There are times that I forget that Edelman was a QB in college. What a great position switch for him to go from QB to WR, where he's cemented himself as a top slot receiver in the league. If he was a QB I have no doubts his top aspirations would be to be a bench warmer who might get Brandon Weeden reps if his starter went down. I wonder of the other athletic QBs if any of them would benefit more from switching to a WR role.

TanGeng

Sanya12364 Posts

October 07 2015 23:06 GMT

#2602

Julian Edelman is really too short to be a NFL QB.
There are a bunch of comments about how Wilson can't see over the line and can make up for it with his legs. It'd be the same thing with Julian Edelman.

With RBs you want to be short, stocky, and hard to tackle. With your slot receivers you want them to be nimble and shifty. For QBs, the WR transition is easier without the need to bulk up in the legs.

As far as value goes, the QB position is way more valuable. I just feel like RBs and WRs are bit players in the current NFL offense. Their full potential is unlocked by a good QB, so any players that want to maximize their full earning potential should try to stick it out as a QB. Then again, it is best to be the best at any position rather than bad at the most important position.

Jibba

United States22883 Posts

October 08 2015 02:13 GMT

#2603

When did zone blocking really take off?

There was a big article on the Lions' switch to zone blocking from Linehan's hybrid power scheme, and how our man blocking studs haven't been able to adjust. If it's really that difficult to go from zone to man, is it possible that the constant shuffle of coaches and OCes are part of the problem too? Too much turnover of leadership and systems.

DannyJ

United States5110 Posts

October 08 2015 03:32 GMT

#2604

On October 08 2015 08:06 TanGeng wrote:With RBs you want to be short, stocky, and hard to tackle

Obviously that's somewhat true, at least compared to the other positions, but is that really what anyone truly wants anymore? I can't think of many stocky short RBs in recent NFL history that performed well for any decently long period. Maybe MJD? Seems like most of the best RBs (charles, Bell, etc) are more nimble and shifty than they are tanky. Of course there are freaks like AP, Foster and Lynch who are just both...

GTR

51596 Posts

October 08 2015 06:59 GMT

#2605

Ray Rice comes to mind.

QuanticHawk

United States32135 Posts

October 08 2015 14:06 GMT

#2606

Ideal RB size has always been under 6ft and somewhere around 200+lbs. Bell is on the taller side at 6'1 but he's also 244 and his running style is real compact/hard to tackle. He's basically the total opposite of Adrian Peterson, who for years I was convinced would have a short career since he runs basically standing up. I still do not get how he constantly moves piles like that.

But even of that group, Jamal Charles is under 6ft and about 200lbs. Short and stocky doesn't necessarily mean tanky like Bettis or Brandon Jacobs were, just that you won't see a lot of guys who look like WR back there.