e16bball Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 I've recently been pondering the look of the offense next season, and I got to wondering about the FB vs. H-Back situation as it pertains to Saunders vs. Gibbs. Obviously, if we are going to stick with the H-Back + TE scheme, this is a moot point, so I guess it's a two-part question. 1) What do you think about switching to a FB + TE scheme where Cooley would line up at TE? 2) If we did incorporate a pure FB, what about adding Tony Richardson as a veteran FA? Here's my two pennies (and for the record, I'm very much on the fence about it all): I'm not sure Cooley's in-line blocking is sufficient at a pure TE position, and so that may handcuff us because clearly he has to be on the field. If he could succeed at the TE position, however, I think Richardson is an extremely interesting proposition. He is a great lead-blocker, a load in short-yardage, and a hard-nosed veteran presence. He also happens to be one of the most upstanding guys in the league, which I think would certainly appeal to Gibbs's sense of Redskins-type players. Additionally, he is about as familiar with Saunders's scheme as anyone. He is 34 years old, but that is really not particularly old for a FB. Obviously, Cooley's blocking is an issue for me, as is the presence of Mike Sellers, because I'd really like to see him get a shot at a full-time starting gig. However, he doesn't have Richardson's experience at the FB spot, and I think the coaching staff would limit his ST play if he was a major part of the offense; that is bothersome to me because he is such a physical and emotional member of that unit. So, all of that said, would you or would you not consider taking a run at Tony Richardson in FA? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RabidFan Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 Tony and Priest should be signed if both avail...Priest would be a great 3rd down back and goaline slasher like Marcus Allen used to be as they both have a nose for the endzone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpoch Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 I'd just use Mike Sellers as the FB. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vixz44 Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 i really like tony richardson. he's getting up there in age, but if i remember correctly he actually was KC's starting running back a while back before Priest holmes arrived. that shows that he is very versatile. And with the experience he has at fullback, i think he would be a great blocker, and a great pass reciever out of the backfield. that being said, we do have mike sellers that is very capable to fill any spot that tony richardson would potentially fill for us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
shallyshal Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 i really like tony richardson. he's getting up there in age, but if i remember correctly he actually was KC's starting running back a while back before Priest holmes arrived. that shows that he is very versatile. And with the experience he has at fullback, i think he would be a great blocker, and a great pass reciever out of the backfield. that being said, we do have mike sellers that is very capable to fill any spot that tony richardson would potentially fill for us. it's hard to imagine richardson being any more effective than sellers. sellers had 7 td's this season. put him in saunders offense and he shouldbe able to match that next year. plus he is huge at the point of attack- like another guard we do need another purely blocking tight end. like middleton used tobe for the skins. cooley improved, but he is still not inthat class, and is 30 lbs lighter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinfan2k Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 it's hard to imagine richardson being any more effective than sellers. sellers had 7 td's this season. put him in saunders offense and he shouldbe able to match that next year. plus he is huge at the point of attack- like another guardwe do need another purely blocking tight end. like middleton used tobe for the skins. cooley improved, but he is still not inthat class, and is 30 lbs lighter are you comparing the offense production? why? tony richardson maybe the best fb in the league.. only 1 comes to mind is lorenzo neal. if we can get richardson, we should. sellers is nothign to him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fdarugar Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 Sellars is our guy, no need to replace a strength on our team. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chiefhogskin48 Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 Richardson is a stud blocker. What do the following players have in common? Tomlinson Holmes/Johnson Alexander Barber McAllister They all utilize a blocking fullback. Portis would be perfect with a lead blocker to spring him into the secondary. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
supersmartbrunell5 Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 Yeah I agree, there are plenty of way to keep everyone involved if we brought in Richardson, Sellers can be used for slower developing plays and richardson is smaller and quicker to keep up with clinton on more attacking style plays. I think Sellers is more of a tightend than fullback, hes huge, can catch, and can move, that's more than can be said about Robert Royal. But you're right, it all depends on not only the system deployed, but the contract he would demand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SB33 Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 "The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence." 1. Saunder's offense is the same as Gibbs offense. 2. at HB Tony G played the same role as Cooley 3. at FB Tony R played the same role as Sellers 4. at RB Johnson played the same role as Portis I don't think I would trade the three KC players for the Skins players Sellers and Cooley are several years younger than The KC Tonys, who are near the end of there careers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsNoles21 Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 This isnt going to happen because saunders loves the h back just like joe gibbs and cooley will continue to play h back. I think we should keep sellers at fb and upgrade at Tight End. We need to either trade up or hope one of these stud tight ends in the draft falls to us. There are a lot of good tight ends this year and I would take any one of them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsNoles21 Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 If im going to upgrade i would rather upgrade over royal than sellers. Sellers is intimidating and a monster at fb Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
portis&taylor Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 Tony is getting old he will retire soon it wouldnt be worth it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dead Money Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 I'd just use Mike Sellers as the FB. :yes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EFFENCOWBOYS Posted February 9, 2006 Share Posted February 9, 2006 Tony Richardson soon not even be in this question. I've watched him play every game here in Kansas City. Granted he is a very good blocker, but you can definitely find somebody that blocks just as well for a fraction of the price. He is going to command a pretty huge salary just because he has been in the league for so long. He can't run and he doesn't catch. All he does is block. Unless you want to throw tons of money away for one third down blocker in the backfield, go ahead. I'd spend the money on some good blocking offensive lineman to keep the d-line out of the backfield. PS. Saunders is a god. KC's one big mistake was letting him go! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moondog Posted February 10, 2006 Share Posted February 10, 2006 Chris Cooley wouldnt have any problems switching to tight end in saunders schemes. I dont think Gonzales did a lot of blocking either. He had over 100 catches two years ago---he couldnt have been blocking a whole lot that year. Cooley would do just fine the few times he had to block and it wouldnt be a problem if we didnt use an H-back. I wouldnt be surprised to see us use both. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.