Tight Ends

I did like Shockey here last year and the role he was able to play. I felt though, that it took oportunities away from Olsen. Shockey is a little more scrappy going for the ball but is also long in the tooth to basicly fill the same role Olsen does and sooner or later something was going to blow up with Shockey. Maybe he comes back if we need him due to injury or decide near the end of camp we need him.

Although on the surface bringing Tolbert in is a head scratcher, I like that he brings an added wrinkle the other backs dont. Creating mismatches and keeping defenses guessing is a welcome change from years past IMO. With Cam you have to run an exotic scheme, at least until he matures as a passer(which will happen, but thats another topic). I personally dont care if we run a full house backfield as long as it works.

Trading for Wallace would be nice, but the Steelers typically dont do those types of trades. The other thing is Wallace wants big money, something we're a little short on. Pitt wont pay DWs salary so wed be strapped to pay him.

 

Shockey and Olsen played nothing alike. Shockey was used more often as a blocker and underneath receiver, whereas Olsen was used vertically to attack the seams.

Such as? Stewart & DW are both capable of catching passes if the offense chooses to use backs in that fashion, while Chud didn't use a whole lot of two back sets before.

Santonio Holmes?

 

The role of pass catching TE, two different niches. I think Olsen is physical enough to do some more of the underneath work. Shockey was a better blocker.

Tolbert is the better reciver of the three and more versitile where you can line him up. Thus, someone to come in and create mismatches.

I just dont see the steelers dumping Wallace, who has no choice but to play for his tender, to get 1 DW that we vastly overpayed or 2 JS who will have to get paid sooner or later. These arent the Steelers of old, RB just isnt their main focus.

 

with the amount we ran shotgun, two TE makes us more easy to read, though I didn't find much of a correlation between the two. And in this offense it's not like you can just say "there are two TE in the game"

Hartsock is said to be a good blocker. He barely played last year but statistically over the last number of years it's all he's really done, so he either does it well or not. Some of those numbers at FB, keep in mind that it's either Brockel, who had 100 snaps, or Olsen, who acted like a fullback to show a look and clearly has no business at FB. So hopefully that would improve.

If they did sub in Hartsock occasionally as a blocker, I'm OK with that. He's not that good, but he's what we have. It's clear they'll continue to run more analogous to the second half of the year, but it's less clear if they'll make it as spread.

we used 3 WR a ton last year (11 and 17 each had over 700 snaps, so each had about 70% of the available snaps), but I would anticipate that would tail off a bit this year. If they're serious about going with two backs, it's tough to see them doing a lot without any TE. Which obviously leaves a 3rd WR off more of the time. Not that it's 100% what we would do, but Norv doesn't do that much 3 WR, and instead does a lot of WR subbing and moving, but the amount of time I studied him dealt with a lot of injury as well.

 

Dude, Tolbert isn't even anywhere close to the other two as a receiver. He's very good for a fullback in that respect, but tight ends are another level. And Olsen really isn't physical. I suppose he could handle underneath routes, but it's certainly not the most efficient use of his talents. I imagine that they're just hoping Barnidge can give them what Shockey did, and maybe he can.

Mendenhall is out for most if not all of the season and they have no real replacement on a team that is otherwise prepared for a Super Bowl run. A Wallace for Stewart swap would actually make perfect sense for both teams, but I agree that it's still unlikely. For the record, Wallace can miss half the season and still get credited for service to become unrestricted next off-season, so he can definitely cause problems for them if he wants to go that route.

 

I just noticed that Olsen only caught 50.6% of his targets last season, which is pretty bad for a tight end. For his career he's up around 60%, which is about average, so hopefully that was just a one season blip. Interestingly, Shockey was also down around ten percent. He caught 59.7% of his targets after being up at 70% with New Orleans.

 

Is the target stat related to Qb accuracy or is that taken into account somehow?

 

Id still like Shockey back too. Frankly, im not keen having only one reliable TE. Thought bringing in 2 last year was one of the better moves this franchise has made.

But looking at the moves contract wise, we were paying Shock 4 mill for one year. We're paying Tolbert 12 mill over 4 years if i remember rightly. I think well get more bang for the buck with Tolbert next year than we got outta Shock. I think he actually offers much more versatility to the playbook too.

Tolbert will be a big fan favorite i predict but again id still like Shockey back for one more year.

Still kinda shocked San Diego let him go to be honest and we have him.

OT but same with Murphy too, i remember him looking like the Raiders best WR not too long ago. Dont know what happened there at all.

 

Sorry, when i was saying of the three i meant between Tolbert, Williams, and Stewart.

 

"I suspect they will continue to depend on Cam's versatility at the goal line rather than running a power game. Hopefully that does not get him hurt."

This is my concern - Cam's potential for injury at the goal line. I hope they utilize the other offensive weapons down there this year and try to protect him more. Plenty of stud backs to get it across the goal line.