Technicalities

[JohnTurney]

The Mercury News, Daniel Brown, January 2016
Craig reached the end zone three times in that game ...

FIRST FULLBACK TO LEAD THE NFL IN CATCHES ... Then things went nuts. 1985, the fullback led the NFL with 92 catches — two more than Washington star Art Monk, the future Hall
of Famer ...

"Craig remains the only player to make the Pro Bowl as both a fullback and a running back."

Chuck Foreman was a fullback most of his career. However, Vikings gamebooks didn't specify it like some other teams. Bud Grant talked about it and so did Foreman.
He was usually on the TE side...in the I he was the tailback, so there were some differences.

But McCutcheon and Perkins went to Pro Bowls as both a FB and HB but Pro Bowls never distinguished so it's all sticky. In 1975 Foreman led NFL in receptions
and was the FB that year (1976-77 I think he switched--McClanahan came in)

anyway, thought it is interesting of the levels of "accuracy"

[Brian wolf]

Thanks John ...

SF fans can only imagine what Craig and the team could have done had he never got hurt in 1990. Seifert decided not to keep him and his career nosedived ...

[rewing84]

agreed brian his career took a complete nosedive from 1990-93 his numbers tell the tale no doubt 1990-93 446 Carries 1564 Yds 7 TDS 83 Rec 670 yds 1TD Prior to that 1983-89 1545 Carries 6625 Yds 49 TD's 483 Rec 4221 Yds 16 tds like you said Brian it could be thats stretch from 90-93 that could be keeping him out of canton

[Bryan]

The Mercury News, Daniel Brown, January 2016
Craig reached the end zone three times in that game ...

FIRST FULLBACK TO LEAD THE NFL IN CATCHES ... Then things went nuts. 1985, the fullback led the NFL with 92 catches — two more than Washington star Art Monk, the future Hall
of Famer ...

"Craig remains the only player to make the Pro Bowl as both a fullback and a running back."

Chuck Foreman was a fullback most of his career. However, Vikings gamebooks didn't specify it like some other teams. Bud Grant talked about it and so did Foreman.
He was usually on the TE side...in the I he was the tailback, so there were some differences.

But McCutcheon and Perkins went to Pro Bowls as both a FB and HB but Pro Bowls never distinguished so it's all sticky. In 1975 Foreman led NFL in receptions
and was the FB that year (1976-77 I think he switched--McClanahan came in)

anyway, thought it is interesting of the levels of "accuracy"

I thought the answer was Shipwreck Kelly back in 1933. I agree that Foreman was a FB in 1975, as was MacArthur Lane in 1976. And even if there is nuance, its not like Roger Craig was "more" of a FB than Foreman and Lane. So its kind of a bogus distinction to begin with, and even then the comment is inaccurate.

[Gary Najman]

In 1978, Rickey Young of the Vikings led the entire NFL in receptions. His three seasons prior he was with the Chargers and was listed as the FB, while Don Woods was the TB. In 1978 who was the TB, Young or Chuck Foreman? Brent McClanahan was by then a backup.

[JohnTurney]

In 1978, Rickey Young of the Vikings led the entire NFL in receptions. His three seasons prior he was with the Chargers and was listed as the FB, while Don Woods was the TB. In 1978 who was the TB, Young or Chuck Foreman? Brent McClanahan was by then a backup.

I think Foreman was back to FB and Young was kind of a chess piece, even playing wide receiver -- or slot, giving VIkings a 3 receiver look
but from 21 personnel. plus some 4 WR--

but IMO, Foreman was the FB, line up on the TE side in split backs

[GameBeforeTheMoney]

I can confirm that Foreman refers to himself as having played fullback.

Although I never saw either of them play, I always thought that both Jim Brown and Jim Taylor played fullback also.

Of course, "It can be confusing. Sometimes fullbacks fall on their half backs and halfbacks fall on their full backs. Very confusing."

[JohnTurney]

Jim Brown and Jim Taylor played fullback also.

correct--back then there were offense that Chuck Noll referred to as "the fullback offense"

He used it in Pitt, Harris the FB, Rocky the HB, but Rocky the blocker...

He also said that the one-back offenses are really the "fullback offense" that Emmitt
Smith was the "full" back and Moose was the "half" back...in the terminology, I suppose,
he used

Colleges would call Smith a tailback and Moose the fullback, I guess...because the "I" is
kind of a different animal.

But what things are called is interesting to me...in Noll's system it would have
been different than what it was in Dallas and what caught on...the college-type
verbiage...