Jamal Adams

[Shas]

Yeah, if Andrews or Boyle goes down that position becomes paper thin. TE3 to me is the most wide open position on the team.

I think wee need to look at how they used each individual tight end last year as we ponder depth chart questions.

Boyle was the clear #1 TE, on the field for seven out of ten offense snaps. That was by far the most for any offensive skill player except Lamar. If he gets hurt, it is difficult to project a comparable player on the roster. You really don't want Andrews taking on Boyle's role because that diminishes his value.

Charles Scarff, the other Delaware TE on the team (from Lancaster) is as close as they have to a Boyle as a traditional, big, in-line TE. Although he is still 20 lbs lighter. We don't know much about him. He emerged as a big redzone threat as a senior at UD and his in-line blocking was said to have improved.

Neither UDFA TE is much of a comp for Boyle. Breeland is as big as Scarff, but was clearly a move TE in college. Wolf is built like a big wideout.

I remain intrigued at what Ricard could do as an H-back--I suspect he would take some of Boyle's snaps.

Andrews and Hurst had very nearly identical snap counts last year and combined they were close to what Boyle's workload was. I think you can expect Andrew's role to increase if he can stay healthy. While the talent drop off would be huge if Andrews can't go, you can say that about a lot of positions. I'm way more concerned about what happens if Stanley, Jackson or the Browns go down.

I don't think it is all that crazy to imagine using Miles Boykin (6'4" 220) to fill some of what Andrews does, in a pinch. He may come closer to replicating what Andrews does compared to the drop off from anyone asked to fill in for Nick Boyle.

With the expanded practice squad I am really less concerned about how many, or who is in the active roster. While Harbaugh shot down the idea, I like the thought of keeping four running backs and just two tight ends, plus Ricard playing an H-back role, and being more creative in how they use receivers. They can still keep three TEs in reserve, on the practice squad--Scarff, Breeland, and Wolf--and bring any one of them up on game day to fit the scheme that day, without having to cut anyone.

[QtR Nevermore]

Minnesota is somewhere in the first list... certainly not left off the second list.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Probably. I couldn't really decide between the Raiders, Steelers, Broncos and Vikings for the last 3 places - it's very close.

[L. G. Dupre]

Not many....
Really I look up and down the rosters and nobody is better than Baltimore. Perhaps equal, but not better.

That’s how I feel about it,too, but I didn’t know if I was just being a 72 year old fanboy. It’s nice to think the biggest roster hole is third string TE.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

[QtR Nevermore]

With the expanded practice squad I am really less concerned about how many, or who is in the active roster. While Harbaugh shot down the idea, I like the thought of keeping four running backs and just two tight ends, plus Ricard playing an H-back role, and being more creative in how they use receivers. They can still keep three TEs in reserve, on the practice squad--Scarff, Breeland, and Wolf--and bring any one of them up on game day to fit the scheme that day, without having to cut anyone.

I'm with you on being fairly relaxed about how the last few rosters spots break down between TE and WR but I'd also throw the 4th RB into that too.* It doesn't really matter how many RBs, TEs or WRs we keep. Whoever looks best in whatever camp/preseason we get, and anyone we might lose if we expose them to the practice squad, should make the roster and we can promote the others as we need them.

*I'm still waiting to be convinced by Justice. Looking fast on a few outside runs doesn't make him a roster lock in my book. I don't dislike him but I'll admit to getting really annoyed when people value him over Gus for no discernible reason.

[jonboy79]

That’s how I feel about it,too, but I didn’t know if I was just being a 72 year old fanboy. It’s nice to think the biggest roster hole is third string TE.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro

OLB is a MUCH bigger hole, IMO.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[WNCRavensFan]

OLB is a MUCH bigger hole, IMO.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Judon, Ferguson, Bowser, McPhee, Ward

What I mean is it might be the worst positional group among starters on the team but there is no roster hole there.

[jonboy79]

Judon, Ferguson, Bowser, McPhee, Ward

What I mean is it might be the worst positional group among starters on the team but there is no roster hole there.

Not one of them is as good as Mandrews or Boyle though,,.
Charles Scarff isn’t all that different from Jihad Ward, and not likely to get 10% the snaps of the former.

I mean I guess TE3 is a hole, but... that’s a stretch to call deep depth a hole.
If Boyle goes down we play Ricard more.
If a Mandrews goes down we play less two TE, like a “normal team”...




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[202Belden]

I expect Jacob Breeland, UDFA Tight End from Oregon, to make some noise in pre-season (assuming there is one) and challenge for the TE3 slot.

[jonboy79]

I expect Jacob Breeland, UDFA Tight End from Oregon, to make some noise in pre-season (assuming there is one) and challenge for the TE3 slot.

Absolutely as good a chance as anyone.
He’s the guy that was trending toward a kid round pick before ACL tear if I’m not mistaken...


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[edromeo]

Shas-
Good point about Boyle. If he goes down the run game changes a lot; unless Andrews becomes a stud blocker over night.

I guess Ricard could play more TE? But even if Ricard could then it creates a hole at FB albeit a lesser hole.

[QtR Nevermore]

Shas-
Good point about Boyle. If he goes down the run game changes a lot; unless Andrews becomes a stud blocker over night.

I guess Ricard could play more TE? But even if Ricard could then it creates a hole at FB albeit a lesser hole.

Run blocking will probably be the deciding factor when picking our 3rd TE. We have plenty of players who can make catches inside and from the slot to cover for Andrews.

[21xxxv]

I think wee need to look at how they used each individual tight end last year as we ponder depth chart questions.

Boyle was the clear #1 TE, on the field for seven out of ten offense snaps. That was by far the most for any offensive skill player except Lamar. If he gets hurt, it is difficult to project a comparable player on the roster. You really don't want Andrews taking on Boyle's role because that diminishes his value.

Charles Scarff, the other Delaware TE on the team (from Lancaster) is as close as they have to a Boyle as a traditional, big, in-line TE. Although he is still 20 lbs lighter. We don't know much about him. He emerged as a big redzone threat as a senior at UD and his in-line blocking was said to have improved.

Neither UDFA TE is much of a comp for Boyle. Breeland is as big as Scarff, but was clearly a move TE in college. Wolf is built like a big wideout.

I remain intrigued at what Ricard could do as an H-back--I suspect he would take some of Boyle's snaps.

Andrews and Hurst had very nearly identical snap counts last year and combined they were close to what Boyle's workload was. I think you can expect Andrew's role to increase if he can stay healthy. While the talent drop off would be huge if Andrews can't go, you can say that about a lot of positions. I'm way more concerned about what happens if Stanley, Jackson or the Browns go down.

I don't think it is all that crazy to imagine using Miles Boykin (6'4" 220) to fill some of what Andrews does, in a pinch. He may come closer to replicating what Andrews does compared to the drop off from anyone asked to fill in for Nick Boyle.

With the expanded practice squad I am really less concerned about how many, or who is in the active roster. While Harbaugh shot down the idea, I like the thought of keeping four running backs and just two tight ends, plus Ricard playing an H-back role, and being more creative in how they use receivers. They can still keep three TEs in reserve, on the practice squad--Scarff, Breeland, and Wolf--and bring any one of them up on game day to fit the scheme that day, without having to cut anyone.

YOur sentence about Rickard is the most intriguing to me, and I absolutely agree. At 300lb, and athletic, he's a guy every team wished they had, because he doesn't pimp for the glory stats. Whenever the majority of media or even posters here speak about the Ravens TE's, they fail to mention Patrick's versatility and worth to the team. Clearly one of the unsung Ravens.. Having him on the field allows Andrews or one of the new UDFA's play that hybrid role off the line to create mismatches with LB's and CB's