Rivals: Norfleet expected to return to offense

Submitted by MH20 on February 20th, 2013 at 12:36 PM

Sounds like our favorite scatback is headed back to offense.  From a Rivals spring preview article found here ($), I give you the money quote:

 

"He's supposedly going back to offense," Blackwell [ed: Norfleet's 7-on-7 coach] said. "They will use him in the slot and in the return game, and some as a running back. Coach [Greg] Mattison is saying he can still use him on defense and is making an argument to keep him there, but Dennis' passion is for the offense. That's where he wants to play, and from talking to Dennis it appears that's where he's going to play.

 

The rest of the article basically describes why Norfleet went to defense in the first place (potential for PT in the bowl game) and that offense is his true passion (duh).  It also highlights his need to beef up his blocking and grasp of the playbook in order to see the field more.

Brian is going to cry tears of joy.

Comments

Bombadil

February 20th, 2013 at 1:55 PM ^

Yes, it's Groucho as Quincy Adams Wagstaff the college president. Groucho gets convinced to recruit professional football players but ends up signing Harpo and Chico instead. A must-see for the witty, high-IQ mgocommunity. Wow, I'm a dork.

 

Bombadil

February 20th, 2013 at 4:32 PM ^

Coincidence. I don't think RDT was smart enough to have been a Tolkien reader. Although, finding someone who has also seen Horse Feathers is quite rare. 

As for Tolkien inspired names I think there's: Thorin, Balrog, and myself. Perhaps Logan88 can become Glorfindel.  

mGrowOld

February 20th, 2013 at 12:46 PM ^

Coach Mattision expressed disapointment in losing Norfleet back to the other side of the ball:

"Look...we gave the kid all off season to grow and put him on a strick diet to facilitate growth but despits all our efforts he simply refuses to get any taller.  Until Dennis gets serious about his height we sadly have no place for him on defense."

Belisarius

February 20th, 2013 at 12:44 PM ^

I never understood why Brian was so worked up about this. There was never anything suggesting the move was permanant, and it seemed to me pretty clear this was about CB depth, with Countess and Floyd both down and out.

Rabbit21

February 20th, 2013 at 12:44 PM ^

Good, Defense seemed like a big mismatch for his size and abilities and what it seems like the coaches are trying to do there.  Would much rather see him back on offense.  This is good enws if it holds up.

detrocks

February 20th, 2013 at 12:59 PM ^

I'd love to see him take a bigger role on offense next season.   He offers a unique change of pace compared to Fitz, Green, Smith, Rawls, etc.   Would love to see emerge as a third down back, slot WR and kick returning terror.

GoBlueInNYC

February 20th, 2013 at 1:08 PM ^

Absolutely. With Vincent Smith leaving, there's definitely an opening for a 3rd down back. I'm guessing it'll come down to Norfleet and Hayes to fight for that roll. Hopefully one of them can tap into whatever it was that made V. Smith such a monster when it came to blitz pick-ups.

Ideally, I'd like to see Hayes move to the slot and keep Norfleet at RB. But that is based on nothing but my knee jerk response to my own post as I was writing it.

funkywolve

February 20th, 2013 at 2:01 PM ^

To me if you have a 3rd down back, it probably means your back on first and second downs isn't that good at catching the ball or pass blocking (or possibly both).  If your back that's out there on 1st and 2nd down can catch the ball and pass portect, you don't really need a 3rd down back do you?

funkywolve

February 20th, 2013 at 2:23 PM ^

you want to rotate running backs but if you put a back in only for certain situations, defenses will start to pick up on that and have a pretty good idea of what is coming depending on which back is in the game. 

You ideally want 2-3 backs who can handle all aspects of the position - running, catching and pass protection.

GoBlueInNYC

February 20th, 2013 at 3:09 PM ^

Yes, ideally you want all your players to be able to do everything. But that will never be the case; teams will always have situational players. It's not like V. Smith only came in to run one play or only stayed in to pass block whenever he was on the field. He ran it sometimes, he took blitz pick-up duties sometimes, and he ran out for passes/screens sometimes. He was used for a variety of purposes, but he was still very much a situational player.

WolvinLA2

February 20th, 2013 at 3:24 PM ^

The whole point of a third down back is to have a guy who can pass block and catch the ball out of the backfield on third and long. How is puting him in giving anything away? It's not like the defense doesn't know the down and distance. If we have third and 8, the D is probably thinking pass regardless of who our RB is.

Now, if you have a RB who only goes in on passing downs and you put him in on first, then you'd probably be giving something away. But that's not what a third down back is for.

Nothsa

February 20th, 2013 at 6:12 PM ^

Too much emphasis on the three. Look what that otter is bringing you in the lane! Not just the high-efficiency two, but the opportunity for and-ones at the line! Foul trouble for the opposition bigs! Cute otter accessories for the ladies!