Tight End Requirement Problems
Posted: Mon May 25, 2020 10:17 am
Watching most of the game replays each week, I have picked up on a potential problem with our running game, and some long passes! So, what is the problem, since our runners are doing great you might say? Well, here is the current breakdown of the teams with (A)ctive or (O)pen Tight Ends: Six teams only have One (1); ten teams have Two (2); one team has Three (3) and one team has Four (4). In this regard, first, none of the plays in the play pool allow WRs to be in a three-point stance at the snap of the ball. Second, the game automatically replaces tired players, and in the case of receivers, a tired TE with no back-up is replaced by a WR. As such, a tired TE on the OL with no back-up violates the play design by replacing him with a WR in a three-point stance.
Many of our run plays are designed with two and three TEs, and there are a lot of them with two TEs on the OL, both in a three-point stance. Although the rule, as currently written, only requires one active TE, either (A) or (O), teams using some of the existing plays with two and three TEs automatically violate the play design, either accidently or on purpose. BTW, some teams have an additional TE on the active roster, but they are (I)nactive! Clearly, unless the owner with just one TE has made a concerted effort NOT to pick plays with more than one or two TE, these teams violate the letter of the rule weekly by virtue of the replacements during the game. Ideally, teams should look at the plays that they use in the Play Editor, and if you see a WR in a three-point stance, you should either activate your additional TE if you have one, draft a FA TE, or not use the play in your plans. BTW, the situation occurs most often in run plays, and eight-man blocking schemes with two WRs going out for passes.
I have been aware of this issue for awhile, which is why the 49ers have carried three active TEs for a while, and took it for granted that other teams did the same until it dawned on me this weekend watching the games. I mistakenly thought that by increasing the HA of the TE a couple of seasons ago, and having many of the TE draftees better than the current TEs available, everyone would be on board with having at least two, if not three TEs. Obviously, I was mistaken.
I will not require any changes now, but next season there will be a requirement that all teams carry a minimum of two active TEs (As) and or (Os), since that is much easier to review than seeing a one TE team is using certain plays. Rich, you can put it in the rules now, but it will not take effect until the start of the next season. Sorry guys and gal, but this is not a debatable issue.
Many of our run plays are designed with two and three TEs, and there are a lot of them with two TEs on the OL, both in a three-point stance. Although the rule, as currently written, only requires one active TE, either (A) or (O), teams using some of the existing plays with two and three TEs automatically violate the play design, either accidently or on purpose. BTW, some teams have an additional TE on the active roster, but they are (I)nactive! Clearly, unless the owner with just one TE has made a concerted effort NOT to pick plays with more than one or two TE, these teams violate the letter of the rule weekly by virtue of the replacements during the game. Ideally, teams should look at the plays that they use in the Play Editor, and if you see a WR in a three-point stance, you should either activate your additional TE if you have one, draft a FA TE, or not use the play in your plans. BTW, the situation occurs most often in run plays, and eight-man blocking schemes with two WRs going out for passes.
I have been aware of this issue for awhile, which is why the 49ers have carried three active TEs for a while, and took it for granted that other teams did the same until it dawned on me this weekend watching the games. I mistakenly thought that by increasing the HA of the TE a couple of seasons ago, and having many of the TE draftees better than the current TEs available, everyone would be on board with having at least two, if not three TEs. Obviously, I was mistaken.
I will not require any changes now, but next season there will be a requirement that all teams carry a minimum of two active TEs (As) and or (Os), since that is much easier to review than seeing a one TE team is using certain plays. Rich, you can put it in the rules now, but it will not take effect until the start of the next season. Sorry guys and gal, but this is not a debatable issue.