1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

How important is the tight end position to this offense?

Discussion in 'Miami Dolphins Forum' started by Paul 13, Sep 28, 2010.

  1. Paul 13

    Paul 13 Chaotic Neutral & Unstable Genius Staff Member

    85,620
    51,681
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    We've gone from a tight end by committee group, lead by Anthony Fasano... to Anthony Fasano and a bunch of projects. I watch other teams around the league with good tight ends and how important each of them are to their respective offenses and think "why don't we have a guy like that?"

    Last night, for example, Green Bay has Jermichael Finley, Chicago has Greg Olsen. The Jets have Dustin Keller. The Vikings have Visanthe Shiancoe. The Pats drafted two tight ends who have both looked good in Gronkowski and Hernandez. The Chiefs drafted Tony Moeaki (sp) who has looked very impressive. The Ravens drafted two to add to the Heap. Getting that tight end down the middle of the field and miss matched against the defender is so key. Fasano is not a mismatch against anyone really. Now that Brandon Marshall has opened up things in the passing game, it's time to get even better.

    Fasano does a good job in certain aspects of his game, but he's not comparable to any of these guys. Should our next move be to add that true #1 tight end? I don't know that we can get one via trade in the next few weeks or not before the deadline, but we should be on the phone. I honestly believe it could mean the difference between us finishing 8 and 8 vs 10 and 6 and making the playoffs.
     
    ToddsPhins likes this.
  2. adamprez2003

    adamprez2003 Senior Member

    37,392
    14,745
    113
    Nov 27, 2007
    new york ciity
    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
     
    Paul 13 likes this.
  3. unluckyluciano

    unluckyluciano For My Hero JetsSuck

    53,333
    23,006
    0
    Dec 7, 2007
    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.
     
    SICK, Paul 13 and adamprez2003 like this.
  4. Bpk

    Bpk Premium Member Luxury Box

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

    So, important, I guess.
     
  5. HardKoreXXX

    HardKoreXXX Insensitive to the Touch

    20,459
    14,210
    113
    Apr 2, 2008
    Coral Springs, FL
    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.
     
  6. rafael

    rafael Well-Known Member

    27,364
    31,261
    113
    Apr 6, 2008
    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.
     
    jim1, gunn34, Bpk and 1 other person like this.
  7. padre31

    padre31 Premium Member Luxury Box

    99,377
    37,301
    0
    Nov 22, 2007
    inching to 100k posts
    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.
     
  8. rafael

    rafael Well-Known Member

    27,364
    31,261
    113
    Apr 6, 2008
    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.
     
  9. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    Then he'd just be a WR, no?

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

    Conuficus Premium Member Luxury Box

    18,044
    19,676
    113
    Dec 8, 2007
    Well away from here
    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?
     
    jim1, gunn34 and Bpk like this.
  11. rafael

    rafael Well-Known Member

    27,364
    31,261
    113
    Apr 6, 2008
    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.
     
    gunn34, Bpk and Paul 13 like this.
  12. rafael

    rafael Well-Known Member

    27,364
    31,261
    113
    Apr 6, 2008
    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.
     
    Bpk and Paul 13 like this.
  13. ToddsPhins

    ToddsPhins Banned

    29,125
    7,721
    0
    Mar 15, 2009
    So what you guys are saying is Henning is limited as an OC? :shifty: 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? :dunno:

    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)
     
    Paul 13 likes this.
  14. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    And I'm sure they aren't happy with the blocking from the TE, and will look to improve upon it.
     
    Bpk likes this.
  15. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    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.
     
    Bpk likes this.
  16. Finsanity

    Finsanity New Member

    718
    363
    0
    Apr 21, 2009
    City of Angels
    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.
     
  17. rafael

    rafael Well-Known Member

    27,364
    31,261
    113
    Apr 6, 2008
    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.
     
    gunn34, ToddsPhins and Paul 13 like this.
  18. Paul 13

    Paul 13 Chaotic Neutral & Unstable Genius Staff Member

    85,620
    51,681
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    Hasn't Sparano always said you build your system around your players, not your players around your system? I think it's up to the front office to realize we need an upgrade at the position. If we need a new OC to realize how players that we have should be used more effectively, then I also hope that decision is made.
     
  19. rafael

    rafael Well-Known Member

    27,364
    31,261
    113
    Apr 6, 2008
    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.
     
    Bpk and ToddsPhins like this.
  20. ToddsPhins

    ToddsPhins Banned

    29,125
    7,721
    0
    Mar 15, 2009
    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?
     
    HardKoreXXX, gunn34 and Bpk like this.
  21. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    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.
     
  22. Paul 13

    Paul 13 Chaotic Neutral & Unstable Genius Staff Member

    85,620
    51,681
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    Even Mike Martz has woken up to the tight end position... since he has that horse in the stable. I reckon Henning would be smart enough to adapt if the player was on the roster.
     
  23. Paul 13

    Paul 13 Chaotic Neutral & Unstable Genius Staff Member

    85,620
    51,681
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    I was agreeing with you until you said that. I think Henne is actually better throwing on the run than he is in the pocket. We should have called more designed rollouts for Henne in that Jets game... remember that final drive against the jets in last year's home game? Problem is his mobility is nonexistent, I know that seems contradictory. But he should be in shotgun, and that IMO is where his comfort level is (rather than under center). He's too slow getting back in his drops from center IMO.
     
  24. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    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.
     
  25. emocomputerjock

    emocomputerjock Senior Member

    5,649
    1,853
    113
    Nov 23, 2007
    DC
    That sounds more like a fix the OL problem than a need blocking TEs problem.
     
    gunn34 likes this.
  26. Conuficus

    Conuficus Premium Member Luxury Box

    18,044
    19,676
    113
    Dec 8, 2007
    Well away from here
    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?
     
  27. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008

    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.
     
  28. Paul 13

    Paul 13 Chaotic Neutral & Unstable Genius Staff Member

    85,620
    51,681
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    It's a revolving cycle... if the D is dictating to us what we should be doing with our tight ends and backs, that they should be blocking rather than receiving, then those players aren't threats to receive the ball anyway. Otherwise the D would be more concerned about what they do as a receiver and wouldn't be so quick to send the guy who is responsible for coverage ordinarily. The DC might just think twice about sending that guy. If you line up Fasano and Brown on third and 10 next to Henne in the shotgun, I'm blitzing the hell out of that. Because Fasano and Brown aren't going to slip out of the backfield and scare me as the tendency is for them to block and not be thrown the ball.

    Is the OL bad that they need these guys to max protect? Or are the backs and tightends not good enough receivers that they end up blocking?

    BTW, I think Ronnie is a great receiver if given the chance... it's already been proven by Cameron.
     
    gunn34 likes this.
  29. Paul 13

    Paul 13 Chaotic Neutral & Unstable Genius Staff Member

    85,620
    51,681
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    Are you saying the Packers don't have problems on the offensive line? I'm fairly certain many Packer fans would disagree with that.
     
  30. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    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.
     
  31. BicketyBam

    BicketyBam No Fist Pumps Allowed

    4,022
    1,879
    113
    Sep 6, 2010
    New Milford, CT
    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.
     
  32. Bpk

    Bpk Premium Member Luxury Box

    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.
     
    gunn34, ToddsPhins and Paul 13 like this.
  33. Paul 13

    Paul 13 Chaotic Neutral & Unstable Genius Staff Member

    85,620
    51,681
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    I remember when you guys drafted him... and then drafted that Brady guy the following year or so. :pointlol: :wink2:
     
  34. Paul 13

    Paul 13 Chaotic Neutral & Unstable Genius Staff Member

    85,620
    51,681
    113
    Dec 3, 2007
    yeah that's what I've been trying to say, with less words... :lol:
     
    gunn34 likes this.
  35. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    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.
     
  36. BicketyBam

    BicketyBam No Fist Pumps Allowed

    4,022
    1,879
    113
    Sep 6, 2010
    New Milford, CT
    Brady had the opposite problem. Great blocker - lousy receiver (by today's standards).
     
  37. ToddsPhins

    ToddsPhins Banned

    29,125
    7,721
    0
    Mar 15, 2009
    Didn't we see this example with Keller?
     
  38. ToddsPhins

    ToddsPhins Banned

    29,125
    7,721
    0
    Mar 15, 2009
    I watch how effectively GB utilizes their backs in the passing game and it just makes me :angry:
     
  39. Stringer Bell

    Stringer Bell Post Hard, Post Often Club Member

    44,356
    22,480
    113
    Mar 22, 2008
    Would you be :angry: if Henne took as many sacks as Rodgers?
     
  40. gunn34

    gunn34 I miss Don & Dan

    21,755
    3,475
    113
    Jan 5, 2008
    Oviedo FL
    I was so pissed when we passed on Hernandez. :angry:
     

Share This Page