I am unfamiliar with the 2-tight end set...
- Thread starter juck
- Start date
superpunk
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 26,330
- Reaction score
- 75
Charles said:Jeff Ireland(05/04/06):"We ran the 2 TE set all last year with Jason and Campbell, we felt we could improve on that with Fasano".
New wrinkle!!!!
Guess what - we ran the lone back, and the 3 WR set, and the I formation all last year too.
That still doesn't answer the question of how much we ran each of those sets (which is, of course, the issue here). Get back to me when you have something substantive, and not just quote blurbs and emoticons.
superpunk
Well-Known Member
- Messages
- 26,330
- Reaction score
- 75
Interesting NEW wrinkle....
In 2003, Richie Anderson (for those of us having problems with amnesia, he played fullback for us) caught 69 passes, and had 70 rushing attempts. I wonder - how did he outproduce Campbell - at the time, our starting TE - by so much, if he saw the field so little, since we were apparently running 2 TE sets like it was the new hotness? Even knowing that Campbell is mainly a blocker, he still should have, just by sheer volume of time on the field, outproduced the FB, right? Yet neither he nor Witten did that year.
If last year, we were running mainly two TE sets, then why didn't our second TE outproduce Patrick Crayton, who palyed far fewer games, or hell - even peerless price, who basically stopped in for lunch?
I mean, if this two TE set is just going to be business as usual, did we really waste a second round pick on a blocking TE? When that position in this system (again, if this is all business as usual) has been outproduced by players who, if it is just business as usual, see the field FAR less than that 2nd TE?
Doesn't add up.
In 2003, Richie Anderson (for those of us having problems with amnesia, he played fullback for us) caught 69 passes, and had 70 rushing attempts. I wonder - how did he outproduce Campbell - at the time, our starting TE - by so much, if he saw the field so little, since we were apparently running 2 TE sets like it was the new hotness? Even knowing that Campbell is mainly a blocker, he still should have, just by sheer volume of time on the field, outproduced the FB, right? Yet neither he nor Witten did that year.
If last year, we were running mainly two TE sets, then why didn't our second TE outproduce Patrick Crayton, who palyed far fewer games, or hell - even peerless price, who basically stopped in for lunch?
I mean, if this two TE set is just going to be business as usual, did we really waste a second round pick on a blocking TE? When that position in this system (again, if this is all business as usual) has been outproduced by players who, if it is just business as usual, see the field FAR less than that 2nd TE?
Doesn't add up.
Hostile
The Duke
- Messages
- 119,565
- Reaction score
- 4,544
Remember when you told me I bit and got sucked in?superpunk said:
For someone who is as intelligent as Charles obviously is, he enjoys playing clueless. He knows exactly what you and I are saying. He just can't help thinking he looks smarter by feigning mock shock. I don't get that personally.
Post the quotes by Jerry Jones about added dimension as a receiving threat and he'll completely ignore it because we've run a 2 TE set before. The synapses don't fire once the idea to play spin control is set in stone. In some people's minds every offensive or defensive set with the same set of people on the field means it is 100% similar. The very idea of thinking new things could be added or "improved upon" is alien. Even if someone with his hands on the situation (in this case, Jerry Jones and Jeff Ireland) explains that they are reaching beyond old boundaries. It's as clear as can be, unless you've got blinders on.
In other words, in his mind Campbell and Fasano are equal and Fasano won't do anything different. This flies in the face of every report from the team, but it IS a 2 TE set. It must be the same right?
What can I tell you? Charles is the patron saint of lost causes.
I tell you this because you're my boy. Still can't believe that one.
DiscipleofTuna
New Member
- Messages
- 114
- Reaction score
- 0
My 2 cents on the 2 TE is that we ran it quite a bit anyway but it morphed itself over the last couple years.
2 years ago we saw countless times when Witten would motion and turn into the lead blocker, usually on trap type plays.
Last season Witten didnt move as much and was used to aid our inept RTs blocking.
If you look at NFL.com and watch the game highlights for all 16 games (I did), you will see us in singleback a majority of the time. Be it with Crayton on the field or Campbell.
We used the fullback very sparingly, usually in short yardage. I would say there was a split in PT between Pollite and Spears.
Now for the benefits of it. Go play Madden 06 and you can see you can line up the two TEs on side of the formation, you could motion one to the backfield and turn it into an I (straight,weak,strong), you could split one out wide in the slot and essentially run a 3 wide set with the TE as a slot guy. Possibilities are endless.
I think Fasano is actually better than Witten coming out of college. If he can turn into a Witten like Pro is the question. I think yes. So the flexibility of the two TE set is scary.
Julius runs a million times better as a singleback than with a fullback. He is a cutback runner. Like an astute poster pointed out, the scheme is horizontal and will allow JJ to pick his spots. That draw play I hope is run more than twice a game with him this yr.
Lastly, like the 34, flexibility and disguise are crucial. Thats why Tuna loves them so much. Additionally you add value as TEs and LBs are well utilized in sp teams. Heck Witten was a Sp teams beast his rookie yr.
Also note that much like Gibbs used the 2 TE and Hback to counteract Taylor and Parcells 34, Tuna is using such to counteract the Howard/Kearse and Osi/Strahan combos that have abused our tackles.
2 years ago we saw countless times when Witten would motion and turn into the lead blocker, usually on trap type plays.
Last season Witten didnt move as much and was used to aid our inept RTs blocking.
If you look at NFL.com and watch the game highlights for all 16 games (I did), you will see us in singleback a majority of the time. Be it with Crayton on the field or Campbell.
We used the fullback very sparingly, usually in short yardage. I would say there was a split in PT between Pollite and Spears.
Now for the benefits of it. Go play Madden 06 and you can see you can line up the two TEs on side of the formation, you could motion one to the backfield and turn it into an I (straight,weak,strong), you could split one out wide in the slot and essentially run a 3 wide set with the TE as a slot guy. Possibilities are endless.
I think Fasano is actually better than Witten coming out of college. If he can turn into a Witten like Pro is the question. I think yes. So the flexibility of the two TE set is scary.
Julius runs a million times better as a singleback than with a fullback. He is a cutback runner. Like an astute poster pointed out, the scheme is horizontal and will allow JJ to pick his spots. That draw play I hope is run more than twice a game with him this yr.
Lastly, like the 34, flexibility and disguise are crucial. Thats why Tuna loves them so much. Additionally you add value as TEs and LBs are well utilized in sp teams. Heck Witten was a Sp teams beast his rookie yr.
Also note that much like Gibbs used the 2 TE and Hback to counteract Taylor and Parcells 34, Tuna is using such to counteract the Howard/Kearse and Osi/Strahan combos that have abused our tackles.
