|ESPN.com: NFL Nation||[Print without images]|
Posted by ESPN.com's Pat Yasinskas
A lot of readers have been hitting the mailbag with questions about why Mike Alstott wasn't the fullback for our all-decade offense. Here are a couple of samples:
Chance in Evanston, Wyo., writes: I believe Mike Alstot should have been in at FB on the all decade team. What would your arguments over that be? I thought he was pretty amazing player at a position that gets very little recognition.
Ryan in Charleston, W.Va., writes: I've been watching old video's of Mike Alstott and with this all decade teams coming up, Where do you think He Fits in? I mean has there ever really been a Fullback like this guy who could open up holes for RB's then move to Running back and change the game like him.
Here are my thoughts: Lorenzo Neal got the nod on this team, probably because he's the best blocking fullback ever. In fact, when the Bucs had Neal back in the 1990s, they used him as the blocking back for Alstott and Warrick Dunn.
Don't get me wrong, I think Alstott was a wonderful player. He could do a lot of things other fullbacks couldn't do -- mainly carry the ball and catch it out of the backfield. Alstott's one of the all-time favorites among Tampa Bay fans and some of his 1- or 2-yard runs were the stuff of highlight films because of his blue-collar approach. But the fact in the NFL these days are that fullbacks are around mainly to block.
The reality about Alstott is he did a lot of things better than any fullback, but blocking wasn't one of them. He was only ordinary in that area and I might even be too generous on that.