tennesseeboy Posted February 14, 2006 Share Posted February 14, 2006 Pete Metzlaars, Ernie Warlick, Seymour, Costa, Remiersma? I'll go with Ernie Warlick, who was on a line that led Sports Illustrated to conclude that Jack Kemp was the most protected quarterback in the history of football, and in the championship game against San Diego based on a beat up offensive line, Warlick starred as a receiver in a two tight end offense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted February 14, 2006 Share Posted February 14, 2006 friggin Lonnie is number 1 in my book. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoachChuckDickerson Posted February 14, 2006 Share Posted February 14, 2006 friggin Lonnie is number 1 in my book. 602689[/snapback] Lonnie gettin smoked by the punt returner.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Like A Mofo Posted February 14, 2006 Share Posted February 14, 2006 Butch Rolle??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HopsGuy Posted February 14, 2006 Share Posted February 14, 2006 Pete Metzlaars, Ernie Warlick, Seymour, Costa, Remiersma? I'll go with Ernie Warlick, who was on a line that led Sports Illustrated to conclude that Jack Kemp was the most protected quarterback in the history of football, and in the championship game against San Diego based on a beat up offensive line, Warlick starred as a receiver in a two tight end offense. 602685[/snapback] I'll go with Metzelaars (68 in '93?). The guy was a great blocker and he lead the team in receptions one year. He wan't really flashy, but if it was 3rd and 7, he'd run 8 yards, curl, catch the ball and fall to the ground. First down. Can't ask for much more than that, right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OnTheRocks Posted February 14, 2006 Share Posted February 14, 2006 I'll go with Metzelaars (68 in '93?). The guy was a great blocker and he lead the team in receptions one year. He wan't really flashy, but if it was 3rd and 7, he'd run 8 yards, curl, catch the ball and fall to the ground. First down. Can't ask for much more than that, right? 602706[/snapback] Metzelaars is a clear winner. No one else even comes close. 10 years with the bills averageing 30 recpts. per season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beerball Posted February 14, 2006 Share Posted February 14, 2006 I'll go with Metzelaars (68 in '93?). The guy was a great blocker and he lead the team in receptions one year. He wan't really flashy, but if it was 3rd and 7, he'd run 8 yards, curl, catch the ball and fall to the ground. First down. Can't ask for much more than that, right? 602706[/snapback] Very much a key piece of those teams, clutch player. He would get my vote. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lofton80 Posted February 14, 2006 Share Posted February 14, 2006 Mark Bramer? Rod Trafford? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plenzmd1 Posted February 14, 2006 Share Posted February 14, 2006 Mark Bramer? Rod Trafford? 602725[/snapback] Bramer had some awesome TE screens back in da day. Paul Seymor anyone? I mean he did get us Frank Lewis, gotta be worth something no? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tennesseeboy Posted February 14, 2006 Author Share Posted February 14, 2006 Bramer had some awesome TE screens back in da day. Paul Seymor anyone? I mean he did get us Frank Lewis, gotta be worth something no? 602746[/snapback] Receiving | +----------+-----+-------------------------+ | Year TM | G | Rec Yards Y/R TD | +----------+-----+-------------------------+ | 1973 buf | 14 | 10 114 11.4 0 | | 1974 buf | 14 | 15 246 16.4 2 | | 1975 buf | 14 | 19 268 14.1 1 | | 1976 buf | 13 | 16 169 10.6 0 | | 1977 buf | 14 | 2 21 10.5 0 | +----------+-----+-------------------------+ | TOTAL | 69 | 62 818 13.2 3 | +----------+-----+-------------------------+ Paul Seymour...remember he did some blocking for OJ as well. Paul Costa was a pretty good tight end as well in the late sixties. The problem with evaluation of TE's is to factor in their effectiveness as blockers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ACor58 Posted February 14, 2006 Share Posted February 14, 2006 Bramer had some awesome TE screens back in da day. Paul Seymor anyone? I mean he did get us Frank Lewis, gotta be worth something no? 602746[/snapback] Keith McKellar was solid in 89, 90, and 91. Then he started to suck. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
plenzmd1 Posted February 14, 2006 Share Posted February 14, 2006 Receiving |+----------+-----+-------------------------+ | Year TM | G | Rec Yards Y/R TD | +----------+-----+-------------------------+ | 1973 buf | 14 | 10 114 11.4 0 | | 1974 buf | 14 | 15 246 16.4 2 | | 1975 buf | 14 | 19 268 14.1 1 | | 1976 buf | 13 | 16 169 10.6 0 | | 1977 buf | 14 | 2 21 10.5 0 | +----------+-----+-------------------------+ | TOTAL | 69 | 62 818 13.2 3 | +----------+-----+-------------------------+ Paul Seymour...remember he did some blocking for OJ as well. Paul Costa was a pretty good tight end as well in the late sixties. The problem with evaluation of TE's is to factor in their effectiveness as blockers. 602759[/snapback] But like a said, totally useless seymour, bum knee i think, got us Frank Lewis. Remember, for some reason the trade was not dependant on a physical of both players, and Seymour never played a down for the Stealers. One of the all time great trades in Bills history Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chalkie Gerzowski Posted February 14, 2006 Share Posted February 14, 2006 Tony Cline Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tennesseeboy Posted February 14, 2006 Author Share Posted February 14, 2006 Keith McKellar was solid in 89, 90, and 91. Then he started to suck. 602762[/snapback] Forgot about McKellar. Thought he was pretty darn good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CoachChuckDickerson Posted February 14, 2006 Share Posted February 14, 2006 Butch Rolle??? 602697[/snapback] 15 career receptions as a Bill, 10 TDs. That dude was money on the goal line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
34-78-83 Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 I always thought Reuben Gant was decent. Boy we have been lacking overall in the TE dept. over the years... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Jokeman Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 What no love for Tony Hunter? Seriously, I'd vote for Metzelaars as think he was the most complete TE we've ever had. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BackInDaDay Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 Receiving |+----------+-----+-------------------------+ | Year TM | G | Rec Yards Y/R TD | +----------+-----+-------------------------+ | 1973 buf | 14 | 10 114 11.4 0 | | 1974 buf | 14 | 15 246 16.4 2 | | 1975 buf | 14 | 19 268 14.1 1 | | 1976 buf | 13 | 16 169 10.6 0 | | 1977 buf | 14 | 2 21 10.5 0 | +----------+-----+-------------------------+ | TOTAL | 69 | 62 818 13.2 3 | +----------+-----+-------------------------+ Paul Seymour...remember he did some blocking for OJ as well. Paul Costa was a pretty good tight end as well in the late sixties. The problem with evaluation of TE's is to factor in their effectiveness as blockers. 602759[/snapback] Campbell reminds me of Costa. Pretty good blocker, and a better receiving TE than he gets a chance to show. I liked Seymor and McKellers, but Metz might've been the best all-round TE we've had. I gotta take a pass on Warlick - I was too young to have an opinion on him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadBuffaloDisease Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 Keith McKellar was solid in 89, 90, and 91. Then he started to suck. McKellar was on his way to being a great one, and then injuries took their toll. The K-gun wasn't the same without him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JÂy RÛßeÒ Posted February 15, 2006 Share Posted February 15, 2006 Paul Seymour was basically a 3rd tackle - one reason the Electric Company was so dominant and OJ got the 2003. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts