The people ready for Weisman to move on

I think there is at least a 50/50 chance he moves on to the NFL. He is made for short yardage and goal line situations.
 
Someone a couple years ago posted on this board that fullbacks dont play much in the NFL but that is just crap if you watch games. There are still a lot of I formation plays with QB under center and a fullback leading the tailback, or the fullback slipping out to catch a pass, or staying in to block.

MWeisman hardly gets thrown to at Iowa so he really needs to work on that but I think he has shown good pass catching ability. He is durable, probably pretty smart, strong and a good blocker.

Can he be a good blocker and tackler on special teams where you have to play with only a 53+ man roster?
 
Someone a couple years ago posted on this board that fullbacks dont play much in the NFL but that is just crap if you watch games. There are still a lot of I formation plays with QB under center and a fullback leading the tailback, or the fullback slipping out to catch a pass, or staying in to block.MWeisman hardly gets thrown to at Iowa so he really needs to work on that but I think he has shown good pass catching ability. He is durable, probably pretty smart, strong and a good blocker.Can he be a good blocker and tackler on special teams where you have to play with only a 53+ man roster?
Last I checked there are less and less teams carrying "true" FBs on their rosters. Most teams are using back up tight ends to man the spot when they use them. Could mark Weisman make a team...yes. But to do that even if every team carries a FB he would need to be one of the 32 best in the nfl and I think that he may struggle with that as he hasn't played a true FB in a few years. Hopefully he makes it but I would bet even he isn't banking on it.
 
2/3 of nfl teams carry FBs on their rosters and a few carry 2. But TEs have been taking over the role of FB more and more. Some of the more productive offenses don't carry FBs. Like New England, Arizona, and Denver. Ray Hamilton has better chances than mark even though he has been far less productive just because he fits what nfl teams want more and more of...versatile TEs.
 
Where is the board protocol saying that threads have to be in response to other threads?

Thought there was discussion about Weisman being a liability and wanted to read the thread. Didn't know someone would make a negative out of whole cloth to respond to something that wasn't there.
 
Weisman would need to dramatically improve in both blocking and catching the ball to fit into the NFL as a fullback. He definitely has his strong points but is something of a tweener in that he has shortcomings as either power half-back or a proto-typical fullback. I think the Iowa staff liked his strong points coming in but couldn't justify the risk, thus the initial walk-on. (staff had other scholarship priorities to fill)

Would love to have a Weisman type player on-board even as a #2 back to take some of the load. We have such problems keeping backs healthy.
 
Thought there was discussion about Weisman being a liability and wanted to read the thread. Didn't know someone would make a negative out of whole cloth to respond to something that wasn't there.

You win the "stupid reply of the day" award. People have made negative comments about him in more than 1 game thread. And in some non-game threads. But you keep pretending otherwise and showing how little you actually read. I've been a lurker for years and apparently you fell off the turnip truck 6 hours ago.
 
You win the "stupid reply of the day" award. People have made negative comments about him in more than 1 game thread. And in some non-game threads. But you keep pretending otherwise and showing how little you actually read. I've been a lurker for years and apparently you fell off the turnip truck 6 hours ago.
I ask a legit question and get a smarmy-*** answer. Your cool.

I don't follow game threads. I don't read every thread. Those two make me stupid, I know. I read this thread because I thought this was a response to Weisman bashing. I was wrong. Props to you. And props to you for your admisstion that you've been "a lurker for years".

No need to explain yourself more, dood. I get it, your Hawkfan superhero Mysteron.
Every superhero needs a superhero talent and you've admitted yours.

Lurking.
 
There have been long threads claiming Weisman wouldn't start for another B1G team, or another P5 team, or any FBS teams. Weisman has some limitations, but he is a lot better than some of the haters think he is.
 
Bottom line: If you could replay the last three years, would you, or would you not, want him playing for the Hawks?

There's your answer.
 
We can all find examples, but they are outliers as it relates to Weisman's running success. Just because you find a quarter it doesn't mean you're a millionaire ;)
All 3 TDs were outside zones when I rewatched. I could have been mistaken but looked very much like it. I know it is only 3 but most of his best runs all day came from the oz.
 
[To preface, i skipped right to the end after reading this thread headline]

Weisman has the best vision of any iowa back that ive seen. The fact that he is not a speed guy accually helps him because the holes made take a tic longer but he finds them instantly and heads down hill. Add on to that that he is a powerhouse when there is no hole and gets the tough yards. I can't see/understand why anybody would want to see him gone. Have people really said that??
 
did someone actually say no one has ever wished for weisman to move on - I've seen people on this and other boards say they wish Lowdermilk would move on weisman would move on Brian Ferentz would move on Kirk move on o Keefe would move on norm Parker would move on I mean the list is endless - oh it was dumb dumb Thompson figures
 
I ask a legit question and get a smarmy-*** answer. Your cool.

I don't follow game threads. I don't read every thread. Those two make me stupid, I know. I read this thread because I thought this was a response to Weisman bashing. I was wrong. Props to you. And props to you for your admisstion that you've been "a lurker for years".

No need to explain yourself more, dood. I get it, your Hawkfan superhero Mysteron.
Every superhero needs a superhero talent and you've admitted yours.

Lurking.

LOL. I don't think this board realized "stoopid" could be a profession. Keep at your homework, the teachers are bound to pass you on to 5th grade some day.
 
All 3 TDs were outside zones when I rewatched. I could have been mistaken but looked very much like it. I know it is only 3 but most of his best runs all day came from the oz.

Being an old coach, I wouldn't refer to those as outside zones (one back). Iowa was lined up in the I for all three TDs and the fullback lead Weisman through the hole. To me they were more of a power/iso play.
 
Being an old coach, I wouldn't refer to those as outside zones (one back). Iowa was lined up in the I for all three TDs and the fullback lead Weisman through the hole. To me they were more of a power/iso play.
When linemen are covered up the zone scheme looks a lot like man. Watch their initial step and you can see the linemen all go laterally to play side. This is an indication of zone. Because the FB goes play side it has to be outside zone or stretch. Since the rb and fb aim for the te it is outside zone. The fb has the job of helping to secure the man on the te and/or attack the lb depending on how the defense reacts.The key is watching the linemen and their initial step man blocking is more forward with the first step while zone is more lateral or bucket stepping. Zone plays do not need to be single back. Power has the FB kick out the de and a guard lead up the hole.ISO has the linemen step to the hole meaning some will step with left foot and some with right foot first. All of the linemen make the same step unless they are uncovered and how uncovered players react tells you whether they are using basic zone or pin and pull technique or another zone technique. I coach zone and man blocking and study both and get as much info on both as I can. It is definitely zone.
 
Top