3 WR and 1 TE yet again

[mgteich]

Reiss thinks that the wide receivers are looking so good that we are likely to move to much more of a 3 WR set than 2 WR, with Amendola, Thompkins and Dobson getting most of the reps. Of course, as always, we will run both sets.

I would not have thought it a month ago, but this is beginning to make sense.

Of course, this would also save a TE roster spot. We are fine with 3 TE's, or 3 TE and one on PUP.

What say you all?

 

[Bruins29]

Reiss thinks that the wide receivers are looking so good that we are likely to move to much more of a 3 WR set than 2 WR, with Amendola, Thompkins and Dobson getting most of the reps. Of course, as always, we will run both sets.

I would not have thought it a month ago, but this is beginning to make sense.

Of course, this would also save a TE roster spot. We are fine with 3 TE's, or 3 TE and one on PUP.

What say you all?

I would agree although if they keep 6 WR 4 TE wouldn't shock me because they are usually about 10 strong with both positions. I dont think they need a 7th WR because those guys are either expendable (Jenkins) or PS material Aiken and Simms etc.

Now, if the wanted to keep 5 RB and 3 QB something is taking a hit perhaps.

As far as TE. Gronk Ballard Suds and Fells are the top 4. If they (for some reason) PUP Gronk, which they wont. You can keep Hoo. They are in a tough spot there. You cant have your star TE on the shelf for 9 months. Could IR Ballard but I dont see that either. This is a tough situation with some tuff cuts coming. Fells and Hoo arent making it to Shadow. Suds wont clear waivers.

 

[dannydyn]

I would agree although if they keep 6 WR 4 TE wouldn't shock me because they are usually about 10 strong with both positions. I dont think they need a 7th WR because those guys are either expendable (Jenkins) or PS material Aiken and Simms etc.

Now, if the wanted to keep 5 RB and 3 QB something is taking a hit perhaps.

As far as TE. Gronk Ballard Suds and Fells are the top 4. If they (for some reason) PUP Gronk, which they wont. You can keep Hoo. They are in a tough spot there. You cant have your star TE on the shelf for 9 months. Could IR Ballard but I dont see that either. This is a tough situation with some tuff cuts cumming. Fells and Hoo arent making it to Shadow. Suds wont clear waivers.

Personally, I think Suds is here to stay

 

[Bruins29]

Personally, I think Suds is here to stay

Of course! My comment was no way he would make it to the PS not that they would even think of sending him there.

 

[dannydyn]

Of course! My comment was no way he would make it to the PS not that they would even think of sending him there.

Oops... Sorry, misread your post...

 

[ctpatsfan77]

Of course! My comment was no way he would make it to the PS not that they would even think of sending him there.

If Belichick is crazy enough to try to "sneak" Sudfeld onto the PS the way he did with Lee Smith and Will Yeatman. . . .

 

[mgteich]

5 RB and 3 QB is indeed the issue. The question may be whether the 4th TE is more valuable than Bolden.

QB 3
RB 5
WR 6
TE 3
OL 8

Even here, we are one light on the OL.

Now, if the wanted to keep 5 RB and 3 QB something is taking a hit perhaps.

 

[Bruins29]

5 RB and 3 QB is indeed the issue. The question may be whether the 4th TE is more valuable than Bolden.

QB 3
RB 5
WR 6
TE 3
OL 8

Even here, we are one light on the OL.

I think the 4th TE is way more valuable the Bolden. We run a lot of 3 TE sets and a ton of 2 TE sets. We dont run even a lot of 2 back sets. All 4 of your TE see the field way more than the 5th RB. And we run the 4 TE power package a few times a game too.

 

[IcyPatriot]

Reiss thinks that the wide receivers are looking so good that we are likely to move to much more of a 3 WR set than 2 WR, with Amendola, Thompkins and Dobson getting most of the reps. Of course, as always, we will run both sets.

I would not have thought it a month ago, but this is beginning to make sense.

Of course, this would also save a TE roster spot. We are fine with 3 TE's, or 3 TE and one on PUP.

What say you all?

I think we will attack each opponent as necessary each week as always.

sometimes the analysis here is way over the top.

The offense will be very balanced for the season ... we're not going to be any one thing.

 

[Deus Irae]

Reiss thinks that the wide receivers are looking so good that we are likely to move to much more of a 3 WR set than 2 WR, with Amendola, Thompkins and Dobson getting most of the reps. Of course, as always, we will run both sets.

I would not have thought it a month ago, but this is beginning to make sense.

Of course, this would also save a TE roster spot. We are fine with 3 TE's, or 3 TE and one on PUP.

What say you all?

If Suds is as good as he's being pimped to be, I don't see why the Patriots wouldn't want that second TE on the field with Gronk as much as possible, which would mean lots of 2 and 3 TE sets, especially if the reports about Fells are also accurate. And that's not even getting into the (theoretical) versatility of OhOh and the comeback of Ballard.

Looking at the overall roster, I think it's more likely that the Patriots will carry 5 TEs this year than it is that they'll carry 3.

 

[ATippett56]

Reiss thinks that the wide receivers are looking so good that we are likely to move to much more of a 3 WR set than 2 WR, with Amendola, Thompkins and Dobson getting most of the reps. Of course, as always, we will run both sets.

What say you all?

The New England Patriots offense started with a two tight end set with the first teamers against the Philadelphia Eagles defense in the first preseason game.

 

[supafly]

I think it will continue to be pretty 2 TE heavy, or at least around the same 50% percentage that it was last season with only AH/Gronk playing in 5/18 games together.

The 2 TE sets give us the ability to run the hurry up via pass and run by enabling the team to keep the same personnel on the field a lot of the time, and that's only one obvious benefit. You also have to figure that we're going to be very balanced in the run game again too, possibly even moreso than last season even.

As Icy the moderator stated--it will certainly depend on the specific gameplanning from a week to week basis as determined by the opponent's weaknesses, but I wouldn't go jumping to conclusions that we'd be ditching the 2 TE formation and going to a primary base 3/1/1 set either.

 

[MalaysiaPatsFan]

I think the Pats will run plenty of multiple TE sets as well as some 3 WR/1TE sets. It may not be that much different than last year. The difference will be that when the Pats run sets with 3 or more WR (not just splitting a RB or TE out wide) that they will actually have at least 3 good WR on the field compared to last year when it was often Welker, Lloyd and ???

 

[Nunchucks]

The Patriots seem to have really hit the jackpot on the WR front this year. I've never seen anything like the Dobson, Thompson, and Boyce rookies. That being said, the matchup problems that are created by running a two TE set against a nickel defense are too tasty to pass up.

Now, if they could run a 3 WR set against a 4-3 base defense, that might be a different story.

We will probably see a lot of WRs rotating in and out of the lineup to keep guys fresh, which is a very good thing.

 

[patsinthesnow]

I want the best possible receiving threats on the field for week 1. (assuming Gronk is out)

IMO that's: Amendola/Thompkins/Dobson with Sudfeld at TE.

Dobson>Ballard. (Our 3rd WR is a better receiving threat than our 2nd TE)

If Sudfeld becomes legit and Gronk returns, a 2 TE set of Gronk/Sud will be the way to go.

 

[BlueThunder]

I heard BB/Josh are working on a 5 RB set.

 

[Sicilian]

I heard BB/Josh are working on a 5 RB set.

Oddly enough, with this mix, you could put Ridley as the HB, Blount as the FB, Bolden at TE, and Vereen/Washington spread out wide. I'm not saying it would be EFFECTIVE, but they'd at least all be able to fake it kinda well

 

[old 55]

I don't think it is out of the question that BB claims a setback for Ballard and puts him on IR for another season. There have already been reports of him having knee issues after practices.It would be plausible if BB wants to stockpile TE's for next year.

 

[IcyPatriot]

I heard BB/Josh are working on a 5 RB set.

I would love to see a few 3 RB sets ... and I think we might see that just a bit with Tebow being the 3rd and running the option with him. A way to use Tebow and still have Brady at QB. Usually teams don't bite to quickly on that but if it's Tebow it presents a huge problem as it takes a few to tackle him in the open field.

Ridley - Blount and Tebow back there with Gronk at TE ... Oh My!

 

[patchick]

I want the best possible receiving threats on the field for week 1. (assuming Gronk is out)

IMO that's: Amendola/Thompkins/Dobson with Sudfeld at TE.

Dobson>Ballard. (Our 3rd WR is a better receiving threat than our 2nd TE)

If Sudfeld becomes legit and Gronk returns, a 2 TE set of Gronk/Sud will be the way to go.

That's a very reasonable argument, but I'm confused that so many in this thread are placing Ballard ahead of Fells. I was under the impression that Fells has had a much stronger camp, and that he seems to have regained his form after playing injured last year. Am I mistaken?

Regardless, this thread makes me happy. Can you believe we're contemplating solid, legitimate options for 3-1 and 2-2 receiving configurations, without ANY of the team's SIX top receivers from last season? Pretty amazing. Then patch Gronk back in, and the smiles grow.