Let's talk tight ends

Can someone smarter than me explain Leach's theory of why he doesn't use tight ends. Watching all these bowl games had me thinking of how creative and how much of a mismatch big towering tight ends could be in this offense along with majorly helping with the run game, blocking on tight screens, and helping make DEs back off in pass pro. Outside Linebackers would have to guard the tight ends and then a quick slot player afterwards. It would give you mismatches depend on who you play. I do realize that Leach doesn't play the mismatch game at all.

It's also frustrating to see how mismatches have won a lot of these bowl games and we don't even consider that in our offensive scheme.

Whatever the answer is, he's not going to change.

because Leach barely runs the ball and he wants wide splits. So the theory is have a guy with better speed on the field.

Had a good tight end one season at tech, 6-5 Samoan.

Speaking of tight ends, Brock bowers looks to be a combination of Dallas Clark and George kittle. He’s going to be a very high nfl draft pick after next season. Freaking animal. The guy outruns defensive backs like they are standing still.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by WhiskeyPirate

Had a good tight end one season at tech, 6-5 Samoan.

Speaking of tight ends, Brock bowers looks to be a combination of Dallas Clark and George kittle. He’s going to be a very high nfl draft pick after next season. Freaking animal. The guy outruns defensive backs like they are standing still.

---

And if Brock Bowers were here, they would have him in the slot unfortunately.

Normally I’d agree with you but Bowers could actually play the slot really well, he lines up all over for Georgia, he can run the ball pretty good too.

Tide end talk ended when Leach was hired. We hired a scheme and historical data, that is it.

Some of y'all thought this thread was going to be about something else didn't you

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by confucius say

Some of y'all thought this thread was going to be about something else didn't you

---

Hey I'm all for having some positive conversation around here. The powder blue only looked good on the cheerleaders...

I'm going to be the the devils advocate here and defend our lack of TE.

1) All those years of Mullen starting a TE, and the TE never did anything. Waste of an on field coach

2) the TE has to be able to block blitzing LBs that already have a head of steam, help the OT block NFL 1st round DEs, get out in space and block, and -to be useful pass catchers- be able to get free of a LB/S and or leap over them and make a grab. Have you seen SEC LBs? This is a true freak athlete. It's hard to find someone that can be anything other than an undersized OT. Which can be useful in certain situations, but not often.

3) How many TEs have truly been "dominant"? The best TE in the SEC has 846 yards this season, meaning there are 7 WRs with more yards. The 2nd best TE has 515 yards, meaning 19 WRs have more yards. Last year Pitts had the most dominant TE seasons I've ever seen, and he still didn't lead the team in yards or receptions. It's simply really really hard to find the freak athlete needed fro the position

4) "But TEs block! A WR can't protect the QB". I'd argue that my having a TE, you're allowing the other team to place another man in the box. If you replace the TE with a WR, the D takes a man out of the box.

5) "You can use a TE like a chess piece to out scheme the D!". That's true, you can use the TE to take advantage of an undisciplined LB/S. But that's hard to do vs competent defenses. And if we concede to the TE not being a schematic advantage vs the best 4-5 teams we see every year, then why not have a WR on the field and give us some speed and big play potential? It's hard to be smarter than everyone you play, and I'm not so confident in our ability to do that that I'm willing to give up WR speed for the chance for our coach to find a flaw in their D.

6) Every team uses a TE. Maybe being different is the best way to catch defenses making mistakes

If you have stud wide receiver sets and a good o line I don’t see a need for it.....but I’m not opposed to it either. TE or H Back adds a new wrinkle and helps block a dominating pass rusher. TE was effective the one year he used one guy by the name of Bristol Olomua.

I once heard Phil Fulmer say a lot of high ranked H.S. TE's don't make it because they don't have collegiate ball catching skills.

I have heard Leach address this two separate times over the years. He said he would love to have a great TE for mismatches, he went on for a while about how great it would be to have that as a weapon.

The problem, as he said it, is that it is very rare to find someone who has the body type and the speed to play the position, and if they do fit the mold, most times either they cant catch or get turned into DEs.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Leroy Jenkins

I have heard Leach address this two separate times over the years. He said he would love to have a great TE for mismatches, he went on for a while about how great it would be to have that as a weapon.

The problem, as he said it, is that it is very rare to find someone who has the body type and the speed to play the position, and if they do fit the mold, most times either they cant catch or get turned into DEs.

---

Monetez Sweat (assuming he could catch) would have been the most dominant receiving TE of all time. But on out '17 or '18 teams? He'd never have cracked 400 yards receiving either year. Why? because the QB couldn't have gotten him the ball. But as a DE, his potential wasn't limited by others. That is why the best 6'4"+ athletes get turned into DE... even if they have the hands, it's often the best for the team to have a dominant pass rusher

Leach doesn't use a TE because his route tree doesn't incorporate a TE. Leach can say all he wants. He had Spivey. Also I see Dallas using the hell out of a TE. You can name many HOF TEs over the years.

Also, Mullen was two coaches ago. The best coach in MSU history to date. Throwing shade at Mullen doesn't convince me of any argument of why Leach is such a genius.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Maroonthirteen

Leach doesn't use a TE because his route tree doesn't incorporate a TE. Leach can say all he wants. He had Spivey. Also I see Dallas using the hell out of a TE. You can name many HOF TEs over the years.

Also, Mullen was two coaches ago. The best coach in MSU history to date. Throwing shade at Mullen doesn't convince me of any argument of why Leach is such a genius.

---

Again, he did use one to good effect , Bristol Olumua

I think if you can find that unique athlete you use a TE/h back....but just a run of the mill extra blocker and occasional short yardage receiver.....no, unless you find a really good one. I’d play Bowers any where he wanted to play on offense.

He could use a TE when he runs that tight trips formation.

Edit to add: I recall the genius Ed O was bringing an extra DL v State on short yardage. At the goal line it worked. The extra beef blow up that trips formation and LSU tackled Marks for a loss.

He had Spivey and now Harmon.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by the_real_MSU_is_us

Monetez Sweat (assuming he could catch) would have been the most dominant receiving TE of all time. But on out '17 or '18 teams? He'd never have cracked 400 yards receiving either year. Why? because the QB couldn't have gotten him the ball. But as a DE, his potential wasn't limited by others. That is why the best 6'4"+ athletes get turned into DE... even if they have the hands, it's often the best for the team to have a dominant pass rusher

---

TE's don't have to dominate the stats .... they are better used for 1st downs and the occasional touchdown - they have their place on a team ..... and yes, Mullen did use his tight ends a lot with success