billsfan1959 Posted September 3, 2013 Posted September 3, 2013 Not exactly true. Metz got 609 yards in '93. McKeller had a couple mid-400 yard receiving seasons in '90 and '91. The next best was Riemersma with 590 in 2001 but that wasn't with Kelly. That is in fact correct. I only went back to 2000, but the Bills haven't had a good TE game in like forever. They have surpassed 600 yards only twice since 1990: 1993: 665 yards 1999: 654 yards Yep - a couple of decent years. Either we have never had a TE capable of that upper echelon play, or a philosophy in which we feature our TE position as an integral part of our offense.
BillsFan3434 Posted September 3, 2013 Posted September 3, 2013 I was honestly hoping, and I've never actually posted this, that we would have picked Tyler Eiffert at 16 and E.J. manuel (or whoever they had on their board) as the 1st pick in the 2nd round. Then possibly Woods or Kiko with the next pick, probably Kiko since Woods would have probably been gone. I know hindsight is always 20/20 and perfect scenarios and the draft is over blah blah blah but RIGHT when Buffalo picked EJ Manuel at 16 I loved the pick but wish they would have went about it differently. Such as the way I proposed.
Doc Posted September 3, 2013 Posted September 3, 2013 oh, cool!!! On paper he is a stud. I'm optimistic on the guy, but I was thinking Donald Jones could be a legit #2 and David Nelson the twin to Victor Cruz. Gragg is too big to be covered by a CB and most safeties and too fast to be covered by most safeties and LB's. You could line him up anywhere a la Hernandez, and that's what I'd love to see Hackett do.
BillsVet Posted September 3, 2013 Posted September 3, 2013 Hard to take tight ends when you are rebuilding every 3-4 years with runnin' backs and CB's. OP is correct and quibbling about it is pointless. Having a good offense means having a good or better receiving TE.
Sisyphean Bills Posted September 4, 2013 Posted September 4, 2013 Since this has gone on for so long, it appears that the organization as a whole just doesn't place any value on the position. Which is kind of odd, in a way. According to Sports Illustrated, the average TE is paid less than a kicker. They are the definition of a bargain weapon.
l< j Posted September 4, 2013 Posted September 4, 2013 I have tried to find the source and can't, but I remover reading this summer that the Sith Lord sat down with his coaches and determined that safety play was generally the weak link in NFL defenses and that the way to take advantage of that was with strong tight ends. And this is where the decision to go with two pass catching tight ends came from. So by neglecting the TE the Bills may be neglecting a league wide weakness that they could be exploiting.
Best Player Available Posted September 4, 2013 Posted September 4, 2013 Does Ernie "big Hoss" Warlick have any grandkids? Now he was a TE.
artmalibu Posted September 4, 2013 Posted September 4, 2013 The OP brings up some valid points, with some supporting stats. But lets factor in a few other problems that the bills have encountered over the past few years that contributed. 1. Chan didnt seem to run his Offense around TEs . He played multi WR sets 2. How many of the years did the O line stink? and the TE have to support in blocking 3. How many of the years did the D stink and not be able to get off the field? not giving the TEs a chance to get onto the field to get stats.
Gray Beard Posted September 4, 2013 Posted September 4, 2013 The OP brings up some valid points, with some supporting stats. But lets factor in a few other problems that the bills have encountered over the past few years that contributed. 1. Chan didnt seem to run his Offense around TEs . He played multi WR sets 2. How many of the years did the O line stink? and the TE have to support in blocking 3. How many of the years did the D stink and not be able to get off the field? not giving the TEs a chance to get onto the field to get stats. I agree with your quick summary completely. I never understood why Chan/Fitz didn't use the TE more, at least as a check down if nothing else. Now if somebody wants to discuss the rise of the fullback in the past few years (another position Chan didn't use)...
artmalibu Posted September 4, 2013 Posted September 4, 2013 I agree with your quick summary completely. I never understood why Chan/Fitz didn't use the TE more, at least as a check down if nothing else. Now if somebody wants to discuss the rise of the fullback in the past few years (another position Chan didn't use)... Chan liked to spread the Offense out so the defense could not load the box. That is why Spiller could rip off so many long runs. And think about what Chan had to work with a QB that leaves and doesn't even challenge for a starting spot, and 3 WR who wont be in football this year. Chad actually did alright with what he had to work with.
inkman Posted September 4, 2013 Posted September 4, 2013 Gragg is too big to be covered by a CB and most safeties and too fast to be covered by most safeties and LB's. You could line him up anywhere a la Hernandez, and that's what I'd love to see Hackett do. Sounds good but his ability to play football is still in question.
Doc Posted September 4, 2013 Posted September 4, 2013 Sounds good but his ability to play football is still in question. If anything, it's his blocking that may prevent him from seeing the field.
dave mcbride Posted September 4, 2013 Author Posted September 4, 2013 Did you look at the use of TE in the context of the offense as a whole? In other words, was TE production merely reflective of offensive production in general? Or were the WR on those teams equally, highly productive, reflecting the fact that those teams had efficient, productive passing offenses in general? Good offenses almost always have good TE play these days. I looked at team stats over a number of years. There is one outlier, however: Mike Martz's offenses. He's all about big armed QBs and WRs who run deep ins. Going back to the Rams of 1999 and onward, they never relied on TEs. Of course, his QBs take a real pounding. Most every other good offense has relied on strong TE play, however. as for the Bills, for a dozen years, the offense has been very subpar, especially on third down. At least half a decade ago, the league became very TE-centric, but the Bills didn't buy in. I have a ton of respect for Gailey as an offensive coach, and he did get production out of a castoff (Chandler). However, neither he nor Nix prioritized the position, unlike the well run NFL front offices.
Prickly Pete Posted September 4, 2013 Posted September 4, 2013 Good offenses have good QB's that can get the ball to all the WR's and open up the field for a TE. I think it has been way more of a problem at QB than at TE. When you don't have a good QB, AND you have the kind of defenses that the Bills have had, you slide TE down in priority come draft day. A more talented TE wouldn't have saved any of the past Bills teams from sucking.
Helpmenow Posted September 4, 2013 Posted September 4, 2013 Let me know when we have a QB, then you can talk TE. . Charlie sanders ever heard of him? Greg Landry was his qb!
dave mcbride Posted September 4, 2013 Author Posted September 4, 2013 Good offenses have good QB's that can get the ball to all the WR's and open up the field for a TE. I think it has been way more of a problem at QB than at TE. When you don't have a good QB, AND you have the kind of defenses that the Bills have had, you slide TE down in priority come draft day. A more talented TE wouldn't have saved any of the past Bills teams from sucking. I suggest looking at the stats over the past few years team by team on pro-football-reference.com . You'll see that the quality of the QB when it comes to TE productivity is a pretty marginal issue, and if anything that good TEs measurably improve the performances of mediocre QBs. They are big targets who run short to medium patterns, and the good ones get open consistently.
Doc Posted September 4, 2013 Posted September 4, 2013 Good offenses have good QB's that can get the ball to all the WR's and open up the field for a TE. I think it has been way more of a problem at QB than at TE. When you don't have a good QB, AND you have the kind of defenses that the Bills have had, you slide TE down in priority come draft day. A more talented TE wouldn't have saved any of the past Bills teams from sucking. Yep. Fitz' lack of arm strength wasn't a threat vertically to defenses and a better TE catching short passes from Fitz wouldn't have made a bit of difference.
dave mcbride Posted September 4, 2013 Author Posted September 4, 2013 God knows the Bills needed better QBs over the years, but can people really believe that the lack of a quality TE in a now TE-centric league is irrelevant? Geez.
Doc Posted September 4, 2013 Posted September 4, 2013 God knows the Bills needed better QBs over the years, but can people really believe that the lack of a quality TE in a now TE-centric league is irrelevant? Geez. That's not what we're saying, dm. A good TE is good to have and hopefully Chandler and/or Gragg breaks out or they draft one next year. However the QB is more important to the success of an offense.
Helpmenow Posted September 4, 2013 Posted September 4, 2013 Chris cooley and jason campbell 2008. Tommy kramer and steve jordan. All had big years with average QB's
Recommended Posts