+- Cincinnati Bengals Message Board / Forums - Home of Jungle Noise (https://thebengalsboard.com)
+-- Forum: Cincinnati Bengals / NFL (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-3.html)
+--- Forum: JUNGLE NOISE (https://thebengalsboard.com/forum-2.html)
+--- Thread: Why we don't need a TE (/thread-28401.html)
RE: Why we don't need a TE - fredtoast - 09-17-2021
(09-17-2021, 01:38 PM)Hammerstripes Wrote: 2. This offense is much different than the one we used to run with Andy. Targets won't be an issue.
It does not matter what scheme we run. I feel it will be impossible to find a TE that will be a better receiving threat than Boyd, Chase, or Higgins.
This discussion is getting a little convoluted because I started out just talking about how we don't need an upgrade over CJ this year. But this is the last year of his contract. So now we are starting to talk about next year. But I still think that with the talent we have a WR we don't need an elite pass catching TE. Even the best TEs are not as good as our WRs. CJ (or someone on his level) is fine for our offense.
Reiff, Ogunjobi, Bates, Tupou, and Spain are all free agents next year. I would much rather use our top draft picks on O-line or D-line to replace those losses than pick a TE who will just take targets away from our really good WRs or else be wastes as a #4 option.
RE: Why we don't need a TE - ochocincos - 09-17-2021
(09-16-2021, 08:39 AM)fredtoast Wrote: If TEs were really unstoppable "mismatches" for every defense then there would have been more than 3 that averaged at least 50 receiving yards a game last year.
It is not easy to find a All-Pro/Hall of Fame level TE like Gronk/Kelce/Kittle. And if you don't have one of those you don't have a receiving weapon as good as a WR. We already have Uzomah. If he was targeted more often then he would have receiving numbers equal to pretty much any TE other than the very elite. He doen't have low numbers because he can't get open. He has low numbers because he is usually the #4 option behind 3 VERY GOOD wide receivers. I just don't believe Bengal coaches are upset because they can't take more targets away from Higgins/Boyd/Chase in order to throw to a TE.
Kittle would have very likely been there had he not only played half a season last year.
He had 634 yards in just 8 games off 48 rec. Had he played a full season, it likely would have been his 3rd consecutive 1000+ yard season.
I think Kittle, Kelce, and Waller are 3 guys you can easily compare to a really good WR.
I liked Pitts enough to think he'll be in that category within a few years, but time will tell.
I think Hockenson and possibly Fant can also be in that category, but they aren't quite there yet.
Gronk arguably is still in the elite category too, although he now has more competition for targets between Godwin, Evans, and AB, plus he's older.
So is a good receiving TE "needed" in the Bengals offense? Arguably no given the talent of Boyd, Higgins, Chase, and Mixon.
But having a legit pass-catching threat at TE to go along with those guys would, theoretically, really boost this offense that much further.
RE: Why we don't need a TE - Tony - 09-17-2021
(09-16-2021, 08:39 AM)fredtoast Wrote: If TEs were really unstoppable "mismatches" for every defense then there would have been more than 3 that averaged at least 50 receiving yards a game last year.Those wrs are getting open because they gotta worry about that elite TE... Sorry this is all far fetched..
It is not easy to find a All-Pro/Hall of Fame level TE like Gronk/Kelce/Kittle. And if you don't have one of those you don't have a receiving weapon as good as a WR. We already have Uzomah. If he was targeted more often then he would have receiving numbers equal to pretty much any TE other than the very elite. He doen't have low numbers because he can't get open. He has low numbers because he is usually the #4 option behind 3 VERY GOOD wide receivers. I just don't believe Bengal coaches are upset because they can't take more targets away from Higgins/Boyd/Chase in order to throw to a TE.
RE: Why we don't need a TE - fredtoast - 09-17-2021
(09-17-2021, 03:58 PM)Tony Wrote: Those wrs are getting open because they gotta worry about that elite TE.
Go back and look at the OP. I posted stats that show an elite TE leads to LESS production from WRs not more.
RE: Why we don't need a TE - ochocincos - 09-17-2021
(09-17-2021, 04:46 PM)fredtoast Wrote: Go back and look at the OP. I posted stats that show an elite TE leads to LESS production from WRs not more.
It's true. Having a really good TE typically means more targets to that TE instead of so many to the WRs.
If the Bengals had a really good pass catching TE, it would mean Boyd, Chase, and/or Higgins could suffer.
But more weapons is always better for the team as a whole. It helps the offensive production overall and also helps cover injuries.
Very few teams have really good production from all their starting position players.
TB is one of the only ones.
RE: Why we don't need a TE - Bilbo Saggins - 09-17-2021
(09-17-2021, 10:08 AM)fredtoast Wrote:(09-17-2021, 10:08 AM)fredtoast Wrote: The cost of brining in an elite receiver to play TE might improve our passing game some, but it would not be enough to be worth the investment of a first round pick or huge free-agent contract.
I totally agree with that. As a fan though, you're always yearning for that improbable "third way" with stuff like this. It's not unbelievable to think that one of the best young TEs of the future could be drafted in later rounds. In fact when we look at draft position of some of today's top TEs:
Kittle - 5th round pick 146
Gronkowski - 2nd round pick 42
Waller - 6th round pick 204
Kelce - 3rd round pick 63
It doesn't seem like scouting TE prospects is as cut and dry as some positions.
RE: Why we don't need a TE - BengalChris - 09-17-2021
(09-16-2021, 12:39 AM)fredtoast Wrote: First of all TE's are not as good of receivers as WRs. Last year there were only 5 TEs with more than 700 receiving yards, but 48 wide receivers passed that mark. Only 1 TE in the league had 30 receptions and and averaged over 14.0 per catch. 26 WRs did it. So if you just want receiving production it is better to throw to a WR than a TE.
Teams still need a big TE who can help out with blocking and provide a 3rd or 4th receiving option when the WRs are covered. And I feel that Uzomah is fully qualified to do that. He is a very impressive combination of aize (6'4", 264) and speed (4.64 forty was second fastest TE at the '15 combine). He is not "nimble"; he can't run real tight routes like elite TEs. But he has good hands and is plenty a goo enough receiving threat to run down the seam or just catch a check down route when everyone else is covered.
But here is the big point that a lot of people miss. We currently have three top level WRs. Any team that has a TE in the top ten in receiving yards generally has a weak #2 WR and an invisible #3. Here are the top 10 TEs from last year by receiving yards and the number of receptions by the #2 and #3 WRs on their team
...................yds....team...#2 WR....#3 WR
Kelce...........1416.....KC.......45.........41
Waller..........1196....LV........56.........26
Hockenson.... 723....Det.......46.........20
Gesiki........... 703....Mia.......36.........28
Andrews....... 701....Bal........33.........19
Fant............. 673....Den.......51.........30
Thomas........ 670....Was......32.........27
Engram........ 645.....NYG.....50.........35
Kittle............ 634.....SF........49.........33
Gronkowski... 623....TB.........65........45
So if you start dreaming about a TE being a big part of our passing game realize that he will be taking targets away from our top 3 WRs. And if you want a TE good enough to match the production of Chase, Boyd, or Higgins You are probably going to need a high first round draft pick or a ton of free agent money. And even then I don't think he would make the offense any better or more productive. It would just be a zero net sum gain taking catches away from the WRs and giving them to the TE.
When I look at the positions where we need to get better I just don't see the justification of using large resources for a TE.
While I'm sure this took some time to look up, you didn't mention the biggest reason the Bengals have little use for a TE.
And that reason is that the coach hasn't a clue how to use a one. Geez, just think of who else we could have drafted or had on the roster if we just cut loose of these pesky useless TEs.
In real life there's plenty of use for a TE though. And in all honesty I was really expecting you to have one word as your reason and that word is Tate.
RE: Why we don't need a TE - ochocincos - 09-17-2021
(09-17-2021, 05:43 PM)Bilbo Saggins Wrote: I totally agree with that. As a fan though, you're always yearning for that improbable "third way" with stuff like this. It's not unbelievable to think that one of the best young TEs of the future could be drafted in later rounds. In fact when we look at draft position of some of today's top TEs:
Kittle - 5th round pick 146
Gronkowski - 2nd round pick 42
Waller - 6th round pick 204
Kelce - 3rd round pick 63
It doesn't seem like scouting TE prospects is as cut and dry as some positions.
With Kelce, it was concern with level of competition, IIRC.
Waller was drafted originally as a WR, not a TE.
Kittle had very little receiving production in college, having just 43 receptions. 22 for 309 yards his final season.
There were injury concerns with Gronk when he was drafted, not playing the entire year before he was drafted and having back surgery.
The "perfect" TE prospect (someone like Pitts) is someone who has multiple years of really good production, plays at an established Power 5 school, and displays elite measurables (preferably at the Combine).
RE: Why we don't need a TE - Bengalitis - 09-17-2021
All I know is that TE's win you games. Seen it so many times. Last week Gronk scored many times to give the Bucs a W. The squeelers & ravens have used their TE's to win more games than they should have with. If you used them well, the TE's are the X factors to your games. Eifert was becoming that X factor for us, scoring TDs, or getting those vital 3rd downs until he got injured and never was the same.
RE: Why we don't need a TE - fredtoast - 09-18-2021
(09-17-2021, 05:43 PM)Bilbo Saggins Wrote: I totally agree with that. As a fan though, you're always yearning for that improbable "third way" with stuff like this. It's not unbelievable to think that one of the best young TEs of the future could be drafted in later rounds. In fact when we look at draft position of some of today's top TEs:
Kittle - 5th round pick 146
Gronkowski - 2nd round pick 42
Waller - 6th round pick 204
Kelce - 3rd round pick 63
It doesn't seem like scouting TE prospects is as cut and dry as some positions.
If we do not re-sign Uzo then I have no problem with Taking a TE in the third round or later.
RE: Why we don't need a TE - J24 - 09-19-2021
A TE would be helpful to attack the seams in Cover 3 and attack the Middle of the field in two deep Safety looks.
RE: Why we don't need a TE - TheFan - 09-19-2021
(09-19-2021, 10:30 PM)J24 Wrote: A TE would be helpful to attack the seams in Cover 3 and attack the Middle of the field in two deep Safety looks.
That would require our coach to actually know how to attack a defense. What has lead anyone to believe he knows how? Our skill players are NOT the problem.