Bills Sign FB John Conner

[Mace]

Not as a fulltime thing, but it happens.

http://espn.go.com/blog/boston/new-e...-fullback-void

I really find it honestly ridiculous it isn't common sense. With the speed and power of even development linemen coming out of college nowadays, unless you're going to use a fullback more artfully there's no point to hiring an undersized lineman who is not a lineman to be one, and the standard fb is probably shorter for catching the odd dump off than the average say developmental tackle, with less power and blocking ability no matter how good he is at it.

To me if you're just going to use the guy to block, why not hire a blocker with more muscle and height and career blocking experience so you have 6 effective linemen instead of 5 1/2.

H-back I can understand as a weapon to run or catch while blocking.

Well Felton ran a 4.6 40, and Richardson ran a 5.4, but Richardson is 6'5" 329 and Felton is 6' 248 and they aren't running a 40, which one makes a better "fullback".

I dunno, leads me to hope we use them as more than blockers, anyway.

[John Doe]

When has Harvin ever proved himself to be a consistent weapon as to classify him as one of our better weapons? I'm not really worried about trying to outscheme guys at this point, we've seen how those results go when we can't move the defense off the ball at all. Also let's not loop Felton and Conner in the same category. Felton is a versatile runner who can take the ball out of the backfield as well. He was the primary ball carrier in a very good Furman triple option offense in the SOCON when in school. So I don't agree with the idea that we sacrifice versatility simply because the guy plays FB. He hasn't been utilized much as a ball carrier in the NFL (46 carries, 163 yards, 3.5 ypc) but he does have the ability to be a guy who can take the ball to surprise the D. Conner is a straight kick the snot out of you blocker. I'm not a fan of Felton's contract either FWIW.




Well the offense was basically pure crap last year so they needed to spend some money. Plus the scheme almost entirely changed. I don't think Goodwin even makes the team at this point. So we can give his roster spot to Conner and still add a LB who nobody will remember come next offseason.



RB: McCoy, Jackson, Williams (3)
FB: Felton, Conner (2)
WR: Watkins, Woods, Harvin, Hogan, Lewis, Easley (6)
TE: Clay, O'Leary, Gray (3)

There is your 15. If you're going to ask for 14, likely Lewis gets cut and added to the PS.

You think that they will cut Dixon, Brown, and/or Goodwin to make room for 2 fullbacks?

The league was not exactly beating down Connor's door to sign him. It is highly likely that he would be available later on in the season if he were to be cut. And, it is highly likely that Clay will get some snaps out of the backfield as well.

I just don't see Connor as more than pre-season insurance.

[DraftBoy]

You think that they will cut Dixon, Brown, and/or Goodwin to make room for 2 fullbacks?

The league was not exactly beating down Connor's door to sign him. It is highly likely that he would be available later on in the season if he were to be cut. And, it is highly likely that Clay will get some snaps out of the backfield as well.

I just don't see Connor as more than pre-season insurance.

I think they could cut Goodwin, Brown, and Dixon to make room for anybody. None of them are guaranteed roster spots at this point.

That's true about Conner but keep in mind he's a Rex Ryan guy. I think Clay gets snaps as will O'Leary and Gray. I think you'll see us use a number of different formations/alignments with our RB, FB, and TE's this year. I imagine that's how Roman will try and keep us versatile. It would not surprise me, if both FB's make the roster, To see them even incorporate a couple of Maryland I, Wishbone, Flexbone, and Wing T formations.

[Mace]

I imagine that's how Roman will try and keep us versatile. It would not surprise me, if both FB's make the roster, To see them even incorporate a couple of Maryland I, Wishbone, Flexbone, and Wing T formations.

Oh I hope not. Kiss of Doom. Even wing-T Levy handed the keys to Marchibroda after destroying himself in KC with those. Have to draw a line somewhere.

[DraftBoy]

Oh I hope not. Kiss of Doom. Even wing-T Levy handed the keys to Marchibroda after destroying himself in KC with those. Have to draw a line somewhere.

Why? I'm open to almost anything offensively. That's how bad last year was for this offense.

[Topas]

Oh I hope not. Kiss of Doom. Even wing-T Levy handed the keys to Marchibroda after destroying himself in KC with those. Have to draw a line somewhere.

Well, I think two things are often received wrongly. And that is that Levy and also Belolicheck failed in their first HC jobs.

If you look at Levy the KC team improved each year from being very bad to average and above, and during the strike year they fell apart. But they were definitely on the upswing and I guess the KC superiors would redo their decision to fire Levy if they can.

Similar for Bellicheck. I hate him more than anybody else. But you have to admit that he got a very bad Browns team and improved them until the went deep in the playoffs. Then there was the decision to move the team and that became public at the beginning of the season and everything went downhill. Ok, IIRC correctly they also had some problems during the year before, but in general he improved the team. Well the Ravens won two Super Bowls, so I guess they are fine. But just look at Bellicheks staff. Many became head coaches from the Browns coaches back then. You can very well argue that he did a good job there.

So to summarize, in my opinion these are misconceptions that Bellicheat and Levy flailed in their first gigs. If you look closely both could have been kept as HC and probably both owners would decide differently when given the chance.