2018 Red Zone Personnel ( Team TDs with 2/3 TEs vs 0/1 TEs )
- 2/3 TE 31 plays, 7 TD (23%)
- 0/1 TE 127 plays, 22 TD (17 %)
Note: This includes playoff games.
2018 Red Zone Personnel ( Team TDs with 2/3 TEs vs 0/1 TEs )
- 2/3 TE 31 plays, 7 TD (23%)
- 0/1 TE 127 plays, 22 TD (17 %)
Note: This includes playoff games.
Our TEs were a developmental squad last year. Those numbers look different with quality TEs. They should be better this year, but they're still our weakest position group on offense.
I am interested in seeing Hill play some FB. If you're gonna go jumbo, go with jumbo players, not 250 lb TEs.
Not really sure in the point you're trying to illustrate either ,as the o.p. merely stated in the red zone, where the lesser number of ran plays with 2+ t.e. sets clearly produced a much high return percentage wise,which easily correlates into the terminology: efficiently effectiveHigher % of TDs due to goalline situations bringing in the extra TE. Not really sure what point you're getting at.
Higher % of TDs due to goalline situations bringing in the extra TE. Not really sure what point you're getting at.
Speculative assumption is irrevelant,,,I'd be careful comparing %s as you've got a small sample for 2/3 TE. These were likely mostly goalline situations as well
You do know Dez was throwing shout outs to you all those years, right?2018 Red Zone Personnel ( Team TDs with 2/3 TEs vs 0/1 TEs )
- 2/3 TE 31 plays, 7 TD (23%)
- 0/1 TE 127 plays, 22 TD (17 %)
Note: This includes playoff games.
You do know Dez was throwing shout outs to you all those years, right?
But fun! For some...Speculative assumption is irrevelant,,,
Not really sure in the point you're trying to illustrate either ,as the o.p. merely stated in the red zone, where the lesser number of ran plays with 2+ t.e. sets clearly produced a much high return percentage wise,which easily correlates into the terminology: efficiently effective
Yer' the one interjecting additional equations into the easily discernable intent of the thread,,,er,,, like goal-line,,,perhaps that's the reason being in yer' lack of conceptual grasp/ clarity,,, Bro
I'd be careful comparing %s as you've got a small sample for 2/3 TE. These were likely mostly goalline situations as well
Ya,I know ,I'm just in a rare " wizz in the post-toastys" breakfast food box this afternoon isBut fun! For some...
Ya,I know ,I'm just in a rare " wizz in the post-toastys" breakfast food box this afternoon is
all, , ,
I know my man, as it was clearly evident in the half way/50% hand drawn picture you'd posted up in the attempted dismantling of the O.P.'s implessively structured worded thread,,,Man,,, we were shamefully lame in our offensive red zone endeavors last seasonMy point is you would expect a higher efficiency closer to the goal line... which is where you'll see more tight ends on the field.
,,,er,,,it's been known to seize up a scurrying cockroach in less than 10' of runaway/ hide travel distance after once having encountered is presence on the ground 3 days prior,,,At least it's sterile...
2018 Red Zone Personnel ( Team TDs with 2/3 TEs vs 0/1 TEs )
- 2/3 TE 31 plays, 7 TD (23%)
- 0/1 TE 127 plays, 22 TD (17 %)
Note: This includes playoff games.
As are your posts.
You just have to watch football to know when you see 2 or 3 TE sets
Isn’t it much more likely that the “Jumbo” look would take place inside the 5 than on the 19? These are skewed stats.