Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

Will we scale back to 3 TE's this year?


panther4life

Recommended Posts

We have at least opened the season, if not carried 4 TE's throughout the year, every year since Rivera got here.

2011: Olsen, Shockey, Brockel, Hartstock

2012: Olsen, Barnidge, Brockel, Harstock

2013. Olsen,Brockel, Harstock, Brandon Williams

2014. Olsen,Dickson, Brockel, Williams

2015. Olsen, Dickson, Brockel, Williams.

2 of the 4 that have been on the roster the past 3 years (Brockel and Williams) are already gone and Dickson has pretty much assumed the role previously filled by Shockey/Barnidge. 

I could be wrong, but I don't believe we have ever had more than 3 active on game day. I don't personally have a preference as to where we add the extra spot if we do scale down but I just feel like that 4th spot could be better allocated else where.

 

For further reference here's what we have averaged since Gman (2013) arrived at all spots.

QB - 3 (In 13 it was only 2 and we used extra spot for DB's)

HB/FB - 4 (4 in 13,14, 5 last year)

WR - 5

TE - 4 

OL - 10 (10 in 13 and 14. 9 last year)

D-lineman - 9 (5 DE's,4DT'S in 13,14, and 5 DT's, 4 DE's last year)

LB - 6

DB's - 9 (In 2013 we kept 10 here and only had 2 QB's)

Specialist - 3

So in previous years, when we went lighter at 1 position we allocated the extra spot to

DB's once (2013)

RB/FB once (2015)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

B-Will got axed pretty early in favor of Bersin last year too.

I could see us having four dedicated TEs this year. 

Has anyone ever paid attention on whether or not Simonson, Sandland  and Mucas play on ST, and how they actually looked doing it.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I keep coming up with 54 when I try to narrow things down. Some sources have us keeping 5 DTs or Safeties but I can hardly see the numbers working with only 4 of each. I keep coming back to the offense.

3rd QB
5th RB
6th WR
4th TE

One probably has to go, Webb is likely safe and latest reports have Wegher hanging on. Last year they initially went the 5WR/4TE route, but it didn't take long to switch to 6WR/3TE.

Sent from my SM-N920V using CarolinaHuddle mobile app


Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, O-Ther said:

Brockel was considered more of a FB than TE hybrid. I remember him lining up in the backfield and very rarely on the line of scrimmage. His number, 47, is added evidence of this. The 40's are for FBs, RBs, and LBs

That's a good point. So since we don't have a player with his skill set this year maybe we truly will get down to 3 players listed as  TE's this year.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • I enjoy being truthful. Although that means being unbiased. Which most on here are incapable of being unbiased. 
    • It looks like the Bucks and Giannis are headed for a divorce. He says he's ready to play and the Bucks say that he has told them he isn't. It really doesn't matter except that it likely means the end for Giannis in Milwaukee. He's 31 years old, but still an elite producer.  So, as GM, would you go after him this offseason? Remember, the Hornets have two 1st round picks this year and potentially THREE first round picks next year. What would a trade look like?
    • I agree with you, if all things are equal--assuming we are on the same page as to what that means.  If a DT and OT are there at 19 and you have them equal, which do you take? The DT would be rotational and get 25 snaps a game or so, and the OT is probably a reserve for most of the season.  What if Walker plays out of his mind and Ickey comes back strong? To me, there are just too many variables at T and Morgan met the needs for 2 starters.  Nothing about that screams lets "go OT in round 1" to me. I could see an Edge or a DT at 19 before I see OT.  I could see a TE or S before an OT--and I (personally) would rather have an OT over DT, Edge, TE, or S--but I do not see the logic.  In fact, CB is a position that resembles OT--who do we have behind our starters and are we happy with Smith-Wade?  A CB would be on the field more than a reserve OT.  How is the Walker at LT situation different than the the Bryce situation? He is basically on a 1-year deal and if he is injured, Forsythe becomes Pickett.  Would you take Simpson in the draft?  Dont get me wrong--I usually agree with you  and I get your point.  I am an OL guru--but I just do not see this particular group of Tackles making us better than Walker.  In addition, I think we can address OT once the Ickey situation clears up.  Short arms, poor run blocking, issues with strength--I am simply not impressed with the OTs.  For clarity, "developmental" refers to players who are still a year or two away from starting.  We are all developmental, but there are prospects who need a season to transition to the pro game. I see 1--maybe 2 OTs who could step into a starting role right now. In college, for example, taking snaps under center requires a different approach than blocking for the shotgun.  There is less to learn if you play a position that does not require much adjustment to transition to the NFL.
×
×
  • Create New...