The Bengals/Brat TE Myth

[Tasher]

any of you folks ever heard of the TE screen?

Standard play in the playbook. Course you gotta have a TE that you wnat to take advantage of with the TE screen. We throw the better known screen to the RBs, effectively the same play in generally the same game situations.

But really, who do you want to have the ball in that situation? Chris Perry or the TE? No TE is going to show the elusiveness, speed and quickness of CP, I don't care if it is M. Lewis, Pope or Davis.

And, oh by the way, Chris can stretch the field with his speed and ability, just look at the Indy game where he caught the ball down the sideline with the circus catch. CP can do more an is a threat all over the field, running the ball, catching the ball lining up from just about any position, that is a multi-faceted, multi-dimensional threat!

Now I'm not saying that we do not need a TE, nor am i saying that a TE of the caliber of a Gonzalez, Gates, Pope, Davis or Lewis would not be nice, but the reality is that we are not going to draft a TE in the first couple of rounds (I can see it happening in the 3rd) and one of those guys will not be sitting around in the 3rd.

That is all.

[andybren]

Just one extra point....

The concept that more TE passes means fewer WR or RB passes isn't true if the TE pass extends the drive and leads to more plays.

I'm not saying that would happen, but just that there doesn't need to be a finite number of offensive plays. Except where constricted by the game clock.

[Stripes]

Just one extra point....

The concept that more TE passes means fewer WR or RB passes isn't true if the TE pass extends the drive and leads to more plays.

I'm not saying that would happen, but just that there doesn't need to be a finite number of offensive plays. Except where constricted by the game clock.

Same point I tried to make. Give us a good pass catching tight end, he extends drives, everyone still gets touches, and Kyle Larson never needs to take the field.

[andybren]

Same point I tried to make. Give us a good pass catching tight end, he extends drives, everyone still gets touches, and Kyle Larson never needs to take the field.

You did make that point. My bad.

But I don't know that our offensive drives ever stalled for lack of offensive options. Or at least in any way that could be corrected by bringing in a big-time tight end.

I'd still like to see those resources go to the other side of the ball.

[Stripes]

You did make that point. My bad.

No worries, ain't nothing wrong with agreeing with TDB.

But I don't know that our offensive drives ever stalled for lack of offensive options. Or at least in any way that could be corrected by bringing in a big-time tight end.

I'd still like to see those resources go to the other side of the ball.

I do agree, I'm not one that wants to spend a first round or even first day pick on offense in any fashion. Still, if the circumstances end up putting the Bengals in that position, I won't be overly disappointed.

[andybren]

I do agree, I'm not one that wants to spend a first round or even first day pick on offense in any fashion. Still, if the circumstances end up putting the Bengals in that position, I won't be overly disappointed.

Agreed again.

And if that TE is more versatile than the present stable, then it contributes to Carson's no-huddle, no-substitution offense. Wouldn't be such a bad thing.

[schweinhart]

Just one extra point....

The concept that more TE passes means fewer WR or RB passes isn't true if the TE pass extends the drive and leads to more plays.

I'm not saying that would happen, but just that there doesn't need to be a finite number of offensive plays. Except where constricted by the game clock.

That's true enough -- and the best example that comes to mind was the use of Matt Scobel when the Bengals beat the Fins on the ESPN night game in 2004. They used Schobel on the game-winning drive in that game in front of the CB in quarters until the CB finally came up and left a safety deep to try to deal with Chad. The result was a deep out that led to the game-winning FG.

But beyond the specifics, in a general sense the TE playcalling for the Bengals does get dicatated by the use of 3 Wr sets, Perry as a pass receiver, and the limited abilities of the TE themselves to be complete TEs who can stay on the field without a defense pretty much being able to recognize what to expect.

[schweinhart]

But really, who do you want to have the ball in that situation? Chris Perry or the TE? No TE is going to show the elusiveness, speed and quickness of CP, I don't care if it is M. Lewis, Pope or Davis.

And, oh by the way, Chris can stretch the field with his speed and ability, just look at the Indy game where he caught the ball down the sideline with the circus catch. CP can do more an is a threat all over the field, running the ball, catching the ball lining up from just about any position, that is a multi-faceted, multi-dimensional threat!

Now I'm not saying that we do not need a TE, nor am i saying that a TE of the caliber of a Gonzalez, Gates, Pope, Davis or Lewis would not be nice, but the reality is that we are not going to draft a TE in the first couple of rounds (I can see it happening in the 3rd) and one of those guys will not be sitting around in the 3rd.

That is all.

At 6.4 yards per catch in 51 tries, I 'd rather have a TE who can run after the catch, hit the seam, and move the chains underneath and an outs. The math should be fairly simple.

And, oh by the way, Chris SUPERSTAR Perry mainly only stretches the field with his amazing speed and elusiveness when the field is already stretched, just look at the Indy game where the success he had was the result of the Bengals being down by bunch and the Colts mainly in prevent.

Perry is nowhere close to being a threat all over the field, especially vs. 3-4 defenses and the flow that he proved over and over and over again all season long that he couldn't beat. Add to that the fact that he can't run between the tackles well enough yet and still struggles in blitz pick up of LBs and you pretty much got a highly specialized contributor on offense who is pretty much one-dimensional in the plan to create a mismatch with an LB in a 4-3 base receiving out of the backfield.

But Perry still is a threat who can situationally contribute in hurry up offense, catch up ball when down by a couple scores in the 2nd half, limited change of pace back that will at least force other teams to gameplan for him, and as a 3rd and long receiving back.