Home
Articles
Photos
Interviews
Forums
New posts
Search forums
Georgia Tech Recruiting
Dashboard
What's new
New posts
New profile posts
Latest activity
Chat
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
Serious Question re: Our "Fullback"
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="zhavenor" data-source="post: 89967" data-attributes="member: 1541"><p>As far as you alignment..we can all find borderline fringe freaky things that challenge the standard. Classic GT argument is they find that fringe. The reality is, you know this, one guy will have a tape tendency to get that snap, the D will assign him the QB read and the other the HB read and you move on...by alignment yes one would have to be a QB. Typically they shade, its not rocket science. This is getting way to fringe for the pursposes of what the discussion was about. The discussion was about OUR FB in OUR offense not being called a FB but a BB. My point is in our offense he is in a FB position, he is by nature a FB not in the NFL sense, in the option offense sense for sure, but still lined up as a FB...that is featured.</p></blockquote><p></p><p>The problem with the last statement is that if where a player lines up is proprietary to their position then the fullback position you are arguing about at the moment would never have been called fullback in the first place. The alignment is not the same in the single wing as it is in the t and so on so forth.</p><p>[/QUOTE]</p>
[QUOTE="zhavenor, post: 89967, member: 1541"] As far as you alignment..we can all find borderline fringe freaky things that challenge the standard. Classic GT argument is they find that fringe. The reality is, you know this, one guy will have a tape tendency to get that snap, the D will assign him the QB read and the other the HB read and you move on...by alignment yes one would have to be a QB. Typically they shade, its not rocket science. This is getting way to fringe for the pursposes of what the discussion was about. The discussion was about OUR FB in OUR offense not being called a FB but a BB. My point is in our offense he is in a FB position, he is by nature a FB not in the NFL sense, in the option offense sense for sure, but still lined up as a FB...that is featured.[/QUOTE] The problem with the last statement is that if where a player lines up is proprietary to their position then the fullback position you are arguing about at the moment would never have been called fullback in the first place. The alignment is not the same in the single wing as it is in the t and so on so forth. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
What jersey number did Justin Thomas wear?
Post reply
Home
Forums
Georgia Tech Athletics
Georgia Tech Football
Serious Question re: Our "Fullback"
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
Accept
Learn more…
Top