How important is the tight end position to this offense?

we have to get one next year for sure. i think we're just riding it out this year with what we have and probably bringing in periodic practice squad guys to try out

 

We will probably be doubling up on te next year and maybe rb? Whatever happens I hope we sign vincent jackson, peyton manning and early 2000 keyshawn johnson.

 

If we had Keller and they had Fasano we win Sunday night.

So, important, I guess.

 

I was pissed we didn't draft a TE this year. Hernandez was there for the taking. I guess we can't complain too much (I think we got John Jerry there?) but yes, we need a pass-catching TE badly.

 

IMO this F.O. has done a poor job of addressing this need. I think they have a prehistoric view of the position. They seem to be looking for the all-around guy who is primarily a blocker and a receiver second. They already have that in Fasano. They should be looking for the compliment that is a receiver first and a blocker second. Not only does it make sense in today's game, but it provides so much more offensive flexibility. We should be looking for the personnel that allow us to field both a 22 formation and a 3-wr formation. That would allow us to maximize the effectiveness of our run-centric offense against any defensive alignment.

 

Well, contrarian again but:

Not very, the Te is more or less a blocker in Henning's offense they rely on the Wr's more than Te's or Rb's in the passing game.

I would not mind sniffing around Donald Lee up in Green Bay as he is the sort of all around Te who would offer an end to the Te merry go round of UDFA types.

 

I agree that Henning hasn't used a TE much, but I would think that he would be forced to use a receiving TE if he were given a great one. You would have to be an idiot not to use a TE like Finley as a receiver if you had one. Despite the WC complaints, I don't think anybody is claiming that Henning is an idiot.

 

Then he'd just be a WR, no?

Do you really think they'd trust Finley to block out of a 3-point stance?

 

The better question may be why would the team get Henning one for the offense if in fact he doesn't really use one? That could be seen as a waste of resources if you use a draft choice on a position that you don't feature; like FB. Just because we have one on the roster doesn't mean we'll use him. Ronnie Brown has great hands, how many times do we throw the ball to him?

But Henning will now completely buck this behavior because he'd have one on the roster? Before Henning came here he had a TE catch 30 or more balls 4 times in 27 years as an OC. 4 times. He's done better here, but how much can we expect that to continue to change upwards?

 

They should. By my count we have run 19 times out of the 2-TE set. Our runs out of the 2-TE set have averaged about 2 YPC except for the one 51 yard run RB had against Minny. And on that run it wouldn't have mattered if the TE (either one) had been run over since it was a quick hitter up the middle. Basically, our use of a blocking type TE has not yielded any great results. Having a guy who makes the LB worry that might run out for a pass would at least as effective as what we have been doing and probably more so.

 

B/c just the threat of a seam buster will help the running game. Even if he only catches 25 passes all year but breaks a few due to his athleticism the defense will have to worry about him. IMO that will yield better results than what we're getting now. And I believe that Henning would be smart enough to target that kind of TE a few more times if he had one.

 

So what you guys are saying is Henning is limited as an OC? If he can't find ways to maximize talent, then he doesn't deserve to be here.

Is there a 'Utilizing TE's for Dummies' book that we can all pitch in on and mail to him?

We've been watching TE's torch us for 2 years now; so can't the guy at least learn from 1st hand experience?! (drrrrr which way-did-he-go George)

 

And I'm sure they aren't happy with the blocking from the TE, and will look to improve upon it.

 

I'm sure he could utilize it, if someone like that were on the roster. But the issue isn't that, its acquiring that player. For a team thats built as a power-running team, it wouldn't make sense to bring in a TE that wasn't a good blocker. We probably run the most max protection in the league.

 

We dont run the West Coast offense or Spread offense. No need for a pass catching TE. We need RB/LB/Safety in the first Rd. A new Coordinator will help too.

 

I haven't run the stats but just a quick perusal of the top 10 running teams shows me 6 of 10 teams that feature receiving TEs. So having a receiving TE certainly doesn't stop you from being able to run. Obviously there are other factors. It would seem that a team like Miami which has spent so much on their OL shouldn't have to support it by being forced to bring TEs in that are Tackles. And it has clear benefits in the passing game.

 

We run a lot of 2-TE set though. We have a run-centric offense and a QB that is more comfortable under center and using the play action game. The receiving TE is a natural compliment to that.

 

We had a shot at Gronkowski who can dominate in both aspects. Even Keller sealed off a nice block Sunday night. I don't think the TE needs to be a mauler; he just needs to be effective...... especially while we have Fasano. How many blocking TE's do we need?

How much pressure did we get on Sanchez while he was busy completing passes to Keller?

 

Its about pass protection as much as run blocking. When we've had negative pass plays this year, its because we havent protected the QB well. We run so much max protection, you'd either have to change your blocking schemes just to accommodate your TE, or you'll end up taking a lot of sacks. Theres a reason someone like Aaron Rodgers takes a lot of sacks. They've designed their offense like that. And thats fine, but it wouldn't mesh with what we do, IMO.

 

Well, are we keeping Fasano and the new receiving TE on the field at the same time? Does that mean we're taking Bess off the field?

Keller isn't a bad blocker. I would say he's an average blocker. But they run a west coast system. We saw them use a lot of 3-step drops. We don't do that stuff.

Gronkowski is a very good TE. But I'm not sure he's quite the downfield receiving threat that Finley, Gates, Gonzalez, Keller, etc. are. He has good hands, but he's not that type of player IMO.

In regards to how many blocking TEs we need, I would say as many as we can find. We ran the most max protect in the league last year for a reason.

 

That sounds more like a fix the OL problem than a need blocking TEs problem.

 

Again I question the belief that if Henning had it he'd use it. Henning has a running back with perfectly good hands that can in fact do many of the things we'd ask a TE to do in terms of routes - some of them anyways. Yet, we do not use him very often in the passing game.

So why would it be one way for Ronnie Brown but different for a TE? When both Martin and Fasano had over 30 catches in 2008 I think that was the first that had happened for Henning.

You may believe that he'd be smart enough to use him, but looking at how we use Ronnie who is well known as having great hands should say something.

Maybe we didn't target the TE big time as we just don't see it being a deciding factor in our passing game?

 

Its not really a problem with the OL, its just how the offense is designed.

The Green Bay Packers don't have an offensive line problem because they give up a lot of sacks. They just have an offense who's design results in a lot of sacks.

 

Any time you run the spread, and routinely keep 5 in to block, you're going to end up with pressure on the passer. The edges are shorter. Packers fans could disagree with that, but its the reality of their scheme. Every scheme has shortcomings.

 

Keller has improved his blocking a lot. He used to be awful and it hurt the Jets running game.

Who remembers Johnny Mitchell? Talk about a guy that couldn't even fall in the way of a defender.

 

I've agreed with some of your points, String, but in this case I have to say a good receiving tight end is a great way for QB's to burn blitzers. In effect, a nice blitz counter-measure, which in turn leads to less blitzing.

 

Sure, it is a good way to burn blitzes, I don't disagree.

But thats not really how we've used the TE. You can go to a five step drop, and use the TE to block, as opposed to sending the TE out and throwing it to him. I'm not saying one way is better than the other, just that our scheme tends to favor a certain style.

 

Brady had the opposite problem. Great blocker - lousy receiver (by today's standards).

 

Didn't we see this example with Keller?

 

I watch how effectively GB utilizes their backs in the passing game and it just makes me

 

Would you be if Henne took as many sacks as Rodgers?

 

I was so pissed when we passed on Hernandez.