PDA

View Full Version : Kleinsasser as FB



HEY
03-03-2008, 01:06 PM
I know were all upset about our Pro Bowl fullback Tony Richardson leaving our beloved team
:(
Fortunately, we got Tapeh as a replacement, but why can't we just use Jimmy Carter Kleinsasser as our fullback? Did I miss something here? Isn't he good enough at the FB position?

If I recall, he played fullback in his first 4 or 5 years in the NFL, and he did do pretty good! (I remember he was the second best fullback in madden 2005 or something)

So my big question is: why can't Jim "Clank Clank" play FB? It can't be that he's too old, Tony Richardson is 37 years old or something, Jim is "only" 31 years.

Please, help me to understand!!!!!
???

Marrdro
03-03-2008, 01:14 PM
"HEY" wrote:


I know were all upset about our Pro Bowl fullback Tony Richardson leaving our beloved team
:(
Fortunately, we got Tapeh as a replacement, but why can't we just use Jimmy Carter Kleinsasser as our fullback? Did I miss something here? Isn't he good enough at the FB position?

If I recall, he played fullback in his first 4 or 5 years in the NFL, and he did do pretty good! (I remember he was the second best fullback in madden 2005 or something)

So my big question is: why can't Jim "Clank Clank" play FB? It can't be that he's too old, Tony Richardson is 37 years old or something, Jim is "only" 31 years.

Please, help me to understand!!!!!
???

Does it matter were he lines up?

Truth be told all of the TE's (with the exception of Shank) line up at FB at some time or another during the game.

Additionally, he is on the field for almost every run last year assisting the OL take on blockers.
My guess is you will see alot of formations like this....

Berrian











OT
OG
C
OG
OT














Klieny




TJ




Shank
























Tapeh
























AD

Or

Berrian











OT
OG
C
OG
OT












Rice























TJ




Shank
























Tapeh
























AD

Or

Berrian











OT
OG
C
OG
OT

B-wade











Rice























TJ





























Tapeh
























AD

What are we doing in all of them?
Passing or running?

I for one would think that both Tapeh and AD will see alot of passes off of playaction fakes in all of these sets.

magicci
03-03-2008, 01:19 PM
jimmy k has good hands and is an awesome blocker. i still dont understand either why we dont put him at FB. He also has the build to be a punishing FB blocking and with the ball.

cito
03-03-2008, 01:22 PM
He was a decent short yardage runner in his second or third year.
Denny loved using him that way.

ultravikingfan
03-03-2008, 01:36 PM
He is a better blocker on the line than in the bakfield.

He is not the type of guy you give the ball to unless it is to throw-off the defense.

V-Unit
03-03-2008, 01:55 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"HEY" wrote:


I know were all upset about our Pro Bowl fullback Tony Richardson leaving our beloved team
:(
Fortunately, we got Tapeh as a replacement, but why can't we just use Jimmy Carter Kleinsasser as our fullback? Did I miss something here? Isn't he good enough at the FB position?

If I recall, he played fullback in his first 4 or 5 years in the NFL, and he did do pretty good! (I remember he was the second best fullback in madden 2005 or something)

So my big question is: why can't Jim "Clank Clank" play FB? It can't be that he's too old, Tony Richardson is 37 years old or something, Jim is "only" 31 years.

Please, help me to understand!!!!!
???

Does it matter were he lines up?

Truth be told all of the TE's (with the exception of Shank) line up at FB at some time or another during the game.

Additionally, he is on the field for almost every run last year assisting the OL take on blockers.
My guess is you will see alot of formations like this....

Berrian











OT

OG

C

OG

OT















Klieny





TJ





Shank

























Tapeh

























AD

Or

Berrian











OT

OG

C

OG

OT













Rice
























TJ





Shank

























Tapeh

























AD

Or

Berrian











OT

OG

C

OG

OT

B-wade












Rice
























TJ































Tapeh

























AD

What are we doing in all of them?
Passing or running?

I for one would think that both Tapeh and AD will see alot of passes off of playaction fakes in all of these sets.



1. A classic
two TE set. We're Running it.
2. A classic I-Formation. We're Running it.
3. A classic 3 Wide Set. We're Running it.

Marrdro
03-03-2008, 01:59 PM
"V" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"HEY" wrote:


I know were all upset about our Pro Bowl fullback Tony Richardson leaving our beloved team
:(
Fortunately, we got Tapeh as a replacement, but why can't we just use Jimmy Carter Kleinsasser as our fullback? Did I miss something here? Isn't he good enough at the FB position?

If I recall, he played fullback in his first 4 or 5 years in the NFL, and he did do pretty good! (I remember he was the second best fullback in madden 2005 or something)

So my big question is: why can't Jim "Clank Clank" play FB? It can't be that he's too old, Tony Richardson is 37 years old or something, Jim is "only" 31 years.

Please, help me to understand!!!!!
???

Does it matter were he lines up?

Truth be told all of the TE's (with the exception of Shank) line up at FB at some time or another during the game.

Additionally, he is on the field for almost every run last year assisting the OL take on blockers.
My guess is you will see alot of formations like this....

Berrian











OT

OG

C

OG

OT















Klieny





TJ





Shank

























Tapeh

























AD

Or

Berrian











OT

OG

C

OG

OT













Rice
























TJ





Shank

























Tapeh

























AD

Or

Berrian











OT

OG

C

OG

OT

B-wade












Rice
























TJ































Tapeh

























AD

What are we doing in all of them?
Passing or running?

I for one would think that both Tapeh and AD will see alot of passes off of playaction fakes in all of these sets.



1. A classic
two TE set. We're Running it.
2. A classic I-Formation. We're Running it.
3. A classic 3 Wide Set. We're Running it.

Ahhh, my friend, with a few new faces and some guys coming back that we are counting on being a bit better.

olson_10
03-03-2008, 07:36 PM
i wouldve liked to just use sauce as the FB, but tapeh does give us some versatility..hes naturally a RB, who happens to be big enough to block..this is good because the guy thats expected to block could get the ball a little more often, which could keep a defense off balance..tapeh might not be the blocker sauce and richardson are, but he can at least handle a couple carries/catches here and there, and do more with the ball after the catch/run

Purple Floyd
03-03-2008, 09:38 PM
One of the reasons the team gave for not bringing him back was they were planning on using more sets that include both AD and CT in the backfield




Berrian











LT
LG C RG RT

































TJ



TE









Rice





















CT

AD





This is one I would like to see them sneak in a few times next year




Berrian













LT LG C RG RT















Rice
















TE





QB



TE























CT

AD


;D ;D ;D ;D

ktarinze
03-03-2008, 11:07 PM
he could get the job done i dont know why we dont do it

ragz
03-03-2008, 11:17 PM
i think he's too valuable to the vikings as a tight end otherwise they would never have moved him back to tight end after playing h-back for that period of time.
they targetted this kid taphe and got him so really this is moot.
and what the hell are you guys talking about kleinsasser running the ball.
what have we ever seen outta him that makes you think he could be effective in short yardage.
he has a history of putting the ball on the ground cuz his arms are to big.

jkjuggalo
03-03-2008, 11:33 PM
I like him as a TE.
Tapeh will be fine as our FB, and we may add another in the draft who can play special teams and compete with Tapeh for PT.
I like Hillis and Schmitt.

ragz
03-03-2008, 11:37 PM
"jkjuggalo" wrote:


I like him as a TE.
Tapeh will be fine as our FB, and we may add another in the draft who can play special teams and compete with Tapeh for PT.
I like Hillis and Schmitt.

apparently the coaches like tahi, nafi, or whatever his name is so i dont think so.

aaeyers
03-03-2008, 11:38 PM
"ragz" wrote:


"jkjuggalo" wrote:


I like him as a TE.
Tapeh will be fine as our FB, and we may add another in the draft who can play special teams and compete with Tapeh for PT.
I like Hillis and Schmitt.

apparently the coaches like tahi, nafi, or whatever his name is so i dont think so.


I dont know why, I never saw him do anything that stood out. I ope they cut Tahi and use Mills as the backup FB and 4th TE.

ragz
03-03-2008, 11:45 PM
"aaeyers" wrote:


"ragz" wrote:


"jkjuggalo" wrote:


I like him as a TE.
Tapeh will be fine as our FB, and we may add another in the draft who can play special teams and compete with Tapeh for PT.
I like Hillis and Schmitt.

apparently the coaches like tahi, nafi, or whatever his name is so i dont think so.


I dont know why, I never saw him do anything that stood out. I ope they cut Tahi and use Mills as the backup FB and 4th TE.

who knows, mills might be more than a 4th TE.
but they also got duggan whos flexible so it should be kinda interestin to see who makes the squad as starters and backups.

jessejames09
03-03-2008, 11:48 PM
"ragz" wrote:


"aaeyers" wrote:


"ragz" wrote:


"jkjuggalo" wrote:


I like him as a TE.
Tapeh will be fine as our FB, and we may add another in the draft who can play special teams and compete with Tapeh for PT.
I like Hillis and Schmitt.

apparently the coaches like tahi, nafi, or whatever his name is so i dont think so.


I dont know why, I never saw him do anything that stood out. I ope they cut Tahi and use Mills as the backup FB and 4th TE.

who knows, mills might be more than a 4th TE.
but they also got duggan whos flexible so it should be kinda interestin to see who makes the squad as starters and backups.


Something to ponder for sure. If we cut Dugan we might take quite a cap hit though, as he just signed that new deal last year.

ragz
03-03-2008, 11:55 PM
"jessejames09" wrote:


"ragz" wrote:


"aaeyers" wrote:


"ragz" wrote:


"jkjuggalo" wrote:


I like him as a TE.
Tapeh will be fine as our FB, and we may add another in the draft who can play special teams and compete with Tapeh for PT.
I like Hillis and Schmitt.

apparently the coaches like tahi, nafi, or whatever his name is so i dont think so.


I dont know why, I never saw him do anything that stood out. I ope they cut Tahi and use Mills as the backup FB and 4th TE.

who knows, mills might be more than a 4th TE.
but they also got duggan whos flexible so it should be kinda interestin to see who makes the squad as starters and backups.


Something to ponder for sure. If we cut Dugan we might take quite a cap hit though, as he just signed that new deal last year.

that's right.
so i doubt he goes anywhere.
plus he can play fullback and tight end, they like that flexibility

BloodyHorns82
03-03-2008, 11:59 PM
"jessejames09" wrote:


"ragz" wrote:


"aaeyers" wrote:


"ragz" wrote:


"jkjuggalo" wrote:


I like him as a TE.
Tapeh will be fine as our FB, and we may add another in the draft who can play special teams and compete with Tapeh for PT.
I like Hillis and Schmitt.

apparently the coaches like tahi, nafi, or whatever his name is so i dont think so.


I dont know why, I never saw him do anything that stood out. I ope they cut Tahi and use Mills as the backup FB and 4th TE.

who knows, mills might be more than a 4th TE.
but they also got duggan whos flexible so it should be kinda interestin to see who makes the squad as starters and backups.


Something to ponder for sure. If we cut Dugan we might take quite a cap hit though, as he just signed that new deal last year.


Dugan is Chilly's new found love child...he's going nowhere soon.

HEY
03-04-2008, 01:22 AM
"UffDaVikes" wrote:



This is one I would like to see them sneak in a few times next year




Berrian














LT LG C RG RT















Rice
















TE





QB




TE
























CT

AD


;D ;D ;D ;D

I like the idea of putting CT and AD at the field at the same time
:D
but I would not take the risk to use 12 players on the same play, as you did in the formation above
;D

V-Unit
03-04-2008, 06:00 AM
I would much rather see this set over anything previously proposed in this thread:

Berrian













LT LG C RG RT















Rice















Shank



QB



Sauce

























AD

2beersTommy
03-04-2008, 06:45 AM
"UffDaVikes" wrote:




This is one I would like to see them sneak in a few times next year




Berrian














LT LG C RG RT















Rice
















TE





QB




TE
























CT

AD


;D ;D ;D ;D


??? dont think they'll catch the 12th man on the field? lol

Purple Floyd
03-04-2008, 07:08 AM
"2beersTommy" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:




This is one I would like to see them sneak in a few times next year




Berrian













LT LG C RG RT















Rice
















TE





QB



TE























CT

AD


;D ;D ;D ;D


??? dont think they'll catch the 12th man on the field? lol


That is the hope ;D

We pulled it off against the Steelers about a dozen years ago or so right before halftime. I still remember Cowher running out to the field with the overhead shot and stuffing it in the ref's pocket ;D

Marrdro
03-04-2008, 07:24 AM
"V" wrote:


I would much rather see this set over anything previously proposed in this thread:

Berrian














LT LG C RG RT















Rice















Shank



QB



Sauce


























AD



I love that formation.

So many things can be done out of it and I bet we see alot of it next year.
Nothing like power football my friends.
It might be boring to most, but I love it and it breaks a the other team down when you impose your will on them out of a formation like this.

Purple Floyd
03-04-2008, 12:33 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"V" wrote:


I would much rather see this set over anything previously proposed in this thread:

Berrian













LT LG C RG RT















Rice















Shank



QB



Sauce

























AD



I love that formation.

So many things can be done out of it and I bet we see alot of it next year.
Nothing like power football my friends.
It might be boring to most, but I love it and it breaks a the other team down when you impose your will on them out of a formation like this.



That is a formation that we could potentially be very successful with.

Marrdro
03-04-2008, 03:05 PM
"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"V" wrote:


I would much rather see this set over anything previously proposed in this thread:

Berrian














LT LG C RG RT















Rice















Shank



QB



Sauce


























AD



I love that formation.

So many things can be done out of it and I bet we see alot of it next year.
Nothing like power football my friends.
It might be boring to most, but I love it and it breaks a the other team down when you impose your will on them out of a formation like this.



That is a formation that we could potentially be very successful with.

That would give me nightmares if I was a D cord.
Do I play run, pass?
:o
Imagine how confused they would get if they put someone in motion or the QB rolled out or heaven forbid the QB ran out of this after a playaction to AD.

Scary when you sit there and think of the different things you could do out of it.

seaniemck7
03-04-2008, 03:18 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"V" wrote:


I would much rather see this set over anything previously proposed in this thread:

Berrian














LT LG C RG RT















Rice















Shank



QB



Sauce


























AD



I love that formation.

So many things can be done out of it and I bet we see alot of it next year.
Nothing like power football my friends.
It might be boring to most, but I love it and it breaks a the other team down when you impose your will on them out of a formation like this.



That is a formation that we could potentially be very successful with.

That would give me nightmares if I was a D cord.
Do I play run, pass?

:o
Imagine how confused they would get if they put someone in motion or the QB rolled out or heaven forbid the QB ran out of this after a playaction to AD.

Scary when you sit there and think of the different things you could do out of it.


At least this formation is legal vice some of the ones proposed earlier like the "12th man" formation or the "not enough guys on the line of scrimmage formation"
:P

vikinggreg
03-04-2008, 04:11 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"V" wrote:


I would much rather see this set over anything previously proposed in this thread:

Berrian














LT LG C RG RT















Rice















Shank



QB



Sauce


























AD



I love that formation.

So many things can be done out of it and I bet we see alot of it next year.
Nothing like power football my friends.
It might be boring to most, but I love it and it breaks a the other team down when you impose your will on them out of a formation like this.



That is a formation that we could potentially be very successful with.

That would give me nightmares if I was a D cord.
Do I play run, pass?

:o
Imagine how confused they would get if they put someone in motion or the QB rolled out or heaven forbid the QB ran out of this after a playaction to AD.

Scary when you sit there and think of the different things you could do out of it.


Its not that hard, if its first down play run

Second down play run

3rd and fifteen play run ;)

Its still Childress KAO and until the Vikes start hitting passes plays the run game will be the big play.

Remember vanilla is still the flavor of the playbook until the offense does something to start scaring people, other than the AD nightmare runs Urlacher has ;D

BloodyHorns82
03-04-2008, 04:26 PM
Here is my proposed plan.
With the short passing routes we seem to run, I think it might work.




Berrian













LT LG C RG RT















Rice














Shank




AD



Sauce

























CT

i_bleed_purple
03-04-2008, 04:42 PM
I like this one for short "running downs"













Mills LT LG C RG RT Shank
Berrian














TJ





















CT




















AD

Imagine running counter dives or play action to the tight ends/RB's out of this formation

i_bleed_purple
03-04-2008, 04:44 PM
Or they could take a page out of the packers playbook and get the good ol' Wishbone back


Berrian






LT LG C RG RT Sauce
















TJ
















Tapeh














AD


CT

magicci
03-04-2008, 04:50 PM
"Marrdro" wrote:


"V" wrote:


I would much rather see this set over anything previously proposed in this thread:

Berrian














LT LG C RG RT















Rice















Shank



QB



Sauce


























AD



I love that formation.

So many things can be done out of it and I bet we see alot of it next year.
Nothing like power football my friends.
It might be boring to most, but I love it and it breaks a the other team down when you impose your will on them out of a formation like this.


This is the formation we mainly ran before childress was the coach. Tice and Green didnt really use a fullback that much in the offense. and i think thats when jimmy k was used more as a fb because he was a tweener.

V-Unit
03-04-2008, 06:25 PM
"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


I like this one for short "running downs"














Mills LT LG C RG RT Shank
Berrian















TJ






















CT





















AD

Imagine running counter dives or play action to the tight ends/RB's out of this formation


Some things I see wrong with this.

First of all. We aren't going to gain yards out of it because Taylor is a decoy, not a blocker. Using him there instead of the bulkier Tapeh (God I wish it was Richardson) would be foolish. The FB in this situation is mroe likely to get the tough yards without a lead blocker, and also more likely to provide a better lead blocker for AD. I'm also assuming Sauce is a better blocker than both Shank and Mills, so why take him off the field in short yardage?

Two, who runs counter dives or playaction on short running situations? I would puke if I saw us try to run stuff like that when we are good enough to put our heads down and get the yards.

This formation relies on pure trickery to get short yards. You don't need trickery to get short yards.

singersp
03-04-2008, 06:31 PM
"V" wrote:


"i_bleed_purple" wrote:


I like this one for short "running downs"













Mills LT LG C RG RT Shank
Berrian














TJ





















CT




















AD

Imagine running counter dives or play action to the tight ends/RB's out of this formation


Some things I see wrong with this.

First of all. We aren't going to gain yards out of it because Taylor is a decoy, not a blocker. Using him there instead of the bulkier Tapeh (God I wish it was Richardson) would be foolish. The FB in this situation is mroe likely to get the tough yards without a lead blocker, and also more likely to provide a better lead blocker for AD. I'm also assuming Sauce is a better blocker than both Shank and Mills, so why take him off the field in short yardage?

Two, who runs counter dives or playaction on short running situations? I would puke if I saw us try to run stuff like that when we are good enough to put our heads down and get the yards.

This formation relies on pure trickery to get short yards. You don't need trickery to get short yards.


Ah, but as we saw the past two years, trickery will get you TD's.

Purple Floyd
03-04-2008, 08:18 PM
"seaniemck7" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"UffDaVikes" wrote:


"Marrdro" wrote:


"V" wrote:


I would much rather see this set over anything previously proposed in this thread:

Berrian













LT LG C RG RT















Rice















Shank



QB



Sauce

























AD



I love that formation.

So many things can be done out of it and I bet we see alot of it next year.
Nothing like power football my friends.
It might be boring to most, but I love it and it breaks a the other team down when you impose your will on them out of a formation like this.



That is a formation that we could potentially be very successful with.

That would give me nightmares if I was a D cord.
Do I play run, pass?
:o
Imagine how confused they would get if they put someone in motion or the QB rolled out or heaven forbid the QB ran out of this after a playaction to AD.

Scary when you sit there and think of the different things you could do out of it.


At least this formation is legal vice some of the ones proposed earlier like the "12th man" formation or the "not enough guys on the line of scrimmage formation"
:P


It's the offseason, have a little fun ;D