Question of the Day: Should The Bengals Take Four Tight Ends?

by Josh Kirkendall on Aug 31, 2010 1:01 PM EDT in Analysis

An argument could be made for the Bengals to keep four tight ends heading into the regular season. Jermaine Gresham is sort of a lock, wouldn't you agree? Then you have Reggie Kelly, Chase Coffman, Darius Hill and Daniel Coats, all of whom currently sit on the team's roster. And no, we're not talking about guys that simply snap the football, like Clark Harris. Or Brad St. Louis before him. Dating back to the 2006 season, excluding long snappers, the Bengals have taken between two and three tight ends into the regular season.

Season	Count	Tight Ends
2009	3	Daniel Coats, Chase Coffman, J.P. Foschi
2008	2	Reggie Kelly, Ben Utecht
2007	3	Reggie Kelly, Daniel Coats, Nate Lawrie
2006	2	Reggie Kelly, Tony Stewart

Would the team go with four tight ends this year? Bengals offensive coordinator, and every Bengals fan's BFF, Bob Bratkowski reportedly said that the team has discussed taking four tight ends, while perhaps only keeping two quarterbacks, come September 4, the date in which all NFL teams are required to be within the maximum 53-man roster. While taking two quarterbacks is admittedly a long-shot, what about the idea of keeping four tight ends not including long-snapper Clark Harris?

With Fui Vakapuna and Brian Leonard hurt, the Bengals have been giving fullback Joe Tronzo many reps in their place. Even Dan Skuta, a linebacker in July, now a possible two-way player in September, has been getting looks. The idea of keeping four tight ends is likely based on the experience that Daniel Coats has at the position, where he played most of his 16 games in 2008 at fullback. Though one could argue that Coats was the fullback during the Bengals 1,520-yard rushing season, which is the lowest since 1995. They could argue that.

Question of the Day: Should the Bengals take four tight ends?

Tweet Comment 10 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

If they work out of more spread sets

the traditional FB role on the team will be minimized. I figure Kelly, Coats or Skuta can work as a FB when needed as well as Leonard when he is healthy. I would not expect the Bengals to bring in another FB unless he would be an upgrade over Coats on special teams.

My only concern would be short yardage and goal line ‘heavy’ sets where more blockers are required.

by Cedric Benson Boat Party on Aug 31, 2010 1:24 PM EDT reply actions

+1

Coats has impressed with special teams and can play FB. Versatility counts a lot with Lewis.
He blocks well but don’t worry. He won’t have to take a pass this year.

We have other players for that.

by IllinoisBengal on Aug 31, 2010 8:18 PM EDT up reply actions

I like Tronzo a lot and would prefer to carry him over Coats or Hill. However, he could also go to the PS. In the end I don’t see a lot of difference inkeeping Coats as a 4th TE or Tronzo as a FB, especially if we keep 7 LB including Skuta as a FB/LB.

by jim0ijk on Aug 31, 2010 1:39 PM EDT reply actions

If the Bengals only keep 5 WRs

Then I think 4 TEs makes sense. Otherwise, I don’t think the number of opportunities warrants that many receiving options. If they cut elsewhere, I think carrying 4 RBs would be the better area to load up. Cedric Peerman would be a nice insurance policy if Benson got hurt.

by SnapCount80 on Aug 31, 2010 2:09 PM EDT reply actions

Leonard at FB...Brillant

I say cut Coats, keep Kelley, Gresham and Coffman. Prior to Leonards return use Kelley and Coffman as FB in a two back set( with Ced or Scott)as a safety valve for one man screens with Jelly Moobs blocking. Leonard returns, keep him at FB with the same set up and we could rock and roll. We all know what Leonard can do on third down But can you imagine this additional nightmare to opposing defensive coordinators if he’s in on most downs.

by sofakingood on Aug 31, 2010 2:33 PM EDT reply actions

No

Any and all options for Daniel Coats to wiggle his way onto this roster must be closed down, no exceptions. He’s had far too many chances for far too little production.

by Doc Scratch on Aug 31, 2010 2:41 PM EDT reply actions

Absolutely not

Gresham, Kelly, Coffman

End of discussion

by jimbasa on Aug 31, 2010 3:04 PM EDT reply actions

I'd rather have Tronzo..

Dude is a truck and can actually catch the ball.. for the love of god, get rid of D. Coats.

by 80%OFTHETIMEIMRIGHTEVERYTIME on Aug 31, 2010 4:33 PM EDT reply actions

Coffman is still a pretty terrible pass blocker...

no way he could run block as a FB he’d get buckled. Leonard is a good pass blocker and having him in a two back set could be interesting, but he also would not be the best option as a down hill blocking FB. Tronzo seems to be doing quite well. Should be interesting to see if the experts agree on cut down day. Ashame about Fui.

by frickja on Aug 31, 2010 10:46 PM EDT reply actions