dave mcbride Posted February 24, 2005 Share Posted February 24, 2005 that's the rule of the pittsburgh system, and they've done their best when they've had guys like bruener in there. a key statement from mularkey this year was when he was asked about the relative lack of productivity of the TEs (before they were hurt). his response was that as a matter of fact, he thought it was one of the best-played positions on the team, and he was clearly referring to the improvement in TE blocking (especially with regard to Campbell, who really improved). There's a reason why guys like Kyle Brady are so admired despite not catching a ton of balls - they're sensational blockers. moreover, mularkey was this sort of TE in his playing days, and coached these types of tight ends for the steelers in the late 90s before becoming OC. the long and short: the bills are planning to operate a run-first, play-action, ball control offense, and my strong hunch is that they want a TE who can block well. i could be wrong, but i seriously doubt they want a guy like pollard, for whom blocking is an inconvenience (I'm sure they'd love Daniel Graham from NE -- a terrific blocker -- but he's not available). for this sort of offense, pass catching comes second, and blocking comes first. their offensive line isn't good enough to overcome weak blocking by the tight end. denver in the late 90s and dallas in the early 90s could overcome it because their o-lines were so dominant, but the bills' current o-line can't hold a candle to them. anthony becht seems like a pretty good blocker, and while he's not a top flight receiver, he could fit the bill. he's a free agent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted February 24, 2005 Author Share Posted February 24, 2005 i forgot to add that bubba franks is a terrific blocker - excellent at sealing off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duey Posted February 24, 2005 Share Posted February 24, 2005 Franks would be a great addition, though his price is going to be too steep. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted February 24, 2005 Author Share Posted February 24, 2005 Franks would be a great addition, though his price is going to be too steep. 251582[/snapback] i dunno - can the bills get by on 3-3.5 mil per year? if so, they've got the space and it's not outrageous for a key player. you're probably right, though - i can't see him on the bills in 05. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d_wag Posted February 24, 2005 Share Posted February 24, 2005 how do you explain jay r. in PIT? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted February 24, 2005 Author Share Posted February 24, 2005 how do you explain jay r. in PIT? 251589[/snapback] good question, and his signing by pitt was strange to me, almost as if had to do with cowher getting back at TD. i'm also not sure who else was on the market that year, and pitt had to do something because bruener was done (shoulder problems). from what i've heard, JR is out at pitt. in any case, the pattern at pitt was established with donohoe (eric green, bruener - both devastating blockers) and he's running the bills now. TD thought JR was a terrible TE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
d_wag Posted February 24, 2005 Share Posted February 24, 2005 good question, and his signing by pitt was strange to me, almost as if had to do with cowher getting back at TD. i'm also not sure who else was on the market that year, and pitt had to do something because bruener was done (shoulder problems). from what i've heard, JR is out at pitt. in any case, the pattern at pitt was established with donohoe (eric green, bruener - both devastating blockers) and he's running the bills now. TD thought JR was a terrible TE. 251602[/snapback] we'll see.......people change and adapt, which is what i think cowher was doing with the JR move and what TD was doing with the euhus move (a guy who is hardly known for his blocking).......i suspect we will get a "blocking" TE as well (if we do get one), but i don't think we will ignore the available "receiving" ones all together......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sfladave Posted February 24, 2005 Share Posted February 24, 2005 i dunno - can the bills get by on 3-3.5 mil per year? if so, they've got the space and it's not outrageous for a key player. you're probably right, though - i can't see him on the bills in 05. 251586[/snapback] Actually he was given a transition tag of $2.2 million, all the Bills have to do is make a better offer and if GB doesn't match he's ours. I read somewhere that GB probably won't match any offers. We'll see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted February 24, 2005 Share Posted February 24, 2005 the long and short: the bills are planning to operate a run-first, play-action, ball control offense, and my strong hunch is that they want a TE who can block well. i could be wrong, but i seriously doubt they want a guy like pollard, for whom blocking is an inconvenience (I'm sure they'd love Daniel Graham from NE -- a terrific blocker -- but he's not available). for this sort of offense, pass catching comes second, and blocking comes first. their offensive line isn't good enough to overcome weak blocking by the tight end. denver in the late 90s and dallas in the early 90s could overcome it because their o-lines were so dominant, but the bills' current o-line can't hold a candle to them. 251572[/snapback] Dave, I appreciate the assesment. Hate to seem like I am crusading, but I think the Bills will be interested in a guy like Pollard. He is a pretty solid blocker, blocks very well down field, and has improved in this area dramitcally over the years. I will admitt, he is not at his best blocking off the line of scrimmage, on runnig plays. This really never hurt Edgerrin James, and I suspect McGahee could deal with it. With a young QB, having a reliable receiving TE, particularly in the red-zone (where Pollard excells), could help the kid build his confidence, and help in minimizig those nasty end-zone interceptions.... While I agree that blocking is a priority, some of the things that Mularkey and TD and Bledsoe said at their last press conferences suggests to me that the team is looking to be more explosive on offense. Franks, IMO, may be a decent blocker, but is not really a very reliable reciever, and can be kind of lazy at times. I am not saying I wouldn't want him, but I wouldn't overpay for him. Guys like Bect are much easier to come by in free agency. We seem to be in an era where the receiving tight end is re-emerging in prominence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted February 24, 2005 Author Share Posted February 24, 2005 Actually he was given a transition tag of $2.2 million, all the Bills have to do is make a better offer and if GB doesn't match he's ours. I read somewhere that GB probably won't match any offers. We'll see. 251609[/snapback] that doesn't sound like too much to pay. anyone have any thoughts on anthony becht? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted February 24, 2005 Author Share Posted February 24, 2005 Dave, I appreciate the assesment. Hate to seem like I am crusading, but I think the Bills will be interested in a guy like Pollard. He is a pretty solid blocker, blocks very well down field, and has improved in this area dramitcally over the years. I will admitt, he is not at his best blocking off the line of scrimmage, on runnig plays. This really never hurt Edgerrin James, and I suspect McGahee could deal with it. With a young QB, having a reliable receiving TE, particularly in the red-zone (where Pollard excells), could help the kid build his confidence, and help in minimizig those nasty end-zone interceptions.... While I agree that blocking is a priority, some of the things that Mularkey and TD and Bledsoe said at their last press conferences suggests to me that the team is looking to be more explosive on offense. Franks, IMO, may be a decent blocker, but is not really a very reliable reciever, and can be kind of lazy at times. I am not saying I wouldn't want him, but I wouldn't overpay for him. Guys like Bect are much easier to come by in free agency. We seem to be in an era where the receiving tight end is re-emerging in prominence. 251615[/snapback] good points. i have to admit, my assessment of pollard is based on past years, not last year, in large part because it seems impossible to judge indy's role players last season. they were just too unstoppable and i felt like i was watching basketball games. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted February 24, 2005 Author Share Posted February 24, 2005 we'll see.......people change and adapt, which is what i think cowher was doing with the JR move and what TD was doing with the euhus move (a guy who is hardly known for his blocking).......i suspect we will get a "blocking" TE as well (if we do get one), but i don't think we will ignore the available "receiving" ones all together......... 251608[/snapback] i think you're right that the steelers were trying to change and adapt, but that lasted one season before they went back to the tried and true. i just checked - all three of their TEs totalled 16 receptions for the entire season!!!!! JR had 7 in 11 games. Yet they managed to go 15-1 .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted February 24, 2005 Share Posted February 24, 2005 Hate to seem like I am crusading, but I think the Bills will be interested in a guy like Pollard. 251615[/snapback] Wow! What a novel idea! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted February 24, 2005 Share Posted February 24, 2005 Whomever the Bills target at TE will likely have most to do with the health of the other two TEs and what they do best. Teams like the Bills, and offenses like Mularkey's, like to use all three TEs. There are a lot of two-TE formations, and every team likes to have one great TE blocker and either a red zone pass catching TE or at least one that can split the defense down the middle on pass plays. That is why I had little use for Neufeld last year. Euhus was going to be the pass catching TE, and Mark Campbell was solid at most everything, but not great at anything. You never need two players like that, which Neufeld was. Euhus is a receiving TE. If both he and Campbell are expected back at 100% by September, unless we can sign Franks, or even Pollard, we're much more likely to get a Brecht or a simple good to great blocking TE that fits certain packages as our #3.If they don't think that Euhus or Campbell are going to be back 100%, look for a guy to replace the duties of one of them. Actually, if we start bringing in a couple of pass catching TEs for physicals or at the draft, that is a clear sign that Euhus's rehab is not going well. This offense does not need two pass catching TEs unless one is a game breaker. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted February 24, 2005 Share Posted February 24, 2005 Wow! What a novel idea! 251662[/snapback] So help me god! Howard Dean is cyber-stalking me!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dave mcbride Posted February 24, 2005 Author Share Posted February 24, 2005 Whomever the Bills target at TE will likely have most to do with the health of the other two TEs and what they do best. Teams like the Bills, and offenses like Mularkey's, like to use all three TEs. There are a lot of two-TE formations, and every team likes to have one great TE blocker and either a red zone pass catching TE or at least one that can split the defense down the middle on pass plays. That is why I had little use for Neufeld last year. Euhus was going to be the pass catching TE, and Mark Campbell was solid at most everything, but not great at anything. You never need two players like that, which Neufeld was. Euhus is a receiving TE. If both he and Campbell are expected back at 100% by September, unless we can sign Franks, or even Pollard, we're much more likely to get a Brecht or a simple good to great blocking TE that fits certain packages as our #3.If they don't think that Euhus or Campbell are going to be back 100%, look for a guy to replace the duties of one of them. Actually, if we start bringing in a couple of pass catching TEs for physicals or at the draft, that is a clear sign that Euhus's rehab is not going well. This offense does not need two pass catching TEs unless one is a game breaker. 251667[/snapback] judging from what i know about acl's, i can't imagine either euhus or campbell will be 100% before november. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted February 24, 2005 Share Posted February 24, 2005 So help me god! Howard Dean is cyber-stalking me!!!!!!!!! 251673[/snapback] And I know who's a real talent at TE, too!! YEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuckincincy Posted February 24, 2005 Share Posted February 24, 2005 I think they will stick with what they have. Mularkey doesn't feature the TE pass game, and an untested and naive JP isn't likely to check off to a TE anyway. See Cincy's Carson Palmer - their TE catches dropped in half because Palmer was wet behind the ears. The Bills only have 6 draft picks, don't have a #1, and have OL and DB needs, so if they find out that Campbell/Euhus are damaged and unavailble for duty, they'll bottom-feed and pick up some low-cost old vet who has some line play savvy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LabattBlue Posted February 24, 2005 Share Posted February 24, 2005 anthony becht seems like a pretty good blocker, and while he's not a top flight receiver, he could fit the bill. he's a free agent. 251572[/snapback] Out of the F/A TE's or ones who may end as cap casulties, I'd like to know which ones are regarded as strong blockers(other than Becht)? I agree with the others who believe that in the offense we are going to run, we need a TE who is a good blocker, not one who is a sh------- blocker, but who can "stretch the field". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Buftex Posted February 24, 2005 Share Posted February 24, 2005 I think they will stick with what they have. Mularkey doesn't feature the TE pass game, and an untested and naive JP isn't likely to check off to a TE anyway. See Cincy's Carson Palmer - their TE catches dropped in half because Palmer was wet behind the ears. The Bills only have 6 draft picks, don't have a #1, and have OL and DB needs, so if they find out that Campbell/Euhus are damaged and unavailble for duty, they'll bottom-feed and pick up some low-cost old vet who has some line play savvy. 251710[/snapback] Interesting perspective. It just seems that since TD has taken the reigns in Buffalo, we have been in perpetual search for a TE! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts