Jump to content

DiMarco to IR


YoloinOhio

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, Johnny Hammersticks said:

No need for a FB with Smith and Sweeney.

 

Maybe this is my ignorance, but can either Smith or Sweeney fill the traditional lead-blocker role of a fullback?

 

It's been my impression that Smith doesn't have the quick twitch and low center of gravity to block in traffic - he can basically act as a 6th OLman?

Also my impression that Sweeney has a long way to go to develop as a blocker in the NFL? 

 

I could be wrong

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, YoloinOhio said:

 

 

I wonder if the picture on the right was taken when they told him he was being placed on IR?

 

1 hour ago, H2o said:

This also makes me wonder if at times our 2 RB sets are gonna have both Moss and Singletary on the field at the same time?

 

I'd vote for that.  Was wondering if they'd consider that.  Technically what is the difference between a full back and guy built like Moss?  If you need a true FB for certain plays, couldn't Moss fill that role?

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, CapeBreton said:

Great to see Sweeney back, has he done any work at all though? I didn’t think he was even running yet.

He likely goes on IR after the final cutdown.  With the new rules, IR players can now return after three weeks.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

Maybe this is my ignorance, but can either Smith or Sweeney fill the traditional lead-blocker role of a fullback?

 

It's been my impression that Smith doesn't have the quick twitch and low center of gravity to block in traffic - he can basically act as a 6th OLman?

Also my impression that Sweeney has a long way to go to develop as a blocker in the NFL? 

 

I could be wrong

 

I’ll answer your question with another question?  Do we really need a traditional lead blocking FB?  I’d almost rather have Moss out there as the lead back 🤷🏾‍♂️

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Johnny Hammersticks said:

I’ll answer your question with another question?  Do we really need a traditional lead blocking FB?  I’d almost rather have Moss out there as the lead back 🤷🏾‍♂️

 

On the lead blocking whatever need, that's one for Daboll. 

 

On Moss, though, if you want a 1-2 punch at RB you for sure don't want one of the guys to eat up body blows and wear and tear blocking for the other.

 

12 minutes ago, Doc said:

If a player starts camp on the PUP list, he can be put on the regular season PUP list.

 

Ah, OK, but just looked it up - then he can't come back for 6 weeks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

On the lead blocking whatever need, that's one for Daboll. 

 

On Moss, though, if you want a 1-2 punch at RB you for sure don't want one of the guys to eat up body blows and wear and tear blocking for the other.

 

Certainly would add another dimension to our short yardage package.  I’m not talking about Moss playing FB in all short yardage/goalline situations.  I would like to see a lot of 2 back sets with Moss and Singletary though.  I just don’t think a traditional FB is necessary.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Johnny Hammersticks said:

No need for a FB with Smith and Sweeney.


In general, I’m cool without one and having more of a single back offense.

 

id rather see beasley or brown get a shot downfield in coverage late in important games 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Johnny Hammersticks said:

 

Certainly would add another dimension to our short yardage package.  I’m not talking about Moss playing FB in all short yardage/goalline situations.  I would like to see a lot of 2 back sets with Moss and Singletary though.  I just don’t think a traditional FB is necessary.

 

Thing is, Daboll seems to roll that way

 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, eball said:

Somebody around here called this one...in a separate thread no less...wonder who?

Me, in the WR/TE discussion.

 

Bummer it is bad enough to shut DiMarco down. Warrior salute!

 

 

Edited by BeerLeagueHockey
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Johnny Hammersticks said:

Yes, you are correct.  So you think Gilliam makes it?  He might be a better receiver than DiMarco and is reportedly solid on ST 🤷🏾‍♂️

 

I would have to give that one "insufficient data". 

 

I thought there were reports he was looking pretty good, but didn't McDermott say something about "he's got a long way to go" or something like that, recently?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

I would have to give that one "insufficient data". 

 

I thought there were reports he was looking pretty good, but didn't McDermott say something about "he's got a long way to go" or something like that, recently?

 

I think he said “he’s not ready.”  We’ll see I guess.  Might be someone on the market after tomorrow?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Hapless Bills Fan said:

 

I would have to give that one "insufficient data". 

 

I thought there were reports he was looking pretty good, but didn't McDermott say something about "he's got a long way to go" or something like that, recently?


If he can play kickoff and punt coverage, he’ll make the 53.  Probably won’t get any touches, if he does we’re in trouble anyways.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For the past 4 years I always heard how DiMarco was on the roster because of what he does on special teams. Can anyone confirm if was actually a good special teams player? It just seems odd that despite not being a good fullback during his time here he always hung around. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...