PDA

View Full Version : What's more important, strong #2 WR or a versatile TE ?


nunusguy
12-26-2005, 01:56 PM
I heard Casserly say on 610 the other day that he thought having a strong
#2 WR to take some focus off of AJ is more important to the Texans passing game and the offense in general than finding a real, all purpose TE who could block and also have the skills to be a bona fide pass receiver. I started thinking about this again last night watching Sonner rookie Mark Clayton have a very good game vs the Vikings, my choice as the Texans #1 last year. And I was wondering why Casserly didn't take him if he felt the way he did, though I know they prefered the rookie WR the Vikings have, Williamson from S. Carolina. But anyway, seems to me that whether we look to FA or the college Draft, getting a real TE is more important than a strong #2 WR ?

PapaL
12-26-2005, 02:00 PM
Versitle TE can be your #2 receiving threat. #2WR can not be your versitile TE. I would rather have the TE/H-back type guy. Someone who can duke it out in the trenches but also run a seam route for a big play down the middle. I like the unheralded guys, like Chris Cooley of WAS. Leaves it on the field every week.

Bubbajwp
12-26-2005, 02:02 PM
Versitle TE can be your #2 receiving threat. #2WR can not be your versitile TE. I would rather have the TE/H-back type guy.
I say TE

ArlingtonTexan
12-26-2005, 02:31 PM
Depends on the design of th offense. The Chiefs, Redskins, chargers are have offenses where the TE is either the primary or 2nd target, but others like the Rams use the TE as little as the Texans do. The key is to have a 2nd pass catching threat to punish people for paying too much attention to your main guy.

Side note: Look around the league there are not many teams (12 maybe 15) with number 2 WRs who are head and shoulders above Gaffney.

DRAMA
12-26-2005, 02:39 PM
TE!!

Keep those linebackers honest...seriously, could you imagine a Todd Heap here? WOW!

The Preacher
12-26-2005, 03:07 PM
Depends on the design of th offense. The Chiefs, Redskins, chargers are have offenses where the TE is either the primary or 2nd target, but others like the Rams use the TE as little as the Texans do. The key is to have a 2nd pass catching threat to punish people for paying too much attention to your main guy.

Side note: Look around the league there are not many teams (12 maybe 15) with number 2 WRs who are head and shoulders above Gaffney.

Well said the Cards get it done with 2 wr's and everybody knows they are going to throw. They are hurting on td's but rack up the yards.

It's gonna hurt for a long time watching Clayton become a superstar knowing we just watched him go right by the board. :loser

sprtsfanatic
12-26-2005, 03:59 PM
I heard Casserly say on 610 the other day that he thought having a strong
#2 WR to take some focus off of AJ is more important to the Texans passing game and the offense in general than finding a real, all purpose TE who could block and also have the skills to be a bona fide pass receiver. I started thinking about this again last night watching Sonner rookie Mark Clayton have a very good game vs the Vikings, my choice as the Texans #1 last year. And I was wondering why Casserly didn't take him if he felt the way he did, though I know they prefered the rookie WR the Vikings have, Williamson from S. Carolina. But anyway, seems to me that whether we look to FA or the college Draft, getting a real TE is more important than a strong #2 WR ?

Well if you watched the game last night then you should have answered your own question...the reason clayton had the game he had last night was because of the damage that heap has done the past three games....there was a point they were double teaming him to limit his impact on the game and yet he still had a good game for a TE.

HJam72
12-26-2005, 04:34 PM
If we get a stud receiver, Mathis will turn out to be a stud receiver and, if we get a stud TE, Joppru will get healthy and be a stud. Whichever we don't get will not improve. It's karma or whatever. :brickwall

HomeBred_Texan
12-26-2005, 04:38 PM
If we get a stud receiver, Mathis will turn out to be a stud receiver and, if we get a stud TE, Joppru will get healthy and be a stud. Whichever we don't get will not improve. It's karma or whatever. :brickwall
LOL, my thoughts exactly. It's called catch-22 and no matter what, we will do the wrong thing. But 1 thing for sure, there are allot of good players coming out this year. The draft is deep in quality...

Holden135
12-26-2005, 05:50 PM
I don't think a stud TE would open up anymore room for AJ than a solid #2. I think a TE would draw more LB's than safeties which wouldnt open too much more up for AJ. However our offense can use all we can get so how about a stud TE and a solid #2? It's possible.

DraconisRex
12-26-2005, 06:06 PM
I heard Casserly say on 610 the other day that he thought having a strong
#2 WR to take some focus off of AJ is more important to the Texans passing game and the offense in general than finding a real, all purpose TE who could block and also have the skills to be a bona fide pass receiver. I started thinking about this again last night watching Sonner rookie Mark Clayton have a very good game vs the Vikings, my choice as the Texans #1 last year. And I was wondering why Casserly didn't take him if he felt the way he did, though I know they prefered the rookie WR the Vikings have, Williamson from S. Carolina. But anyway, seems to me that whether we look to FA or the college Draft, getting a real TE is more important than a strong #2 WR ?

Which is why Casserly will be fired. He builds a team like he's playing Madden. A TE is the best friend of a QB, he's big and in the center of his vision most of the time and can out-muscle defenders for poorly thrown "panic" throws, etc. Plus a good TE can be your #2 WR, whereas your #2 WR generally isn't going to emulate a TE...

nunusguy
12-26-2005, 06:08 PM
Well if you watched the game last night then you should have answered your own question...the reason clayton had the game he had last night was because of the damage that heap has done the past three games....there was a point they were double teaming him to limit his impact on the game and yet he still had a good game for a TE.
To my way of thinking, the Ravens have both an excellent, very promishing
young #2 WR in Clayton, and a PB level TE in Heap. We can only dream that some day the Texans will have that kind of talent within their receiving
corps. In the meantime and as I said at the top of this thread, when you have neither which of the two would you choose ?

rmartin65
12-26-2005, 07:00 PM
TE or Hback, some like Cooley of the Redskins. And Mathis might be able to develop into a solid #2 reciever.

sprtsfanatic
12-26-2005, 10:04 PM
We def need a solid TE. Our WR corps is good and our young talent can develop to be even better. We NEED a TE to come in here to BLOCK AND CATCH the rock. It would keep defenses honest and he could act as another lineman to help protect Carr....we have not had that as of yet....we were supposed to get that in Bennie...but has obviously not been able to help us in that area to this date.

MorKnolle
12-26-2005, 11:32 PM
Depends on the design of th offense. The Chiefs, Redskins, chargers are have offenses where the TE is either the primary or 2nd target, but others like the Rams use the TE as little as the Texans do. The key is to have a 2nd pass catching threat to punish people for paying too much attention to your main guy.

Side note: Look around the league there are not many teams (12 maybe 15) with number 2 WRs who are head and shoulders above Gaffney.

Good to see someone else that shares my opinions on the matter. I think Gaffney is a serviceable #2 WR and with Mathis emerging as a WR threat I don't see the need for us to go spend a high draft pick on a WR and don't really see many in the draft that would be an upgrade anyways. If there is another hidden speedster like Mathis that we can pick up in the 3rd round or later this year then I say look at getting him, but the OL and defense need to be fixed before picking up a TE or WR in the draft.

Scooter
12-26-2005, 11:58 PM
tightend easily. what you're looking for is a threat as the #2 or #3 receiving position which both TE & WR can take care of. what a top-tier tightend brings is that aspect and also the ability to block & read blitzes. tight ends have the ability to move lb's in both the passing & rushing game. they create mismatches on most every play.

please dont use the rams as ANY type of standard ... everything they've done successfully in the past 5 years has been an NFL oddity. also, the cardinals are cited as having a successfull offense without a TE. two top tier WR's, a ringed QB, & a pass only offense will have that effect ... compare them to texas tech (of which i'm a fan, but statistically the best college qb ever sits on our practice squad ... so there ya go).

a tight end is essential to the offense moreso than a 2nd wr because of the versatility. plus, i think we're doing very well in the WR department with AJ, gaffney, mathis, & armstrong ... a coach worth a damn will turn each & every one of those players into a threat.

Double Barrel
12-27-2005, 02:27 AM
I agree with the TE side. Having a big player that gives both options of receiving and blocking is a weapon much greater than a #2 WR. If you can get your TE behind the LBs with a consistent passing game, DBs have a much tougher time bringing him down. And a #2 could never give you the blocking to help the running game.

I've always been a fan of well balanced offenses that utilize all of the positions available. Of course it takes talent to make it work, but the multiple options give you much more versatility.

texasguy346
12-27-2005, 12:34 PM
I've always felt that a TE that could catch and block would do wonders for this offense, and I still do. Some think that we don't have very much talent at WR, but I must disagree. AJ is clearly our #1 guy, and Gaffney is a solid #2. Mathis gives us a WR that can stretch the field opposite of AJ, but his hands will still need some work. He brings more versatility to the team than Bradford since he's a great KR. Armstrong is in the same mold as Gaffney, and he's got velcro for hands. If we were to lose Gaffney to FA then, and only then, I would see a need to take a look at bringing in another WR.

I think a talented TE could help open up this offense some more so long as the coach utilizes his skill set. With Mathis and AJ on the outside stretching the field the middle of the field will become open allowing for some relatively easy passes to the TE or even to Gaffney crossing the middle from the slot. If you pound the middle long enough then it may lure an opposing defense to try and take the passes in the middle of the field away. That, in turn, would likely open up the deep corners and might even leave AJ or Mathis in man coverage. Definately a formula for a big play. The TE would also help out in the running game as well. Another inline blocker is always a good thing when your in 3rd or 4th and short. Of course all this speculation is totally dependant upon our next HC and what type of offense he wants to use, and also what role a TE plays in his offense.

LBC_Justin
12-27-2005, 01:10 PM
TE!!

Keep those linebackers honest...seriously, could you imagine a Todd Heap here? WOW!In all fairness Todd Heap is a probowl caliber TE.

So this question would need to be reworded to fit your senario.

Would you rather have two ProBowl WRs or one ProBowl WR and a ProBowl TE?

That would be a tough call. I like having the TE myself, because of the option it gives you in the Redzone.

El Tejano
12-27-2005, 01:30 PM
That would be a tough call. I like having the TE myself, because of the option it gives you in the Redzone.
That is why I say TE. Especially at this point, I don't think our receivers are that bad, its just the talented ones have been held back by our staff. We've seen the positives everytime Armstrong and Mathis touched the field.

However if you look at our division rival Colts, they use the TE alot in the redzone and it makes them that much harder to defend because they can go wide open or balanced offense on you all day long.

stevo3883
12-27-2005, 01:37 PM
I dont see how Gaffney is a good #2 receiver... He doesn't have speed or size, and doesnt create much seperation. He lacks the tools of a true #2, and his production over his career shows it.

Texas_Thrill
12-27-2005, 04:27 PM
Love me a good TE. GOALLINE. Security Blanket for Carr.

Remember Cowgirls.....Mike Irvin....Jay Nova. Harper stretched the field but Redzone time it was all about Smith and Nova.

Plus you just don't have that many great TE's that can do it all.
Gates and Gonzalez. The rest are really good WR's and avg. blockers at best or vice versa.

tulexan
12-27-2005, 04:29 PM
Shockey is a pretty good blocker and receiver.

HeartofHouston
12-27-2005, 04:42 PM
Somebody stated that it all depends all the Coaching Strategy..

Some people use a Great TE as part of the play-calling.. Tom Couglin co., Kubiak, Cameron.. and some use 2 WRs as part of their play callin.. Mike Martz co., Marvin lewis co., and Denny Green Co. and some people use both recievers and the TE.. Mike sherman co, Tom Moore, Bill Bellicheck and Andy Reid co.

But if you have to pick out of the 2 then I would have to say.. a Great TE over a #2 Recievers..

cause it forces the LBs to remain honest and they have to respect what he can do.. and it forces DCs to plan for that extra threat.. speaking from experience as a former OLB/S DC dont respect TE as much as they really should.. but if you dont respect the right one then you'll regret it..