Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted (edited)

Patrick DiMarco was signed early in FA last year and I think it was more as a piece for Dennison’s scheme than anything given the way he used the FB. He was a decent blocker,  but I don’t see the value in his contract and with the change in OC his usage could be even lower than it was last year. I wonder if he’s a cut candidate or a trade chip? He’s signed through 2021 but there is a potential out for 2018 where he’s only 1.5 in dead cap

 

also he is useless as a runner or a receiver. Or on onside kicks. :censored:

 

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/patrick-dimarco-11222/

Edited by YoloinOhio
Posted

Normally I realize the value of signing with the best full-backs in the league because you're getting one of the best at the position for a relatively cheap price. Even the best kickers and punters in the league are not as cheap as the best full-backs

 

But when our new scheme I don't know if he has value that we need, ditch him

Posted
1 minute ago, Boyst62 said:

Normally I realize the value of signing with the best full-backs in the league because you're getting one of the best at the position for a relatively cheap price. Even the best kickers and punters in the league are not as cheap as the best full-backs

 

But when our new scheme I don't know if he has value that we need, ditch him

I don’t know if he has value either because o don’t really know what Daboll wants to do. Even if he does use one, I have to think it could be done with someone who can actually be a RB or catch the ball too if called upon.

  • Like (+1) 2
Posted
1 minute ago, YoloinOhio said:

Patrick DiMarco was signed early in FA last year and I think it was more as a piece for Dennison’s scheme than anything given the way he used the FB. He was a decent blocker,  but I don’t see the value in his contract and with the change in OC his usage could be even lower than it was last year. I wonder if he’s a cut candidate or a trade chip? He’s signed through 2021 but there is a potential out for 2018 where he’s only 1.5 in dead cap

 

http://www.spotrac.com/nfl/buffalo-bills/patrick-dimarco-11222/

That was the odd thing with him. They brought him in and paid him well, then under used him IMO. There were stretches of the season I literally forgot he was on the team.

 

If he's going to be used I have no issue keeping him, as you said he is a good blocker. But I still wish we would have ended up with Kyle Jusczcyk last year.

  • Like (+1) 2
Posted
Just now, YoloinOhio said:

I don’t know if he has value either because o don’t really know what Daboll wants to do. Even if he does use one, I have to think it could be done with someone who can actually be a RB or catch the ball too if called upon.

Which is why Tolbert may be here in 2018. He is not great but can do a fairly well balanced routine. Carry, catch, block, special teams.

 

If we do get rid of McCoy than DiMarco is worth keeping. Veteran leadership and worth having.

 

Of course, I'd always prefer the extra OL than a FB

Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, KelsaysLunchbox said:

That was the odd thing with him. They brought him in and paid him well, then under used him IMO. There were stretches of the season I literally forgot he was on the team.

 

If he's going to be used I have no issue keeping him, as you said he is a good blocker. But I still wish we would have ended up with Kyle Jusczcyk last year.

They wanted Jusczyck initially and then SF backed up the brinks truck. I find it interesting that DiMarco’s contract has the out this year.i have a feeling McD hired Dennison thinking it was a 1 year trial run and this guy was a scheme fit who they didn’t know if they would need past 2017.

Edited by YoloinOhio
Posted

I'd rather eliminate the FB spot all together.  If you want a lead blocker on goal line play then use another offensive lineman that has movement skills.  Don't waste it on this guy.  I'd rather use that roster spot somewhere else.  A big back would be needed still for a more balanced run game but I don't see the need for a FB.  

Posted
Just now, Buffalo30 said:

I'd rather eliminate the FB spot all together.  If you want a lead blocker on goal line play then use another offensive lineman that has movement skills.  Don't waste it on this guy.  I'd rather use that roster spot somewhere else.  A big back would be needed still for a more balanced run game but I don't see the need for a FB.  

They may do that. No idea if Daboll uses one. Most teams don’t so i am guessing he doesn’t.

Posted
4 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said:

They may do that. No idea if Daboll uses one. Most teams don’t so i am guessing he doesn’t.

I just think the plan is to fix this running game and get a really big back to play off of Mccoy.  I don't see a need to have a FB on this team.  We have athletic lineman that can pull if they want to give the back a lead blocker. I'd rather use the roster spot for depth elsewhere.

Posted
Just now, Buffalo30 said:

I just think the plan is to fix this running game and get a really big back to play off of Mccoy.  I don't see a need to have a FB on this team.  We have athletic lineman that can pull if they want to give the back a lead blocker. I'd rather use the roster spot for depth elsewhere.

Same here. I want a nice stable of RBs. Shady, sign a vet and draft a guy.  Keep Cadet too.

Posted
30 minutes ago, YoloinOhio said:

I don’t know if he has value either because o don’t really know what Daboll wants to do. Even if he does use one, I have to think it could be done with someone who can actually be a RB or catch the ball too if called upon.

 

Yeah, I think that's the key point.  When DiMarco was in, you knew he was in to block.  Even he was surprised when a ball was thrown to him. 

I was surprised to see that he scored as having 7 receptions, but at a couple of key points, he certainly didn't catch it or put it out of play.

×
×
  • Create New...