Will Priest help our O-line?
 

If so, how?

Can you play two halfbacks instead of having a fullback? We have our key pieces in Bowe, TG, and LJ. Will Priest fit into this new puzzle?

What are your expectations for tomorrow?

Well in a lead blocker type of set no....unless you want Holmes to get his head drilled in. In split backs or something like that sure...

I dunno what will happen, I think we need to see Holmes before we can know anything. The line isn't going to look good regardless of who's back there.

I cannot respond to this thread. Hootie says you know nothing about football. He seems to know it all...

Fizzlepoop.

Priest had a dream about our o-line and its duality of purpose and goals and vision. His presence will elevate the combined ingenuity of teammanship and eliminate our unfashionable play.

FAX

I think Preist would work well on 3rd downs. Obvious passing situations. He'd certainly block better than LJ would.

Sure you can play 2 running backs. In fact, that's the way it used to be long ago. The power I and wishbone formations specialized in two back sets and teams never knew which guy was going to run the ball. With the advent of complicated passing offenses those offensive styles are considered a thing of the past, though.

For someone who claims to be new to football, you ask intelligent questions.

I was thinking that, with them both (Priest and LJ) in, that the defense would be split. Maybe easier for our O-line to cover? Or am I thinking backwards in that regard?

Sometimes you can take things from the past, improve upon them, and have them be more effective now than they were then.

I'm less worried about Priest being effective than how Solari will use him. My heart says Solari should use priest on sweeps and screens.... but my brain says when was the last time you saw an effective sweep or screen play from one of our RB's cause our Oline can't pull like it used to. It'll be a nice sense of euphoria to see Priest back in the line up but with Solari calling the plays I dont see him being the same back.

Every once in a while you'll see an NFL team run the Option. But it's hard to do in the NFL because nearly every defender can cover sideline to sideline very quickly.

LMAO Could you imagine watching Huard trying to run an option play?

Does Priest depend on the O-line like LJ does? LJ doesnt seem to like to push his way through anymore. Wasn't Priest also smart about running behind the O-line until he could find an opening? How was he at blocking before? I was just getting into football whenever he got injured, so I don't know much about his style.

One difference I think Priest will make is when he gets to the sidelines he will talk with the OL and make suggestions instead of yelling at them.

Priest will help be a leader.

Oh and he can pass block.

Can you imagine Solari afterwards? "Damon, for the last time.... the fetal position is not one of your options!!!!"

In his prime, Priest was most effective on sweeps. He'd patiently run behind his blockers, then burst through once they had engaged the defense. Then once he broke into the secondary, he'd drop his second level burst on them.

At some point, I heard that he lost his second level burst.

After this last injury and long layoff, even his burst is in doubt.

And this line allows too much penetration for him to be patient.

I'm thinking his use as a 3rd down back (pass blocking and receiving) might be his best use.

I just asked this in another thread, but I'll as it here, too. Who do you feel is more effective in the red zone?

Well they have to get to the redzone first.....

It's really hard to say right now, Holmes hasn't played in 2 years I don't think anyone knows what to expect.

Priest always had a hunger for the endzone that allowed him to accomplish the unexpected.

LJ has been very good in the redzone, until recently.

I'd give Priest a shot. If he still has it, he's probably slightly better and it would certainly light a fire under LJ's ass.

I have serious doubts about Holmes, but I'd give him a shot or two, because that is the only way you will know for sure.

I thought in 2005, LJ should've been the between the 20's back and Priest should have been the short yardage - goal line back...but LJ would never go for that now.

Priest, in his day, was every bit as good as finding the end zone as LT was last year. I'm not sure he still has it, but it'll be nice to have a back who can pick up a 3rd and 1...

Priest will be in on some passing downs and will protect the QB. That will give Huard 1 extra second to find the open man. Holmes also excels is the draw/delay game, which LJ just can't seem to figure out.

Remember Kimble Anders. He was also advanced in RB age and recovering from injury and he played very well as a HB even though he had played most of his career at FB. Priest has played all his career as a HB. Kimble showed that it can be done.

I'm anxious to see him play, and then come back here to read comparisons between old/new Priest.

When the Chiefs tried to use Anders as a HB he sucked so bad Elvis Grbac threw for about 4300 yards...bad comparison.

Priest is going to rupture his Achilles? Dang that sucks.

Uh, yeah, that's why he carried 76 times for 331 yds and a 4.4 average YPC, right?


:shake:

I always knew Priest as a very patient runner. Letting his blocks develop then attack. So I don't know how that will work out with our line, but hopefully he'll atleast run unlike LJ has been doing. However I think he poses the threat of bouning around and making big gains. Kind of like Jones-Drew.

Obviously a big example there with 76 carries before blowing out an achillies and ending his career.

Uh, NO, the achilles is the injury he overcame in 1999 to gain the big yards in 2000. Thanks for playing, though!

I'm going to repeat myself because i am so certain i am right.

Priest will be a great leader on the team (aka not LJ)

Priest will actually block on passing situations (Not LJ)


Priest fills up the gaps in LJ's ability.

Oh and Priest needs at least one more jump 50 ft. above the line to score a TD play before he retires!

ROFL

he surely can't hurt


i think he will do better at setting up blocks provided there is a block to set up.

I doubt he will pout either ...... if for no other reason that to stick to LJ. :D

So, no delay of games for spiking the ball? I'm all for that.

Check Kevin Mack and Ernest Byner under Marty Schottenheimer in Cleveland.

Luv,

You really did ask a very good question. In the 70's, two running threats in the backfield was very common.

Typically, the idea was for the halfback to be the primary pass catcher and outside runner, while the fullback got the tough yards.

Examples of this type of backfield were the Miami Dolphins with Larry Csonka and Mercury Morris, Pittsburgh with Rocky Bleier and Franco Harris, and Jim Taylor and Paul Hornung. (The early 80's 49ers had such a backfield with Roger Craig and Wendell Tyler).

As conditioning techniques improved, you began to see a series of backs who were both big and fast. With a supply of runners who were effective both inside and outside, you began to see offenses concentrate on putting the ball in the hands of their best runner no matter the situation. Teams began to look for "uber backs" like Herschel Walker, Eric Dickerson, Earl Campbell or Chuck Muncie, who then pretty much carried the ball on the majority of running plays.

Also, teams began to use 3 and 4 wr sets in specific situations. These 3 wr formations would have less versatility if you didn't have a back that could be effective both inside and outside.

Consequently, fullback became limited to a lead blocker role on many teams. "Versatile" fullbacks became blockers who could also catch the ball. Formations changed as well. In the 70's, split back fromations with both backs the same distance behind the qb was the most common arrangement. As teams began to use one back for most running plays, they went to the "I" formation, with the fullback lined up in front of the runningback.

IN fact, terminology has changed. Used to be the outside runner/gamebreaker type was the "halfback" while the inside runner was the "fullback". Now the primary runner is generally called the "running back" while the lead blocker is the "fullback". "Halfback" isn't used that much now.

Now, when you ask if the old system had some wrinkles that are lost today, you are very correct. Misdirection plays used to be very common, where you faked to one back then gave the ball to the other back. Today, "misdirection" usually means the running back and lineman making one step one direction, then going in the other direction.

Today's offenses have tried to bring back some elements of the old misdirection plays by constantly faking the reverse to WRs. (Then finally giving it to him to catch the D flowing the wrong way).

The thing is, to run an effective two back offense, both backs must be willing and able to block effectively. Yet, with so many college backs coming up as "I" backs, most primary runners aren't effective in the lead blocking role. (LJ is not).

Now, most people forget that Priest played FULLBACK in college after his first knee injury, because Ricky WIlliams took priest's job as the primary runner. (which also explains why Priest wasn't drafted. No NFL team was really interested in a 213lb lead blocker with a knee injury). Bottom line, you are unlikely to see the chiefs use this formation b/c LJ doesn't lead block well.