Bengals: Roster analysis: Tight ends

Wednesday, January 23, 2008

Roster analysis: Tight ends

Third in a series

Today: Tight ends

Starter: Reggie Kelly

Backups: Daniel Coats, Nate Lawrie, Brad St. Louis (long-snapper)

The annual anguish of many Bengals fans is the lack of a top receiving tight end. Bengals coach Marvin Lewis and offensive coordinator Bob Bratkowski want a top-blocking tight end, and they have that person in Kelly. Kelly also is one of the best teammates in the locker room. Still, like the offensive line, Kelly's work in the run game will need work in 2008.

Still, he is little threat in the pass game as a receiver -- but watch him block in the no-huddle or shotgun formations -- and he had a 10.6-yard average on 20 receptions.

Coats, a rookie free agent from Brigham Young, had 12 receptions and shows some savvy as a receiver. Lawrie is a smart, team-oriented player who contributed on special teams. The Bengals could really shake up their offense by adding a complete tight end who gets the ball more than one time a game.

Question: Would you spend a third- or fourth-round draft pick to acquire a tight end that might be a little lacking as a blocker but who could give Carson Palmer an option in the middle of the field as a solid receiver?

26 Comments:

at 1/23/2008 9:09 AM

Anonymous said...

Well heck yeah we should take a TE in the mid rounds.

But with that said, I still am not sure that the position is considered an important one by the OC, therefore--- what difference would it make.

Here's an idea, lets fire Bratkowski (his offense is stale and other team have determined the predictability of play calling), promote Zampese to OC and then draft a TE.

at 1/23/2008 9:35 AM

Anonymous said...

I would take a Tight End in the SECOND round, after basically making sure I have: Cedric Ellis drafted on 1st round, a new LB from free agency, I've re-signed Landon Johnson, I've a free agent for DE and odell and Amhad are back.

at 1/23/2008 9:54 AM

Anonymous said...

please draft a TE and take some pressure off of palmer!

at 1/23/2008 10:17 AM

Pete Metz said...

No, no and no again. What is with people's obsession with TEs? In this offense they are not an integral part. Just because other teams use them does not mean that we need to jump on the bandwagon.

I want Reggie Kelly out there as much as possible. He's a leader on and off the field and he's like having an extra tackle.

Why not let a guy like Coats, who even has Reggie's ringing endorsement, develop some and then have a look at what we've got at TE.

Also, Mark, why aren't you including the players that were on the practice squad like Tim Day or Cooper Wallace? Day is a great pass catcher but is lacking when it comes to blocking...just like the supposed middle round TE you think we should take. Why waste the pick when we could use it elsewhere?

at 1/23/2008 10:48 AM

Anonymous said...

what round was Dan Ross taken? I think that is his name - the TE we had with Holman. Those years, they played a huge role in the Bengals offense.

I guess I could look it up myself - too much work. Anyone remember?

at 1/23/2008 11:52 AM

Anonymous said...

Jacob. Tamme.

at 1/23/2008 12:22 PM

Anonymous said...

The answer to the question is a resounding YES. But, I don't think the round you draft a TE is important. The fact that you DO draft an 'impact' TE, whether in round 1 or 7, is the issue. The fact the Bengals want a TE that only stays in and blocks boggles me. It's like saying a RB should only run the ball, not catch passes out of the backfield. Why force a player to be one-dimensional? Think of the impact of a Witten, Cooley, or Gates on this offense. You would think they can remember the impact Chris Perry had on the offense, where his ball catching skills over-shodowed his running ability. He mixed it up just enough to keep defenses guessing. Why move away from that philosophy?

at 1/23/2008 1:05 PM

Anonymous said...

Aquiring a TE in the Mid rounds would be a fantastic idea. TE are still good in the 3rd-4th round. Defense is priority #1. Even if we do sign a big name defensive free agent (which i strongly encorage no matter how un-bengal like that is) i still say we should draft defense 1st-2nd rounds. Even though we are predictable, keep in mind we still maintained a number 10 offense thanks to our passing game. people also dont realize how special of a player R. Kelly really is because of his blocking -when rushing and passing- and his flexability with the hurry-up offense. i personally think that 1st and 2nd are for defense. and prefferably o-line after that. if there are still real good TE's in the 3rd round then that is a fantastic idea. Who Dey!!!

at 1/23/2008 1:11 PM

Anonymous said...

anonymous,
you like they other morons, dont realize Brat is not the problem. A 10th ranked offense does not warrant a firing. When your starting running back goes down most of the year,with your first and second rounder out for the season, along with your 4 string running back starting most of the games, what do you expect? Not to mention your pro bowl tackle was gone as well. How do you put up offensive numbers if your defense is always on the field? Marvin does not agree with your opinion, nor do I. Brat is one of the main reasons we are competitive and went to the playoffs. Fans like you, are never happy unless we score a touchdown every play.

at 1/23/2008 1:12 PM

Anonymous said...

Why draft a tight end? Let's continue to let them double our wideouts and keep the linebackers in tight to stop our running game.

at 1/23/2008 1:33 PM

Anonymous said...

They should have drafted a "first day" TE years ago. Trumpy, Ross & Holman were all vital in the Bengals attack. The Tony McGee and Reggie Kelly lovers might not like this but they haven't had a quality TE since Holman left..

Its not Marv's fault.. Since PB died, this team has overlooked TE and DT in the draft, sticking in over priced FA's.. I do not blame MB for everything but his management has been very poor towards those 2 positions..

at 1/23/2008 1:41 PM

Anonymous said...

Does anyone esle notice that these blog comments start to slowly get uglier as more people post comments. i totally agree that Kelly is an un appreciated part of our offense. however, if there is an opportunity with somebody in the mid rounds that could really be helpful we should take him. heck, we wasted a pick in the fifth round last year with jeff rowe. why not see what we can get with somebody that will actually have a legit opportunity to make it out on to the field and contribute. OHH YEAH, IN REGARDS TO ALL OF THE HATEFUL COMMENTS BROUGHT UP TOWARDS MARK AND EACH OTHER IN THE QB SECTION. THE WHOLE RACE ISSUE. PLEASE STOP BRINGING IT UP. I AGREE VERY MUCH WITH WHAT BOTH SIDES HAVE TO SAY AND IT IS BAD THAT MORE THAN JUST FOOTBALL HAS LED TO THESE COMMENTS, BUT IT ONLY FEULS ANGER! EVEN THOUGH 1530 HOMER IS A TERRIBLE RADIO STATION THAT I REGRETFULLY LISTENED TOO FOR 5 YEARS. WE HAVE GREAT RECIEVERS AND A GREAT QB REGARDLESS OF COLOR WE NEED SOME GOOD PLAYERS AT PRIORITY POSITIONS TO HELP US GET TO THE SUPER BOWL. THE WHOLE CHAD FINGER POINTING WAS CHILDISH OF HIM AND THIS CITY. LOSING SEASONS HAPPEN. WITH OUT HIM... TJ, HENRY, OR OUR PRETTY NEW TIGHT END WOULDNT BE NEARLY AS GOOD AS THEY ARE. ........ THINK ABOUT IT.... PLEASE!

at 1/23/2008 1:51 PM

Anonymous said...

the only solution for this offense is to draft a Quarterback and get rid of Kitna.

at 1/23/2008 2:04 PM

Anonymous said...

I like Coats. Only draft a TE if a really good one falls to you. I'd like to see the Bengals draft 8-9 defensive players this year.

at 1/23/2008 2:07 PM

Anonymous said...

NO NO NO NO.... we have three receiving threats at WR in Johnson, Housh and Henry. Kelly is the perfect TE for this offense... a blocking one. Sure it would be great to have Antonio Gates, but first, we don't need to spend more money on offense and second we need to draft to improve that defense. I say we draft all defensive players unless someone drops really far in the draft.

at 1/23/2008 2:14 PM

Anonymous said...

Fred Davis, Fred Davis, Fred Davis, Fred Davis, if he is available in the 2nd round you cant pass him up, if it were up to Carson, he wouldnt pass on a Trojan tight end as good as Davis.

at 1/23/2008 2:34 PM

Anonymous said...

It seems to me the passing attack has had trouble working the deep middle of the field against zone defenses, a job usually conducted by a tight end. This has made their offense more predictable over time and has limited their options in the passing game by focusing on the perimeter of the field. Kelly is a good blocker but defenes do not have to account much for his receiving skills. The Bengals could use an h-back/TE to add greater flexibility to the offense. The Colts are very effective at using two TE sets with Clark and Utecht (sans fullback obviously) because it is both an effective passing and running formation. Daniel Coats showed signs during the season of perhaps being a good complement to Kelly. If the organization isn't enamored with Coats they could go into the rounds 3-5 to get such a player. It's not a position of need the way DE and DT is but it could add a new dimension to the defense. Also, Kelly will enter his 10th season in 2008 and the Bengals need to consider if it is time to start looking for an eventual replacement.

at 1/23/2008 3:02 PM

Anonymous said...

TE is not an important position in our offense. Yes, we need a decent TE, but we have a few in Kelly and Coates. They are both very capable to produce in the Bengals offensive system. Our offense is just fine, yeah things were a little bad this year, and Palmer had more INT's, but that is all on the O-line. There is only 1 offensive position we need to address in FA or the Draft and that is O-line. We would be better served to get a big FA (Faneca or his likeness) to move in and maybe draft a OT in the late (4-5-6) rounds. If it is not obvious to Bengal fans by now, that defense, more specifically the D-Line, is the pure problem to our woes than your not watching the games. If our coaches-owners even look to draft an offensive player in the first three rounds, that shows their lack knowledge. I would also say we don't need to draft a LB either, maybe late (5-6-7), but our interior lines on both sides are what keep us at 7-9 and 8-8, and we could easily be 10-6 or 11-5 if we had a difference making DT and a pressure DE and then shore up with a proven OG. Round 1= DT/DE, Round 2= DT/DE, Round 3= OT/C, Round 4= OG/LB, Round 5= TE/DB Round 6= C/DE. This is considering that we sign either Haynesworth or Allen at DT, or Faneca at OG. Round 1 and 2 would be a nice place for two USC guys at DT and DE, but we will probably draft a QB, CB, and K in the first 3 rounds.

at 1/23/2008 4:10 PM

Anonymous said...

Why can't the team have a TE who can both block and catch passes aplently? I don't care if the offensive scheme now isn't geared for TEs to catch a ton of passes, but why handcuff yourself completely? I think a good coach/oc can adapt the scheme a little to fit the personel, if there is such an impact TE available. Besides, I'm tired of all this hypothetic talk every season about the impact TE. We've only seen one side of the picture, so why not give it a try by drafting a good pass catching TE? Then if it doesn't work out, Marvin can tell us "I told you so."

at 1/23/2008 5:49 PM

Anonymous said...

Firefly,

Ridiculous comments, really. You're going to question drafting a TE when the entire middle of the field this year was wide open for a TE to have his way? I agree O-line is a need too, but how many 1st downs or TD's did we pass up for FG's when an impact TE would have gotten the job done on a quick slant across the middle? Your LB comment takes the cake (I'm still laughing as I type this). Three quarters of the LB's are either injured or FA's, and there is no guarantee any are coming back to start, save Brooks. If we don't draft LB's, where do we get them? The linebacker fairy? CFL retreads and guys pulled off the street because they can't make other teams is your answer? Count on a heavy dose of defense in the draft, but the team would be wise to address the issues with the offense too. O-line and TE could inject some life into them.

at 1/24/2008 12:25 AM

Anonymous said...

Early in the season Steve Young made the comment that he'd rather have a Pro-Bowl tight end than a Pro-Bowl wide receiver.

The reason the offense doesn't look important to this offense is because the tight end has been a none factor. Despite that the priorities should be (1) O-line (2) linebacker (3) tight end.

at 1/24/2008 9:28 AM

Anonymous said...

Great discussion.

We are not able to look at best available right now. That's what you get to do when you are solid everywhere. We have starting DL positions to fill, especially if we go to a 34. Our current DE stable is not really suited to that system -- they would do well as OLBs.

So if we get Brooks/Thurman in the middle and Geathers/Johnson/Henderson outside, we can plug the holes for a year. We draft smart to get a 34 LB or two. We look for big DL first day. Then we concentrate on bringing in some OL picks to give them better depth. Lets also consider the poor KR/PR options, and possible consider someone solely as a returner.

This addresses a lot of the Bengals problems. This keeps the opposing offense off the field. This gets us better field position. This makes it easier to win games.

Assuming the RB thing works out so we someone can be a running AND receiving threat, we will have options to attack the middle of the field when the WRs push up the field. That will address the primary TE complaint.

And we have put this offense in Palmer's hands. If he wants a blocking TE, go get him another one.

at 1/24/2008 2:04 PM

Anonymous said...

I am moving on to the other post, but first to anon 5:49 pm. First, put your name/nickname on something to be taken seriously, then I could address you. Second, your laughing because you don't understand football. We have drafted TE before, and we have said for years that if we had a middle of the field threat, blah blah blah. Guess what, we do have a middle of the field threat, his name is TJ, or do you not know who led the NFL in receptions? Also, our TE are more than capable of catching passes in the middle, we just don't have time to throw it there because the QB has to throw to the water boy because there are 2-3 defensive guys in his face. Look at the past 8 years, we have had TE, and what is our record, point proven. We could have 2 of the top pass catching TE, and they would not help us win or have huge numbers, WHY? 1) Our offense doesn't work that way, look at some film and you will see. Our TE are 4th options on 75% of plays, that is our scheme. 2) You must have pass protection for longer than 1.8 seconds, to throw to anyone, even more so to your 3rd and 4th option. The new NFL is full of more athletic Linemen and LB, and they are able to cover TE better, and rush the QB better. Hands down we don't need a TE, we need linemen on both sides. As far as LB, are you kidding me, we have 7, maybe 8 (Thurman?) to choose from. Yeah, a few are FA, but thats why you sign them. Injuries are not an excuse, this is a new year, and guys will be healthy. Why draft more and not know what you are going to get, when you could sign most of your own and get a good group. Theses guys have got a bad rap for no reason, the line breaks down and gets 0 pressure, that is where it all starts. Learn your fundamentals first, then we can talk.....

at 1/24/2008 5:44 PM

Anonymous said...

I gotta believe that a Heath Miller or Todd Heap more than makes up for the blocking of Kelly. This year there are plenty of quality TEs available. I sure hope that we've grabbed one by the 4th rd.

at 1/25/2008 2:22 PM

Anonymous said...

firefly,
Just because some players are currently on the roster, doesn't mean the LB position is set. Some are good, some are not. None are game changers. I disagree that we're good at that position, as you claim. Fact is, you're not sure who is coming back. Neither am I, which is why I made my comment. They will draft LB's this year, just watch. Regarding the TE: TJ caught a lot of balls this year, yes. Yes he is the guy over the middle. But he was doubled and tripled all year long in coverage. And carson had most INT's in career this year. Coincidence - NO. He was forcing it to guys in multiple coverage. A TE fixes that issue. Just because you have a pass catching weapon at TE doesn't mean he doesn't stay in and block alot. Your statement of 'that's not our scheme' matches well with the current ownership of this team, and the Paul Brown era of thinking.

at 1/26/2008 8:22 PM

Anonymous said...

The needs of the defensive line and the need of a stronger center outweigh using a draft pick on a TE.

Coats has a respectable 40 time of 4.85 and I agree with those who say our offense is stale. Its not Coats' fault he doesn't have more catches, it's Bratkowski's.
Adding the wrinkle of having to cover him 8 to 15 yds down the field would only make covering the rest of the guys that much harder. I've never understood why they only use the TE to block, hopefully that changes.

And the wides, namely Chad, need to quit whining like spoiled brats if Palmer doesn't throw it to 'em every other play. The coaches need to get that under control so Palmer doesn't have to play daycare teacher throughout the games. It seems that was one of the negatives he felt dragged down by last yr.

Previous Posts

Wednesday, January 23, 2008

Roster analysis: Tight ends

26 Comments: