Jones prefers FB over 2 TE set

by Terry on Aug 4, 2006 8:03 AM CDT in Dallas Cowboys News

JJT of DMN (sub req) writes an interesting article explaining why Julius Jones runs better with a lead fullback as opposed to running from a TE set, the formation the Cowboys will use as their base this season. Jones himself believes a fullback clears out his running lanes much better.

It's a little clearer picture for me when I'm in a one-back set, but when the fullback is in there, you know he's definitely going to clear things up," Jones said. "It doesn't matter to me, but I like having big Lou [Polite] in there because I know he's going to pound someone and create a hole for me.

"I know he's going to get one of the linebackers, and on a lot of the power runs, I feel more comfortable with the fullback in there."

I definitely agree with JJT that running backs like Jones need a fullback as opposed to TE's blocking for them. Just look at Emmitt, I truly don't think that he would be the all time rushing king without Moose Johnston as his lead blocker. I don't think Shawn Alexander wins the rushing title without Mack Strong. Running backs need a fullback to get past the line of scrimmage and thats where JJ had his problems last season.

When Parcells is overseeing the installation of this new offense, even though Dallas used it quite a bit last season, the Cowboys must make sure they don't congest the field with their two-tight end scheme.

Two tight ends bring balance to the offensive line, but it also tends to bring the linebackers and safeties closer to the line of scrimmage because it's usually viewed as a running scheme, thus congesting the field.

Parcells is using this scheme because it will open up our passing game and create severe problems for defenses, but I wonder how great JJ could become if he had a true lead blocker like Moose. I guess we might never know, at least until Parcells retires.

Tweet Comment 4 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

sure, but

JJ is not the same type of runner Emmitt was. Where Emmitt excelled with limited space, JJ is better in the open. The two TE sets will bring LBs and Ss closer to the line of scrimage, but it also opens up room behind them. This is why Larry Allen was cut. BP and co want to get a really big body in front of JJ out were he can use his speed and open field moves. Look for JJ to have more long gains this year and more of 'Big Lou' the closer they get to the endzone.

Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam

by LRogue on Aug 4, 2006 12:21 PM CDT reply actions

BTW...

...Terry, you play the role of Proxy-Grizz very well.

Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam

by LRogue on Aug 4, 2006 12:26 PM CDT up reply actions

He sure does...

Thanks for the help, Terry.

If you're reading this, you could be commenting too. Sign up for a free account on Blogging The Boys.

by Dave Halprin on Aug 4, 2006 2:44 PM CDT up reply actions

I am in 100% agreement there!

The 2-TE set primarily creates a mis-match between the TE and the LBs, which is its biggest advantage. Very few teams have 2 LBs that could cover both Witten and Fasano. While it does bring the LBs closer to the LOS, having 2 really good pass-catching TEs and 2 really good WRs will prevent teams from bringing that SS too close to the LOS. We are much better off with 7 men in the box, than with 8 men in the box. And with the LBs now having to focus on whether the TE is going out for a pass or whether he is blocking, will cause them to hesitate before charging to the LOS on running plays. And if anyone goes back and looks at what plays JJ had the most success with, it was in fact when he was in the backfield by himself, on delays and draw plays. Like you said, he is a different runner than Emmitt. Emmitt was good at using his FB to set up the play. With JJ, he is much better at picking a crease after movement starts than he is at following a lead blocker. I think it will help JJ tremendously. I see a lot more big plays from him this year. No doubt when we are in short yardage, one of the TEs will likely become a lead blocker in the back-field, but I'd say Barber will get the majority of those carries. He's a little more nifty in the hole sorta like Emmitt was.

by dboysrback on Aug 5, 2006 9:06 AM CDT up reply actions