting ANYTHING in return for sacrificing critical blocking, and they can't even put those two things together. The writer of the article articulates this moronic sentiment perfectly:

"I would much rather have a second pass catching tight end on the fiend instead [of a fullback], especially if he can serve as an H-back in certain formations."

So if Ben and Mr. Dave Bryan don't want a true fullback, then they must also be satisfied with all the other aspects of Johnson's game, like running with the ball, catching, getting open. OH WAIT. Johnson doesn't take handoffs at all, he drops almost as many balls as he catches, and he has no running skills to speak of. Not only is he not in the mold of Dan Kreider. He's also not in the mold of Aaron Hernandez, or Richie Anderson, or anyone else that had any skill whatsoever. And it was the same story with Carey Davis before him. These guys couldn't do anything well, but they did everything at the same level and so people thought they were "balanced." Dan Kreider was not a big threat with the ball in his hands, and he was a monstrous blocker. So the difference between his skills was obvious. Johnson can't do any of it, but people perceive him to be a "do it all" kind of guy. But be honest with yourselves. Picture David Johnson running a little route into the flat. Do you really think he could do more with that play than Dan Kreider could have? I think he's more likely to drop the pass, and not any more likely to break a tackle, and not any more likely to run faster. But even if you think he might gain an extra yard or two on every reception, is that really worth having crappy lead blocking for your RBs? Make no mistake, we use a FB all the time. All game long! It's not just here and there, Johnson is in there constantly. And he misses blocks constantly. And the blocks he doesn't miss could be described as "just getting enough." It is a detriment to the team and plain as day to the running backs getting tackled at the line of scrimmage.

For the record, here are some numbers comparing the "true fullback" Kreider and the "versitile H-backs" Johnson and Davis:

Player.....................Yards per Rush..............Yards per Reception.............Yards from Scrimmage/Game

Kreider*..........................4.6..............................7.9.......................................5.4
Johnson**........................N/A..............................8.1......................................3.1
Davis***..........................3.8...............................4.5.......................................5.2

http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/K/KreiDa00.htm
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/J/JohnDa05.htm
http://www.pro-football-reference.com/players/D/DaviCa00.htm

*Players with one asterisk were considered a one trick ponies that was not a threat with the ball in his hands (very true, when compared to starting running backs and receivers). They were also considered an enormous boost to the ground game, because they essentially eliminated one defender on every running play.

**Players with two or more asterisks are infamous for being consistently bad lead blockers from the fullback position, where they primarily played. They have also single-handedly cost their team points time and time again with their woefully inept and often horribly timed whiffs. However, they are also famous for being far superior in the passing game and far superior "threats" to defenses, as proven by the numbers provided.

***Carey Davis was so versitile, he also returned kicks for us, where he averaged 17 yards per return. Somehow, he did NOT make the Pro Bowl that year as a return specialist. But that's because it's rigged.

I'm not trying to make the argument that Dan Kreider was a big threat to do something with the ball. But people do not understand what "threat" means. Any capable, non-handicapped human being with any amount of high school football experience is a threat on the field. Think I'm full of it? Well, would you leave one uncovered on a pass route? Of course not. There is a floor, a "bottoming out" if you will, of threat level. When Neil O'Donnell went out for a pass because Kordell was in at QB, someone covered Neil. They had to, right? They can't just leave him open in the end zone or it'd be a touchdown. It's the same with Kreider vs. Johnson vs. Davis. Unless one of them has enough talent to raise his threat level above that of a normal fullback or tight end up to the level near starting running back, he is at the very bottom of the threat totem poll. Obviously Carey Davis is more threatening than Neil O'Donnell with the ball in his hands. By a mile. But what's the difference on the football field? If it takes the same number of defenders to cover him (one) and tackle him (one), it makes no difference. When it comes to lead blocking, which is what all three of these men did 90% of the time, what's the difference between them? Night and day. But who needs a running game anyway, in today's passing league? We can do without 45% of our offense, right?

 

Snack, I havent re-watched the games like you have, to see Johnson missing all those blocks, or barely making them, so I will trust that you are right about that.
I do remember him having one or two games, where Ben threw him several short passes, that he got some extra yards out of, and at least one or two passes for about 20 yards, just because the other team wasn`t focusing on him. (and why would they?).
So, I am not as "down" on him, as you are.
Even at that, I WOULD absolutely love to see us bring a true fullback into our gameplan, or at the very least, put both of our "halfbacks", onto the field at the same time, and occasionally, let one of them, lead the other, into the middle, or off-tackle part of the line of scrimmage.
Kinda like that fabled "pony backfield", that Arians always teased us was coming.
I just can`t understand why we would NOT do this from time to time.
It has been a pet peeve of mine, even back when we had Bus and Parker...
Why would we NOT make the defense wonder who is gonna get the ball, or, use one of them to block for the other?
It worked for Blier and Harris, Dammit!
I know that isn`t the same as a true fullback, like Krieder or Kuhn, but it would at least give you another potentially good blocker, who is also a LEGITAMITE threat to run with the ball, and not just on a "Fullback Dive" to try and catch the D offguard, and gain a couple yards.
I have never understood why we haven`t done this, and I guess I never will...
It just seems to have a ton of potential for "misdirection" plays, or to simply let one good runner, open up a hole in the line, for another good runner.
By the way, just to nitpick, Snak... I think ONE defender could bring down O`donell, but I`m not sure the same is true about Davis... Might take a couple. moot point anyhow, as they are both gone.
Regardless, I agree with most of what you posted, and that was a good read.

 

What's next, eliminate middle linebackers because they're from football of ages past? Why not swap out the MLB for a CB, as CB's are more of a threat to get the interception in today's passing game? Better yet, let's substitute Ryan Mundy in for Casey Hampton at NT, as Mundy is more balanced.

 

I think we need to go back to basics and get a good fb. Then we don't have to use our TEs as fullbacks.

 

I didn't even get into this, but supposing you do prefer the "light on the blocking, heavy on the receiving" type (maybe a Hernandez kinda guy) and supposing he's actually talented (not Johnson or Davis) and actually a threat to defenses... There's no reason you can't carry both him and a true lead blocker. Have you seen who some of our active roster spots are going to? There's like 4 or 5 guys that don't even really back up any positions and only play special teams! An H-back/TE and a FB could both play special teams. You're telling me we couldn't spare a spot for someone who could have a major impact on at least a few plays per game?

The fact of the matter is, there will be plays in the game where the defense knows you're going to run the ball. And there will be plays in the game when you want to run the ball and don't care if they suspect it... or when you want them to think you'll run the ball. There is room for both players. A true FB could be on the field for 10 plays per game or more. Short yardage, goal line, and other situations. And if you want to do play action, he could pass protect or soak up a defender out on a route. It's not like they're helpless, as I covered above.

 

Welcome to the new NFL, and you wonder why antiques like myself
have a hard time watching football like I use to. To see the total lack of
fundementals in all facets of the game today is disheartening. I don't want to watch an arena football game. I would prefer they do not change the game the way Goodell wants them to change it.
You can thank all the lawyers and ex players for changing the rules with all these lawsuits.
You guys laugh but pretty soon you will see, hell Troy is better suited for LB play anyway
that DB's will control defensive philosophy. HYBRID PLAYERS will dominate the game.

 

I also do not/did not like the David Johnson experiment under BA. What I never understood about this TE being used in the FB role is what did it bring to the table? Johnson is not a threat to run the ball, he doesnt block better than a true FB and he isnt a better reciever out of the backfield. SO what on earth did this do for us? Now to look at this on the other side of the table, I do like having a threat in the backfield that the defenses have to prepare for, so the concept is sound, but our application is flawed. If we want to use the TE in the backfield, we need to get an athlete back there that brings a skillset that defenses have to defend against. I dont believe any team we played spent any extra time in their gameplan on how to defend DJ.

 

First of all, let me say that I believe my eyes over the media.The media and anyone lookingfrom the outside in doesn't understand steeler's methods or Mr.Rooneys way.Now, we have changed as a team.I would love if our defense would play like the steelers of old,but the offense have evolved from running the ball the first two downs and throwing the ballon third and hoping to move the chains.It has also evolved from only scoring 3,6,or 9 points a game.As far as a t.e vs a fb....who cares?! the problem is not the position its the person.Whether they categorize the player as a fb,hb,or te doesn't matter.Just get someone in there that can lead block.Hell when great fb's on the team,we also had great blocking te's on the field at the same time.Miller was a great receiving te coming out of Uva,but was never fully utilizedin that aspect compared to a blocking te.Aians had no imagination and was arrogant in his stupidity.So of course our offense will be betterwith any coordinator that come in with imagination and know what they are doing.

 

Why can't Ben just shut his mouth and let the coaches decide what is and isn't needed. When in the hell was the last time you heard Aaron Rodgers or Drew Brees say they didn't need a FB and instead wanted another WR on the field instead? It wouldn't happen, as those guys are professionals.

I'm sorry to all you Ben fans out there, but I can't wait for the day he retires. I hate him with a severe passion, I don't care if he is a winner. The guy is a complete moron and thinks he is bigger than the team, always has, always will.

 

Hate him all you want, it's your choice, and a moron he may be. But be careful what you wish for, there's a 99% chance that the guy that replaces him will be a whole lot wose.

 

It's not the 80's anymore, much more emphasis is placed on the QB. We'll find a good replacement. Perhaps there will be a few down years, that's bound to happen eventually, with or without Ben, but we will find a good replacement in time, and it won't take over 20 years this time.

 

I really don't like David Johnson. When I see him I become somewhat angry and just wonder WHY IS HE ON THIS TEAM!? We keep David Johnson and let Hines go? I mean come on. I know that Hines was at the end but he's still better than DJ will EVER be!

 

And one carry by Redmon and would have been a TD

 

I would be happy with DJ if he could block or be a receiver; he is bad at both. Is he an h back or is he a full back? He cannot receive or block. He needs to go away with Carey Davis; a horrible full back.

The team needs either a full back that can catch passes out of the backfield, or a h back that can block.

And just so the coaches and administration knows, a full block specializes in blocking out of the backfield. An h-back is a tight end that has some receiving skills but is also a good blocker out of the backfield.

If John Kuhn was chosen over Carey Davis this conversation would not be happening.

The team does not need a lead blocker; it needs a good lead blocker.

Another thing though; a good full back will not be the savior to the running game like many think. With the athletes on defense today predictable running will go nowhere. This team needs better scheme and better guard play. A good h back creates better schemes; the defense has to decide on coverage personnel or stopping the run personnel. Many people on this board either forget about defensive formations other than base 3-4 and 4-3 or do not know that there is anything else. With a good passing attack, good guard play, and a tight end that can block running can be effective out of a single back formation. This will take a linebacker out of the game and drop the strong safety. There is more to running the ball than 100% power I; that will not work by itself today.

 

Wow that's amazing. Would you be willing to share with us your thoughts on where the DJIA will be in 2015 and 2020? You really seem to have a crystal-clear crystal ball. I'm ready to buy all that your selling!!!!!
Unless your wrong.

 

Have to totally agree. Have you been watching him at Green Bay? WTF were they thinking?

 

Wow... Why would you even root for a team that he has led to three superbowls, and won two of?!?!
Do you want him to retire soon, so you can go to his hall of Fame induction?!?!
Whatever... I won`t say he is the best qb to ever play the game, but, your level of hatred is baffling... Are you sure you`re not a Craven fan?!?!

 

Snack, You have made some very good responses. I would have to agree with you !00%. Your statistics were outstanding. I'm glad soomebody could see it for what it really is. Like I said, Ben has done all the talkling and Haley has said nothing. He is probably laughing at all the stuff that Ben is saying. If Ben is still running things and having things his way, then what the heck was Haley hired for? It's time for a change and I think it will be for the better with Haley. Tomlin needed to get things under control with Ben and I think the hiring of Haley will get it done. When Ben doesn't like what Haley is doing, who is he going to run to, Tomlin or Mr. Rooney? I just don't see Ben running over Haley!

 

i miss john l. williams. he was a good blocking, good receiving, and good running FB. i always liked his game. thats the kind of guy we could use again.

 

Yes JLW was awesome.We have had some great fb's throughout the years not to have one on the roster now.I think when we had all of those rbs on the roster they started to vere away from that position to make room to keep all those rbs on the roster.

 

I don't believe the offense needs a true FB. True FB's are not staples in offenses around the league anymore. The run game didn't suffer because they didn't have a true FB. The run game suffered because they had a difficult time replacing Hartings, Faneca, and Smith.

I believe most fans want this offense to produce more points. More point production will result mostly from the effectiveness of the passing game. It's easier to pass the football then it is to run the football. The Steelers offense needs more consistent play from Ben and the passing game to increase scoring.

 

No, you are sadly mistaken sir. The offense doesn't need more consistant play from Ben and the passing game. All that passing got us nowhere last year. What they need is a more balanced attack and to be able to run the football when needed, especially in the red zone and short yardage situations. A more capable blocking back will help that need again when in the redzone and short yardage situations. Our running game really suffered under Arians. It got worst every year he was here. Those five wide zero backfield sets really hurt the Steelers. During Ben's first 4000 yard plus passing season, we didn't even make the playoffs. Mendenhall even rushed for over 1000 yards during that season and we still didn't make the playoffs.

More points will not result mostly from the effectiveness of the passing game. If that was the case, what happened last year? A more balanced attack with a thoughtful game plan and good situational play calling along with a good redzone attack will result in more points scored. All these things were non existent under Arians. I know that a good running attack with a fullback will help the cause. Something that has been missing for the last five years under Arians.

So the bottom line is, Haley will not be listening to Ben and the offense will not look like it was under Arians. You better believe that because what would the purpose be for hiring Haley if the offense is going to look like what Ben wants? I bet there will be a better running game under Haley then it was under Arians. It will be more balanced and Steeler Nation will be happy. I know Haley didn't come here to fail by listening to what Ben is talking about. I believe that Mr. Roooney, Tomlin, and Haley will all be on the same page with their thinking and Ben will have to get on board. Why do you think Ben is doing all of the talking and you haven't heard a peep out of Haley!

 

most of the problem with 3rd and short with 5 wide wasen't about not having a FB. even having just one back and 4 wide in short yardage without a FB at least makes them think about it being the possibility of a run. FB or not. we took that aspect of a play away from the offense and made it easy on the defense. i have no problem with a guy that can run, catch and block. to me he doesn't have to be just a hammerhead FB. williams was as good a runner as he was a blocker and pass catcher. if we could get all those things out of a 3rd down back we could do without the so called 3rd down back position and have a player with much more value. the thing now is a 3rd down back and an H-back/TE two players for one job. it would be nice to turn clay or dwyer into that type of RB. then we would have something. they teach rb's all the time to block for blitz pickup, why can't they teach them to lead block? it's a fading art that needs brought back if you ask me.