Simple Question What's Your Answer and Reason

[Essex Johnson]

(03-21-2021, 01:31 AM)CardCounterChris Wrote: TE is hugely underrated.  Let's look at the TE's on previous superbowl teams:

55: KC (Kelce) vs TB (Brate/Gronk)
54: SF (Kittle) vs KC (Kelce)
53: NE (Gronk) vs LAR (Higbee)
52:NE (Gronk) vs Phi (Ertz)
51: NE (Gronk) vs Falcons (Toilolo)*
50: CAR (Olsen) vs DEN (Owens/Virgil)*

That's a lot of Kelce and Gronk.  Then you have names such as Ertz/Kettle/Olsen.  Higbee had a good season the year they went to the Super Bowl.  Only the two teams marked with * weren't very productive.  Can you make a solid team without a TE? Sure.  Its not as important as say a QB, but in today's NFL, TE is at a premium.  I think a lot of us who remember 90s football tend to undervalue the position.  TE's are weapons today, they aren't vestigial FBs.  Pitts is 100% not a commitment to losing!  To be honest, we should stop referring to them as TE and as a Y.

The Bengals problem isn't talent at the Receiver position. Its the type of players they pick up.  Cincy love's their X's.  They love big guys like Higgins, Green, and Tate.   Boyd can flirt between X and Z, but Cincy really needs a solid Y and a slot guy.  Chase would be a good fit for this. He can create separation as a Z or in the slot.  (Honestly I'm glad we didn't end up with Golladay.  We don't need another big WR).

TLDR: Chase can contribute immediately based off skill set, TE is absolutely not a wasted top 10 pick in today's NFL.

from your scenario  i guess QBs are very underrated since you have Brady and Mahomes in 1/2 those games... lol... it is a small sample but you do know if Uzomah averaged for the year what he did first two games, he would have ended up top 5 TE in the league but still with only around 700 yards... no way am i taking my #5 with a Tight End