I am unfamiliar with the 2-tight end set...

[Hostile]

One of my favorite schemes was actually designed by Mike Sherman. It was a super duper jumbo set they could use in short yardage situations. Instead of going with 2 TE's, they'd have one of their backup OT's play the TE spot. So they'd have 3 OT's, 1 TE, and in the backfield they had 275 pound FB Nick Luchey as the lead blocker with 250 pound RB Najeh Davenport getting the ball.

Parcells tried something similar to that with Vollers in '03, but they just didn't have the RB's to pull it off.

Rich.........

LOL

We're on the same page Rich. See my post above, talking about this very concept a bit.

 

[Charles]

Okay..........Now everyone wants to talk TEs:laugh2:

 

[Yakuza Rich]

Obviously they're going to use it. The pertinent question is "How much?" Because none of those teams you mentioned even came close to running that formation 50% of the time. It was a very small percentage of their actual play-calling.

I'd like to know how much of the time the Skins used it.

Why?

Because they haven't had a true fullback listed on their roster in the last two years.

Unless they are using a ton of 3 WR sets that I simply missed last season, the 2 TE set was their base offense.


Rich.......

 

[Hostile]

Okay..........Now everyone wants to talk TEs:laugh2:

Not our fault you were a year premature. Hope it isn't contageous.

:wink2:

 

[superpunk]

I'd like to know how much of the time the Skins used it.

Why?

Because they haven't had a true fullback listed on their roster in the last two years.

Unless they are using a ton of 3 WR sets that I simply missed last season, the 2 TE set was their base offense.


Rich.......

OK....now there's a little something.

Apparently, 119 of Mark Brunell's 454 pass attempts came in a two TE set. But that's still only 25% of the time. 222 of his attempts came with three wide.

Clinton Portis, on the other hand, ran out of a two TE set 127 times - out of 352 carries (36%)

So maybe we take that to the next level - since we actually have two legitimate threats at the TE position, as opposed to only Cooley.

 

[Hostile]

OK....now there's a little something.

Apparently, 119 of Mark Brunell's 454 pass attempts came in a two TE set. But that's still only 25% of the time. 222 of his attempts came with three wide.

Clinton Portis, on the other hand, ran out of a two TE set 127 times - out of 352 carries (36%)

So maybe we take that to the next level - since we actually have two legitimate threats at the TE position, as opposed to only Cooley.

Good stuff SP. Nice stats for the topic.

 

[Charles]

Not our fault you were a year premature. Hope it isn't contageous.

:wink2:

Nope its not contageous and I am beyond the point of cure

I did it again this year........Center Nick Mangold.:bang2:

So Inhindsight wouldn't having a blue chip TE prospect in Heath Miller as our "2" TE be better than having Fasano. :

 

[Canadian BoyzFan]

Good summary. It would be interesting to see how the 2 TEs will line up. I suspect they will not line up the same every time, but will switch sides, move around, go in motion, etc.

In addition to outside the OTs on either side of the line, there's H-Back as you mentioned and Witten could even move into the slot where he could cause a matchup problem or be an extra blocker out wide on a sweep or screen. Not sure on Fasano in the slot so I can't comment on him yet. If anyone thinks he could line up out there please say so.

If Julius is playing near what they expect of him it could be a very lethal offensive look. Figure 7 potential blockers on run plays and up to 5 receivers counting the RB on pass plays.

It could be fun to watch and will create some matchup problems especially given it will be harder to double team TO or Glenn.

Totally agree with what you said. I would like to add one thought to this. That is, this offensive set really sets up play action very well - this is something Bledsoe already does very well imo.

 

[wileedog]

Though we did use Spears like that a couple of times.

Poorly, I might add.

Someone like Hannam might take over that slot if they let Polite go.

 

[superpunk]

Good stuff SP. Nice stats for the topic.

It's only good if we actually DO take it to the next level - and successfully.

I was flabbergasted when I saw Fasano's name pop up (and then even angrier when it appeared neither network was going to discuss the pick until Labor Day.)

We make that pick, this two TE action better be the greatest thing since sliced bread, LOL.

Some more stats - Brunell's passer rating out of the two TE set was about 10 points higher than his seasonal passer rating (94.9 to 85.9) threw 12 TDs to 5 INTs. Portis' numbers were about the same, although he's a much different back than JJ.

 

[Hostile]

Nope its not contageous and I am beyond the point of cure

I did it again this year........Center Nick Mangold.:bang2:

So Inhindsight wouldn't having a blue chip TE prospect in Heath Miller as our "2" TE be better than having Fasano. :

Given who we got the draft instead and the needs there, no. Given the decision to let Campbell go and the decision to implement this formation this year, yes. Timing is everything.

PS

Many here were on the Mangold wagon.

 

[Charles]

Given the decision to let Campbell go and the decision to implement this formation this year, yes. Timing is everything.

This won't be the 1st year under Parcells that we've implemented this formation. 2 TEs have been a staple since Parcells got here. The only difference is now "we" are assuming we have the (better) personnel to run it. That is the reason I've been talking up TEs for the past 3 seasons

The decision was made the day Parcells signed on as a Head Coach. He's a TE freak. I guess folks have to trumpet "new offensive philosophy (2 TEs)" inorder to justify taking a TE in the 2nd RD.

 

[Billy Bullocks]

Despite the fact NE has Graham and Watson they still turned about and drafted 2 more TE in the 3rd and 4th rounds. If Dallas is to stick to this style of offense having quality TE is a must. Right now I think Dallas has just that with Witten and Fasano

Agreed. Belecheck and Parcells have very similar styles. Esepecially defensively, and of course the type of offense we try and run.

 

[TheOneROWilliE]

one of my friends always uses a teo tight end set in madden...and its very hard to defend....but of course its only a game. lol but i think i kinda understand the whole idea of a two tight end set

 

[TheOneROWilliE]

oh yah and he uses the panthers

 

[CowboyJeff]

I am only guessing here. We will have some 3 WR sets and probably a handful of 4 WR sets. You have to in order to keep the defenses honest.

If you think about it - with Owens, Glenn, Witten and Fasano on the field at the same time, there's your potential 4 WR set right there. A running down with this same set could yield a 2 or 3 WR set with Fasano blocking, Witten running a route, or both Fasano and Witten blocking. The possibilities are endless.

 

[TheOneROWilliE]

i really like the idea of running 2 tight ends lol...Witten T.O Glenn....defenses wont know who the heck to cover

 

[TheOneROWilliE]

and it could also open up way bigger hole to run JJ out of a single back formation

 

[TheOneROWilliE]

I Love It!!!!!

 

[Hostile]

This won't be the 1st year under Parcells that we've implemented this formation. 2 TEs have been a staple since Parcells got here. The only difference is now "we" are assuming we have the (better) personnel to run it. That is the reason I've been talking up TEs for the past 3 seasons

The decision was made the day Parcells signed on as a Head Coach. He's a TE freak. I guess folks have to trumpet "new offensive philosophy (2 TEs)" inorder to justify taking a TE in the 2nd RD.

Oh brother.

If you are going to tell me this 2 TE set will be just like the previous 3 years then by all means come right out and say it and be wrong yet again. Clearly they (Cowboys Management) see a new wrinkle.

Note, even if we had implemented this last year when Miller was available I still wouldn't take him over the guys we did take. There were serious holes on the defensive side of the ball. Or did you sleep through 2004? Oh I know, this was probably during your orientation into the religion of Carl & Kevin Poston. You have a legit excuse I guess.

:wink2: