Why we don't need a TE

[Truck_1_0_1_]

(09-16-2021, 05:09 AM)hollodero Wrote: That example alone imho kind of contradicts the premise. TB has three top WRs and still the TEs do a lot of damage.

If one faces an opponent wth an excellent secondary, but dubious linebackers - or is just committed to stop the passing attack with a bunch of nickel and dime formations that commit extra attention to the WRs - imho it sure would be nice to have a TE that can take full advantage of that. Even if said TE does not catch all that much in a more conventional game and/or reverts back to being the third or fourth option then.

I'm not for or against Fred's argument itself (I do feel we don't need TE help, currently), but looking at just the numbers, Gronkwoski is the ONLY exception in that data list, where everyone else falls in-line with the data presented.

And he's the only HOFer on that list (yeah, yeah, Kelce will be there too, we know, but he's not up to Gronkowski's level yet), so if 9/10 fit the argument and there's one outlier (who happens to be in the running for greatest TE ever), it absolutely does not hurt Fred's argument in the slightest.