Tight End TD Production (1 Viewer)

[H.K.]

The genesis for this post was this thread. I just want people to understand the incredible accomplishment by Gates in 2004 when he scored 13 TD's, and set the all time record for TE's in the process. Hopefully this will help us keep things in perspective when we set expectations for the coming season.

This following comes from FBG's Historical Data Dominator with a time period from 1960 through 2004:

1) Since 1960 only 14 players have scored 10+ TD's at the TE position during a season.

2) There have been only 11 seasons out of the past 45 where any Tight End has scored double-digit TD's. Therefore, there is about a 75% chance that no TE will score 10+ TD's in a season.

3) Over the past 45 years, only three TE's have scored double digit TD's twice in their careers (Gonzo, Sharpe, Walls). All others have achieved the feat once, and no TE has ever done it three times.

4) No Tight End has ever recorded 10+ TD's in consecutive seasons.

5) No Tight End has ever scored 11+ TD's twice or more in his career.

6) There have been only five occasions when two or more TE's have scored 10+ TD in a season, however three of those occurences were prior to 1984.

7) For those who want more recent data, the past five seasons there have been only two 10+ TD producers (Gonzo 2003 & Gates 2004). Obviously, there have been zero occurances when multiple TE's have scored 10+ times during the same season.

When preparing projections for Tight Ends as 2005 nears, please take the aforementioned statistics into account. There is only so much production that can occur out of players and teams, so hopefully this type of information can provide a solid basis to level set your projections.

 

[Family Matters]

So Gates should have no problem getting 15 right? You see the way I see it is because there has so few that have done it, then defenses do not know how to stop it. So you see? It's easy. Gates for 15.

 

[Finatic]

So Gates should have no problem getting 15 right? You see the way I see it is because there has so few that have done it, then defenses do not know how to stop it. So you see? It's easy. Gates for 15.

With the matchup problems Gates presents,I don't see how he is not a lock for 10+ TDs again in 2005.Couple that with LT in the backfield and a WR corps that doesn't have a legit superstar.One would have to think an injury to Gates is the only thing keeping him from reaching that plateau in my opinion.........

 

[Pack43]

So Gates should have no problem getting 15 right? You see the way I see it is because there has so few that have done it, then defenses do not know how to stop it. So you see? It's easy. Gates for 15.

Seems they do....they've stopped it every single time.

 

[Rovers]

Several teams figured out how to shut Gates down last year... Denver in particular. A tall safety with some speed can, and has shut him down. not too many teams have SS's that can cover him, but those that do really did shut him down last year.

 

[NYG Endzone]

Please also take into account rule changes, more athletic TEs, and evolving offenses. I personally think this historical is not very useful at this time (except maybe to provide a cap mark for TE TDs in projections).

 

[H.K.]

Please also take into account rule changes, more athletic TEs, and evolving offenses. I personally think this historical is not very useful at this time (except maybe to provide a cap mark for TE TDs in projections).

Points #6 & #7 address more recent data. You are somewhat correct that numbers have trended up slightly recently. In fact, the past ten years there has been a 50% chance that a TE reached 10+ TD in a season.

However, the data set is largely propped up by numbers provided in the mid to late '90's as opposed to more recently. 1996 was the "high water mark" year for TE's when three (the most for one season since 1960) scored 10 or more - actually all three TE's scored exactly ten: Walls, Keith Jackson, & Sharpe. 1999 was also a good year when Walls & Gonzo went for 12 & 11, respectively.

As stated initially, the past five years have shown only a 40% chance of one TE attaining the double-digit TD mark.

 

[Family Matters]

Please also take into account rule changes, more athletic TEs, and evolving offenses. I personally think this historical is not very useful at this time (except maybe to provide a cap mark for TE TDs in projections).

Excellent post. Rule changes will go along way towards affecting future results. That and new offensive philosophies.

 

[Family Matters]

So Gates should have no problem getting 15 right? You see the way I see it is because there has so few that have done it, then defenses do not know how to stop it. So you see? It's easy. Gates for 15.

Seems they do....they've stopped it every single time.

Keep the wink in mind. It's a joke.

 

[H.K.]

With the matchup problems Gates presents,I don't see how he is not a lock for 10+ TDs again in 2005.Couple that with LT in the backfield and a WR corps that doesn't have a legit superstar.One would have to think an injury to Gates is the only thing keeping him from reaching that plateau in my opinion.........

He could, but history is not on his side. If someone wants to make a bet with me on a result that has never been different in my lifetime, then I'll take the side where the odds are overwhelmingly in my favor.Every year for the World Series: Cubs vs. Everyone Else - I'll take the field, thank you.

I'll bet the sun comes up tomorrow, too.

As long as you are comfortable banking on something to happen that never has, so be it.

 

[Family Matters]

With the matchup problems Gates presents,I don't see how he is not a lock for 10+ TDs again in 2005.Couple that with LT in the backfield and a WR corps that doesn't have a legit superstar.One would have to think an injury to Gates is the only thing keeping him from reaching that plateau in my opinion.........

He could, but history is not on his side. If someone wants to make a bet with me on a result that has never been different in my lifetime, then I'll take the side where the odds are overwhelmingly in my favor.Every year for the World Series: Cubs vs. Everyone Else - I'll take the field, thank you.

I'll bet the sun comes up tomorrow, too.

As long as you are comfortable banking on something to happen that never has, so be it.

History wasn't on Manning's side last year. In fact history is never on the side of anyone who breals a record and yet it happens. So while the odds may be long, the fact that he's the one who set the record also means history is on his side to break it again. But I do see your point.

 

[FFFIEND]

Please also take into account rule changes, more athletic TEs, and evolving offenses. I personally think this historical is not very useful at this time (except maybe to provide a cap mark for TE TDs in projections).

Excellent post. Rule changes will go along way towards affecting future results. That and new offensive philosophies.

 

[Post Corner]

Wow H.K., something tells me Gates handed you a couple of crucial losses last year... Although historical data is an important consideration, the game has changed a ton. It's really not a fair comparison to consider stats for TE in the 60's to today. Heck, until Gonzalez emerged on the scene in 1999, it was virtually unheard of to see WR type numbers at the TE slot. Now we are used to the idea and Gates is just the second type of player to post those numbers on the board at TE. Yes, records are something to be taken seriously; however, Gates is a freak. Gonzo is a freak. They shouldn't have the type of seasons they have....but they do.Gates wasn't exactly slipping under the radar towards the second half of last year. Several D's had their shot at him after a massive publicity campaign by several networks....and he STILL kept doing it. I don't see much changing this year. Particularly with everyone back in San Diego healthy for another year. Perhaps McCardell grabs a couple of extra TDs here and there, but I see Gates pulling down double digit TDs again. I agree with FootballGuys projection at 11 TDs for Gates.

 

[H.K.]

[QUOTE=']Wow H.K., something tells me Gates handed you a couple of crucial losses last year...

Although historical data is an important consideration, the game has changed a ton. It's really not a fair comparison to consider stats for TE in the 60's to today. Heck, until Gonzalez emerged on the scene in 1999, it was virtually unheard of to see WR type numbers at the TE slot. Now we are used to the idea and Gates is just the second type of player to post those numbers on the board at TE. Yes, records are something to be taken seriously; however, Gates is a freak. Gonzo is a freak. They shouldn't have the type of seasons they have....but they do.

Gates wasn't exactly slipping under the radar towards the second half of last year. Several D's had their shot at him after a massive publicity campaign by several networks....and he STILL kept doing it. I don't see much changing this year. Particularly with everyone back in San Diego healthy for another year. Perhaps McCardell grabs a couple of extra TDs here and there, but I see Gates pulling down double digit TDs again. I agree with FootballGuys projection at 11 TDs for Gates.
[/QUOTE]Actually, I had Gates in both my leagues last year and I'll be keeping him in the one that isn't a redraft. It's just that one of my pet peeves is that people fail to look beyond last season when projecting for the next. History can teach us incredible lessons if we take the time to learn from it.

Here's another historical tidbit: San Diego scored 36 offensive TD's in 2002 & 2003 and then leapt to 53 in 2004, do you think they'll blow up like that again in 2005?

Every indicator points to the exception rather than the rule in this scenario, so if you want to ignore them that's your call.

 

[David Yudkin]

To further this along even more . . .Last year was the first since 1985 with 6 TE to score 100+ fantasy points an 11 TE to score 90+ fantasy points.Last year's Top 12 scored more fantasy points (1,282) than in any other year except 1981 (1,323).The last real surge in TE scoring was in the early 80's which last 4 or 5 years.IMO, I think TE scoring will still stay high this year, just not as high as last season. Defenses notmally start to adjust to rules and trends, and officials also start to get lax in their enforcement as well.Overall I think QB/WR/TE scoring will dip, RB scoring will rise slightly.

 

[DerangedGridironGeek]

Some really good points on both sides. I want to add that SD was 4-12 in 2003 and had the benefit of a last place schedule in 2004. This year's schedule is brutal and will require Gates and the SD offense to pick it up a notch. While I really like Gates, I also think expectations should be lowered a little.

 

[Family Matters]

To further this along even more . . .

Last year was the first since 1985 with 6 TE to score 100+ fantasy points an 11 TE to score 90+ fantasy points.

Last year's Top 12 scored more fantasy points (1,282) than in any other year except 1981 (1,323).

The last real surge in TE scoring was in the early 80's which last 4 or 5 years.

IMO, I think TE scoring will still stay high this year, just not as high as last season. Defenses notmally start to adjust to rules and trends, and officials also start to get lax in their enforcement as well.

Overall I think QB/WR/TE scoring will dip, RB scoring will rise slightly.

Good lord David. That sounded like a stock market forcast.

 

[Bri]

tight ends are so much better than they were 20 years ago. How many TEs are in the HOF?

 

[H.K.]

tight ends are so much better than they were 20 years ago. How many TEs are in the HOF?

Everything is relative. Talent at each position is better than it was 20 years ago, so you can not discount that advancements and improvements have been made defensively in order to maintain competitive balance.Yudkin made an excellent point regarding the increase in TE output last year, and his assertion that it is likely to decline is spot on.

The answer to your question, there are six true TE's in the HOF, the fewest of any position other than kicker.

HOF Modern Era: Tight Ends:

Dave Casper 1974-1984

Mike Ditka 1961-1972

John Mackey 1963-1972

Ozzie Newsome 1978-1990

Jackie Smith 1963-1978

Kellen Winslow 1979-1987

There are seven other "pre-modern era" players in the HOF listed as Ends (i.e.-Don Hutson), but they aren't comparable, hence the different designation.

I am confident that Shannon Sharpe will make the HOF, but I wouldn't say there are any certainties beyond him - Keith Jackson, Wesley Walls and Ben Coates may have a shot, but I don't know if they are HOF material based on their pro-bowl and stat totals....Gonzo should make it if he can put up a few more productive seasons.

 

[Bri]

tight ends are so much better than they were 20 years ago. How many TEs are in the HOF?

Everything is relative. Talent at each position is better than it was 20 years ago, so you can not discount that advancements and improvements have been made defensively in order to maintain competitive balance.Yudkin made an excellent point regarding the increase in TE output last year, and his assertion that it is likely to decline is spot on.

The answer to your question, there are six true TE's in the HOF, the fewest of any position other than kicker.

HOF Modern Era: Tight Ends:

Dave Casper 1974-1984

Mike Ditka 1961-1972

John Mackey 1963-1972

Ozzie Newsome 1978-1990

Jackie Smith 1963-1978

Kellen Winslow 1979-1987

There are seven other "pre-modern era" players in the HOF listed as Ends (i.e.-Don Hutson), but they aren't comparable, hence the different designation.

I am confident that Shannon Sharpe will make the HOF, but I wouldn't say there are any certainties beyond him - Keith Jackson, Wesley Walls and Ben Coates may have a shot, but I don't know if they are HOF material based on their pro-bowl and stat totals....Gonzo should make it if he can put up a few more productive seasons.

Yudkin's assertion(if it is as you say) is WRONG. Over 45 years there is only 6 TEs in the HOF, that's a little more than 1 per decade.

There was Coates and Sharpe, 2 TEs (and Coates is a lock IMO.)

You're missing the development of the position. It was a glorified lineman and now we're getting far better athletes.

Rather than explain and explain, see this writeup on ozzie newsome

Round 1 (b) – Ozzie Newsome, WR, 6-2, 232, Alabama. Comment: Hall of Famer is one of greatest tight ends in history of game. … one of first tight ends to be able to go downfield as pass receiver. … switched from wide receiver, where he played in college, to tight end as rookie by coach Sam Rutigliano. … as such, is another example of player whose career was greatly aided by Rutigliano. … with Newsome taking over at tight, Rutigliano was able to move young tight end Dave Logan to wide receiver, where he blossomed. … holds team records for most career receptions (662), most receptions in season (89, twice), most receptions in game (14), most consecutive games with reception (150), most career receiving yards (7,980) and most receiving yards in game (191). … twice went over 1,000 receiving yards for season; played 13 seasons, all with Browns. … best overall season was 1984, when he had 89 receptions for 1,001 yards (11.2) and five TDs.

 

[Bri]

google something(pretty much anything) like team tight end recordyou'll see most of the TEs in recent years are setting their teams records.

 

[David Yudkin]

Yudkin's assertion (if it is as you say) is WRONG.

Huh? I have a spreadsheet with all the fantasy TE data since 1978. The numbers don't lie. The glory days of fantasy TE scoring was in 1980 - 1985. Since then, TE scoring had been WAY down. 2003 was a very poor year for TE production and made last year's TE totals look even more impressive.1980: 5 TE 100+ fantasy points, 7 TE 90+ points1981: 7 TE 100+ points, 9 TE 90+ points1982: 8 TE 100+ points, 8 TE 90+ points (projected out due to strike)1983: 4 TE 100+ points, 6 TE 90+ points1984: 7 TE 100+ points, 9 TE 90+ points1985: 7 TE 100+ points, 8 TE 90+ points2002: 3 TE 100+ points, 4 TE 90+ points2003: 2 TE 100+ points, 2 TE 90+ points2004: 6 TE 100+ points, 8 TE 90+ pointsIf you think that TE scoring was at a high point in 2002 or 2003, then I guess I can't intrepret data at all.If you misread or misinterpretted what I wrote, I mentioned that TE scoring should still be high but lower than last year's numbers overall.So if the average year is worth say .75 cents and last year was worth $1.00, I would guess that this year would be worth .90 to .95 cents.

 

[H.K.]

google something(pretty much anything) like team tight end record

you'll see most of the TEs in recent years are setting their teams records.

Why don't you do it? Yudkin and I keep providing statisitcs that prove your assertions inaccurate. Posting one blurb about a HOF player that retired 15 yrs ago is exception based, and not conclusive of anything. Provide hardcore data to substantiate your claims, then we can have a discussion. Up until that point, it will simply be a case of your perception vs. reality.

 

[jcjets]

NFL trends have a lot to do with the TE production.1) 7 TEs had 61 or more receptions this past year. Last year only 22) A.Gates broke the all time TD mark by a Tight end this year (13).3) 9 TEs had 572 or more yards. J. Putzier had the 572 on only 36 catches - WHO?? Last year only 44) Gonzo had 102 receptions this year. Last year Gonzo with 715) 9 TEs had 6 or more TD catches. Last year only 2 This is my theory on why TE production was so high this last year.All the teams in the league are looking for the big run stuffing DTs to anchor their defenses. In the last few NFL drafts DLs have seen a huge increase in the first round. 3 in 2004, 5 in 2003 4 in 2002 5 in 2001. As opposed to the standard 2 in the previous decade.Linebackers have gone the opposite way. 2 in 2004, 1 in 2003, 2 in 2002, and 1 in 2001. Previously it was 6 in 2000, 4 in 1999...you get the point.Who covers TEs? The linebackers!! Teams are more concerned with being big up front that they are sacrificing the LB position for it. This is why I see the TE having such a big year. Look for the NFL draft to start making a comback to linebackers to cover these TEs.The 3-4 should help reduce TE production as it puts more LBs on the field. With more teams going to the 3-4 look for less TE production in the next few years.

 

[shadyridr]

This same analysis led people to believe Holmes wouldnt approach the TD record again in 2003 and this same analysis leads people to believe that Manning wont approach his TD total of last year. What people dont seem to realize are that these are extremely talented players and while Im not saying Gates will definately get 10+ TDs I know that he is a matchup nightmare & that he's SD's passing redzone option.

 

[H.K.]

This same analysis led people to believe Holmes wouldnt approach the TD record again in 2003 and this same analysis leads people to believe that Manning wont approach his TD total of last year. What people dont seem to realize are that these are extremely talented players and while Im not saying Gates will definately get 10+ TDs I know that he is a matchup nightmare & that he's SD's passing redzone option.

Nobody will disagree with your statements. The possibility is there, but the probability is highly unlikely. The entire purpose of the thread is to communicate how small the percentages are to achieve 10 TD production at the TE slot, that's all.

 

[Bri]

Yudkin's assertion (if it is as you say) is WRONG.

Huh? I have a spreadsheet with all the fantasy TE data since 1978. The numbers don't lie. The glory days of fantasy TE scoring was in 1980 - 1985. Since then, TE scoring had been WAY down. 2003 was a very poor year for TE production and made last year's TE totals look even more impressive.

1980: 5 TE 100+ fantasy points, 7 TE 90+ points

1981: 7 TE 100+ points, 9 TE 90+ points

1982: 8 TE 100+ points, 8 TE 90+ points (projected out due to strike)

1983: 4 TE 100+ points, 6 TE 90+ points

1984: 7 TE 100+ points, 9 TE 90+ points

1985: 7 TE 100+ points, 8 TE 90+ points

2002: 3 TE 100+ points, 4 TE 90+ points

2003: 2 TE 100+ points, 2 TE 90+ points

2004: 6 TE 100+ points, 8 TE 90+ points

If you think that TE scoring was at a high point in 2002 or 2003, then I guess I can't intrepret data at all.

If you misread or misinterpretted what I wrote, I mentioned that TE scoring should still be high but lower than last year's numbers overall.

So if the average year is worth say .75 cents and last year was worth $1.00, I would guess that this year would be worth .90 to .95 cents.

No David, this is quite different. I know you post your numbers as specific as could be hence why I put that in parenthesis. Your post begins with 1978, my Ozzie Newsome blurb is from clevelandbrowns.com's website under the year 1978. 45 years is completely different. As I mentioned before, they were glorified linemen then. You want to compare TEs that catch with TEs that catch. HK wants to talk 45 years. 45 years ago Mike Vrabel would have been a stud probably.Somehow, I missed whatever thread you two are referring to here. I would have loved to discuss this. You use total fantasy points. I wonder about yardage, if there's a major difference year to year. I remember some guys in the 80s that seemed to "just catch TDs", seriously, not a Cris Carter reference.

 

[Bri]

google something(pretty much anything) like team tight end record

you'll see most of the TEs in recent years are setting their teams records.

Why don't you do it? Yudkin and I keep providing statisitcs that prove your assertions inaccurate. Posting one blurb about a HOF player that retired 15 yrs ago is exception based, and not conclusive of anything. Provide hardcore data to substantiate your claims, then we can have a discussion. Up until that point, it will simply be a case of your perception vs. reality.

HK,fine I will. Not much time tonight. Will do so tomorrow.

 

[LawFitz]

I'd guess it was the rule change favoring receivers over DBs.Tons of scoring through the air, with TEs being the biggest positional beneficiary by percentage so far. I'm guessing the bumping affected them the most previously.Gates and Gonzo will be ridiculous again this year and Manning and Culp will approach 40 TDs again.The rules have changed and we need to accept that it's changed the make up of the game. Until they change the rules again, on a relative basis, I've upgraded TEs, QBs, WRs and downgraded RBs and Defenses. On a RELATIVE basis. On an absolute basis all offensive positions have benefitted.

 

[David Yudkin]

Bri -I think you are confusing what the thread talked to . . . TE PRODUCTION. It appears to me that you are looked at overall skill sets and abilities. Yes, there are specialists out there that catch the ball more than in the past, but the numbers essentially have been down IN RECENT YEARS.The numbers don't lie--overall TE production has been bottomed out (until last year) for a period of 20 years. Even in that time, there were still a handful of top guys that posted high end numbers--but TE production as a whole was not that great.As for Coates, I think he is at best a borderline HOFer. He was only a full time starter and relevant offensive player for 6 years.Gonzalez, Sharpe, and Wycheck have had 500+ receptions (Coates had 499).Steve Jordan, Riley Odoms, and Dave Parks had more yards.Wesley Walls had more TD.Several other guys had career totals very similar to Coates.I'm not saying he's undeserving or that he won't make it in, only that I think it's far from automatic. Maybe someday the HOF will induct more tight ends, but as things have gone lately, it's hard for TE and WR to get in.

 

[CalBear]

All the teams in the league are looking for the big run stuffing DTs to anchor their defenses. In the last few NFL drafts DLs have seen a huge increase in the first round. 3 in 2004, 5 in 2003 4 in 2002 5 in 2001. As opposed to the standard 2 in the previous decade.

Linebackers have gone the opposite way. 2 in 2004, 1 in 2003, 2 in 2002, and 1 in 2001. Previously it was 6 in 2000, 4 in 1999...you get the point.

Who covers TEs? The linebackers!! Teams are more concerned with being big up front that they are sacrificing the LB position for it. This is why I see the TE having such a big year. Look for the NFL draft to start making a comback to linebackers to cover these TEs.

I don't think your argument makes sense. If the pool of DTs and linebackers is constant, where those players get selected in the draft is immaterial; even if all teams devalue linebackers, they still need to put linebackers out there on the field.It only makes sense if you think the pool of talent available at linebacker is declining for some reason.

 

[BassNBrew]

Actually, I had Gates in both my leagues last year and I'll be keeping him in the one that isn't a redraft. It's just that one of my pet peeves is that people fail to look beyond last season when projecting for the next. History can teach us incredible lessons if we take the time to learn from it.

Ahhh....the old TEs aren't worth keeping post, but then you spill the beans later. We may have been born on Sunday, but it wasn't yestereday. The TE scoring is so lucrative that we're on to your misdirection play HK. McMichael was crucial to our crown and will be locked up too! In the future, I'd suggest a 100 year study if you want to throw the gunners and hounds off the scent. By the way, you can add to your Cubs and sun certainties list Glump and Bass being in contention for a repeat!

 

[H.K.]

Actually, I had Gates in both my leagues last year and I'll be keeping him in the one that isn't a redraft. 

It's just that one of my pet peeves is that people fail to look beyond last season when projecting for the next.  History can teach us incredible lessons if we take the time to learn from it.

Ahhh....the old TEs aren't worth keeping post, but then you spill the beans later. We may have been born on Sunday, but it wasn't yestereday. The TE scoring is so lucrative that we're on to your misdirection play HK. McMichael was crucial to our crown and will be locked up too! In the future, I'd suggest a 100 year study if you want to throw the gunners and hounds off the scent. By the way, you can add to your Cubs and sun certainties list Glump and Bass being in contention for a repeat!

Bass - Actually I was referring to CHUG as the league I am keeping Gates. Considering we get 2 pts. per TE reception and he'll only cost me an 8th rounder, its a no brainer. But I am not keeping him with the expectation that he'll score 10 TD's....I'd be thrilled if he scored eight.

 

[H.K.]

Your post begins with 1978, my Ozzie Newsome blurb is from clevelandbrowns.com's website under the year 1978. 45 years is completely different. As I mentioned before, they were glorified linemen then. You want to compare TEs that catch with TEs that catch. HK wants to talk 45 years. 45 years ago Mike Vrabel would have been a stud probably.

Somehow, I missed whatever thread you two are referring to here. I would have loved to discuss this. You use total fantasy points. I wonder about yardage, if there's a major difference year to year. I remember some guys in the 80s that seemed to "just catch TDs", seriously, not a Cris Carter reference.

As the title of the thread states, as well as my initial post on the subject, the only statistic I am referring to in TE production is Touchdowns. Any other data is not relevant to this particular discussion. Bottom-line, double digit TD producing TE's are very rare, in any era.As for the 45 year segment, I agree that it wasn't the best to use because teams didn't start playing 16 games until 1978.

However, that will eliminate six TE's who reached 10+ TD's during fourteen game seasons.

Therefore, since 1978 and the advent of the 16 game schedule, there have been a grand total of eight players who have scored 10+ TD in a season at the TE position.

(Sharpe, Gonzo, & Walls have each done it twice in that time span and never consecutively.)

 

[tommyGunZ]

I for one don't care if Gates goes for 9 TDs instead of 10 or 11. As long as he goes for 75 and 900, he'll still justify that 4th round selection.Very few TE's have Gates' athleticism, and evey fewer at the team's #1 threat in the red zone passing game. Drew Brees absolutely loves him, so should we.

 

[H.K.]

Post-season bump. Only one TE had double digit TD's this year, and it was Gates who ended up with 10 TD's. Kudos to him as he is the first TE in the modern era to score 10+ TD's in consecutive seasons.However, the next closest TD scorer at the TE position only had seven (three players tied at that mark). Yet again, multiple TE's failed to notch 10+ TD's in a season.Hopefully this thread helped some people lower their expectations for Tight End TD production before the season started, and hopefully it will be remembered as people work on their projections for 2006.

 

[Finatic]

With the matchup problems Gates presents,I don't see how he is not a lock for 10+ TDs again in 2005.Couple that with LT in the backfield and a WR corps that doesn't have a legit superstar.One would have to think an injury to Gates is the only thing keeping him from reaching that plateau in my opinion.........

He could, but history is not on his side. If someone wants to make a bet with me on a result that has never been different in my lifetime, then I'll take the side where the odds are overwhelmingly in my favor.Every year for the World Series: Cubs vs. Everyone Else - I'll take the field, thank you.

I'll bet the sun comes up tomorrow, too.

As long as you are comfortable banking on something to happen that never has, so be it.

While he wasn't as dominant as he was in 2004,he still managed 10 TDs

 

[H.K.]

While he wasn't as dominant as he was in 2004,he still managed 10 TDs

Good call, Gates really beat the odds this season.

Let's just hope we don't see any more people projecting multiple guys like Gates, Gonzo, Witten, Crumpler, Heap, Shockey, etc. to score 10 TD's each next year.

FWIW, no TE has ever scored 10+ TD's three years in a row

 

[cstu]

People need to stop focusing on the label "TE" that guys like Gonzo and Gates are given since they are actually the #1 WR on the team. If a player rarely pass blocks and is involved on most pass plays, then he's basically a WR IMO.

 

[Bri]

Post-season bump.

Only one TE had double digit TD's this year, and it was Gates who ended up with 10 TD's. Kudos to him as he is the first TE in the modern era to score 10+ TD's in consecutive seasons.

However, the next closest TD scorer at the TE position only had seven (three players tied at that mark). Yet again, multiple TE's failed to notch 10+ TD's in a season.

Hopefully this thread helped some people lower their expectations for Tight End TD production before the season started, and hopefully it will be remembered as people work on their projections for 2006.

TDs is all that mattersthis thread was good for a thanks for bumping it

 

[TME]

People need to stop focusing on the label "TE" that guys like Gonzo and Gates are given since they are actually the #1 WR on the team. If a player rarely pass blocks and is involved on most pass plays, then he's basically a WR IMO.

The "label" is an football position and many leagues, including my main money league, are TE required, so the distinction for FF purposes is huge. Label on...an keep him as TE as the value is huge relative to the position.

 

[cstu]

People need to stop focusing on the label "TE" that guys like Gonzo and Gates are given since they are actually the #1 WR on the team. If a player rarely pass blocks and is involved on most pass plays, then he's basically a WR IMO.

The "label" is an football position and many leagues, including my main money league, are TE required, so the distinction for FF purposes is huge. Label on...an keep him as TE as the value is huge relative to the position.

Yes, I'm quite aware of that the TE position exists. In case you missed it, I'm saying that the new breed of TE's are closer to WR's than traditional TE's, that's all.

 

[Thorpe]

People need to stop focusing on the label "TE" that guys like Gonzo and Gates are given since they are actually the #1 WR on the team. If a player rarely pass blocks and is involved on most pass plays, then he's basically a WR IMO.

The "label" is an football position and many leagues, including my main money league, are TE required, so the distinction for FF purposes is huge. Label on...an keep him as TE as the value is huge relative to the position.

Yes, I'm quite aware of that the TE position exists. In case you missed it, I'm saying that the new breed of TE's are closer to WR's than traditional TE's, that's all.

Agree. You even see some TEs lining up in the slot on some pass plays, which I don't think has ever happened before.

 

[H.K.]

TDs is all that matters

this thread was good for a thanks for bumping it

The title and purpose of the thread was to analyze TE TD production, so yes, for this discussion TD's were all that mattered.

 

[cosmonaut]

People need to stop focusing on the label "TE" that guys like Gonzo and Gates are given since they are actually the #1 WR on the team. If a player rarely pass blocks and is involved on most pass plays, then he's basically a WR IMO.

I take it you weren't a Gonzo owner while Willie Roaf was hurt this year.Gonzo was being held in to pass block, and his early production suffered.