Luke Willson--Adds FULLBACK to List of Responsibilities

I hadn't seen anyone comment on this yet (my apologies if someone already has), but found this quite interesting ...

http://www.seattletimes.com/sports/...ing-fullback-to-his-list-of-responsibilities/

Ideally, it sounds like (and I would think so as well) that Willson is basically a placeholder for that role until Vannett comes back. I say that because IMO, Vannett is a bit better blocker than Willson and bit more consistent as a receiver. From an X's and O's standpoint, I find this intriguing, as the Hawks look like they would basically be incorporating the old H-Back into their offense and perhaps making it a regular staple of what they do.

Going back to the failed Kellen Winslow, Jr. experiment a few years ago, Pete Carroll talked very excitedly during that offseason about all the possibilities of having 2 dominant TE's ... and all the havoc they could cause a defense. BUT ... as we've seen in the past, Pete also has a real affinity for having a fullback as well (Michael Robinson would agree). If you basically make Vannett an H-Back in essence, it would seem you are killing 2 birds with one stone. Interesting wrinkle IMO.

Thoughts?

I get tired of people slamming Willson's blocking. Sure, he struggled to pick up that aspect if the game early in his career, but he's developed into a very capable blocker. Is he a specialist? No. But he more than adequate and IMO based on preseason, a tick better than Vannett at this point.

I remember Willson had a vital block on Clay Mathews in a game against Green Bay that enabled Marshawn to score the go ahead touchdown. Without that block, Mathews swallows Lynch in the backfield for a loss.

McGruff":2s6781dr said:

I get tired of people slamming Willson's blocking. Sure, he struggled to pick up that aspect if the game early in his career, but he's developed into a very capable blocker. Is he a specialist? No. But he more than adequate and IMO based on preseason, a tick better than Vannett at this point.

Click to expand...

Whoa! Didn't mean to ruffle any feathers there McGruff. I looked back at my original post and realized that I came off a lot stronger than I had intended to. I will amend my comments after I'm done here with this post. I would agree with you in saying that Willson is not a bad blocker by any means. Adequate and capable is about the level that I would say he's at as well. However, I DO feel that Vannett is better in that department than he is ... and a bit more consistent catching the ball, therefore, further up the depth chart once he's healthy -- JMHO.

That said, slamming Willson was not even close to the point I was trying to make in posting this. What I was attempting to bring up (and spark a conversation about) ... is the apparent shift on the part of Carroll and crew as far as the offense is concerned. It looks to me as if they are trying to incorporate into the offense the old H Back position ... perhaps making that a bigger feature of their offense. From an X's and O's standpoint, I find that interesting and see a world of possibilities there. See my original post above.

Thoughts?

If TEs can pull double duty, that saves a roster spot, which is a good thing. Fullbacks are nice but I just don't see them a big enough part of the offense anymore to warrant their own spot. This could be a great way to gain some flexibility.

Hawkscanner":2lbee6mo said:

McGruff":2lbee6mo said:

I get tired of people slamming Willson's blocking. Sure, he struggled to pick up that aspect if the game early in his career, but he's developed into a very capable blocker. Is he a specialist? No. But he more than adequate and IMO based on preseason, a tick better than Vannett at this point.

Click to expand...

Whoa! Didn't mean to ruffle any feathers there McGruff. I looked back at my original post and realized that I came off a lot stronger than I had intended to. I will amend my comments after I'm done here with this post. I would agree with you in saying that Willson is not a bad blocker by any means. Adequate and capable is about the level that I would say he's at as well. However, I DO feel that Vannett is better in that department than he is ... and a bit more consistent catching the ball, therefore, further up the depth chart once he's healthy -- JMHO.

That said, slamming Willson was not even close to the point I was trying to make in posting this. What I was attempting to bring up (and spark a conversation about) ... is the apparent shift on the part of Carroll and crew as far as the offense is concerned. It looks to me as if they are trying to incorporate into the offense the old H Back position ... perhaps making that a bigger feature of their offense. From an X's and O's standpoint, I find that interesting and see a world of possibilities there. See my original post above.

Thoughts?

Click to expand...

Sorry for harping. I just see this mantra that Willson sucks as a blocker repeaten too often, and it's just not true (anymore).

I think Vannett upside is greater and agree that he appears more sure handed. Willson is without a doubt the better athlete, and I wish they would use him more on the outside and stretching the seams to take advantage of speed mismatches against linebackers.

I like the idea of using an h-back move TE as it gives us some interesting shift and motion possibilities. I would prefer Vannett back there, but noT because he's a superior blocker. I prefer to have Willson in space to take advantage of his speed. Imagin a heavy formation with a RB, Vannett at H-back and Graham, Willson and a WR. You can move a lot of pieces around from that personnel grouping.

I like it. I know they tried out more FB's this week, but for me I like the flexibility of having an H-back since that guy can be a receiving option as well.

I think Vannett will do well in that role, if he can ever get back on the field.

Too me expanding position versatility is all about projecting uncertainty as to what personal group the opposing defense should put on the field on any given play. That once was a special dimension Zach Miller brought to the field of play. It's the restoration of that dimension the offense seeks to restore to their active play book. It opens up opportunities for beneficial mismatches.

Hawkscanner":4oxf5tiz said:

McGruff":4oxf5tiz said:

I get tired of people slamming Willson's blocking. Sure, he struggled to pick up that aspect if the game early in his career, but he's developed into a very capable blocker. Is he a specialist? No. But he more than adequate and IMO based on preseason, a tick better than Vannett at this point.

Click to expand...

Whoa! Didn't mean to ruffle any feathers there McGruff. I looked back at my original post and realized that I came off a lot stronger than I had intended to. I will amend my comments after I'm done here with this post. I would agree with you in saying that Willson is not a bad blocker by any means. Adequate and capable is about the level that I would say he's at as well. However, I DO feel that Vannett is better in that department than he is ... and a bit more consistent catching the ball, therefore, further up the depth chart once he's healthy -- JMHO.

That said, slamming Willson was not even close to the point I was trying to make in posting this. What I was attempting to bring up (and spark a conversation about) ... is the apparent shift on the part of Carroll and crew as far as the offense is concerned. It looks to me as if they are trying to incorporate into the offense the old H Back position ... perhaps making that a bigger feature of their offense. From an X's and O's standpoint, I find that interesting and see a world of possibilities there. See my original post above.

Thoughts?

Click to expand...

I kind of think we need to reset the meter on Willson. Up until this year I would agree with everything you said in comparison to Vannett but so far this year Luke looks like a completely different player. His body language is way better and his focus and concentration suddenly look very good. His blocking to me also looks exceptional so far this year. Vannett may over take him but I don't think it will be as easy as I suspected before the season. We still need to see Nick on the real field also. So far we are more predicting his ability than actually evaluating it.

I love what they are doing with Willson right now though and I believe the idea is to have a receiving TE in Graham complimented by an H-Back TE with Willson and Vannett. Having both capable of similar roles means we are not showing our hands by changing personnel since everyone knows Graham will always be a receiving first TE. If Wilson wasn't a capable H-back then having him on the field vs Vannett would reduce our options for what plays we could likely run making our offense more predictable. Having two TE's that can both play H-back is a luxury.

Jimmy Graham, Luke Willson, Nick Vannet, and Brandon Williams - good problem to have. Fullback is a need, and this allow Seahawks to save a roster spot. I could care less which TE is performing FB duties. I just love the depth that they finally have at this position.

I'm a fan of the H-Back / TE fill in at FB. I don't think Pete is long term, he is just playing the hand he is dealt, and with a lot of injuries early he needs that extra roster spot.

Luke is much better blocking in space than in line.

Smart decision by the staff.

Now let's see him leak out of the backfield for some catches.

I think a formation with Willson as FB, C-Mike or (Rawls when he's back) as RB, 2 TEs with Jimmy and Vanett, and 1 speedy-as-hell WR could do wonders to confuse defenses as to our intentions. I wonder if bevel has it in him? Really, who is going to cover all those possible receivers while also playing the run and spying Russell? Plus, it sounds old-school enough to appeal to PC.

Pete likes FBs who also contribute on STs like Robinson and Coleman. Plus, those guys had great hands and could run a little if needed. Vannett and Willson are just fine.