Jermaine Gresham

[HellMarine]

Originally Posted by StilHoping

Interesting numbers. However pro football focus had Gresham as the lowest rated tight end. He hasn't impressed me

He was that low due to blocking mainly. I honestly think that's something Gresham will just never be good at, is run blocking.

He's frustrating, and I may cuss him during the game but he's not as bad as many make him out to be, even myself at times. He just seems like he's usually good for a drop or holding per game.

[tazdt]

he's ok but not what i thought he would be some competion would be good for him. make him earn that starting role next year.

[shaolinghost]

Originally Posted by HellMarine

He was that low due to blocking mainly. I honestly think that's something Gresham will just never be good at, is run blocking.

He's frustrating, and I may cuss him during the game but he's not as bad as many make him out to be, even myself at times. He just seems like he's usually good for a drop or holding per game.

A 1st round TE should be good at everything, but he's more like a big Hernandez. Gresham just simply wasn't worth the pick. He's dropped too many passes when it really matters and he goes stretches without really making an impact.

After next season we should probably move away from him and see what Charles can do.

[BengalRugby]

A 1st round TE should be good at everything, but he's more like a big Hernandez. Gresham just simply wasn't worth the pick. He's dropped too many passes when it really matters and he goes stretches without really making an impact.

After next season we should probably move away from him and see what Charles can do.


Or just use him as a true receiving TE...


If he were in New England, he would be producing like Gronkowski. It is a matter of scheme and coaching. Consider the coaching staff's track record of using and developing TE's and you will see where the problem is.

[higametz]

Originally Posted by TheLeonardLeap

He was ranked the worst TE in the league by a single arbitrary system.. but even if that's 100% valid, is it his fault the coaches are asking a TE to block 1-on-1 with Cameron Wake and Justin Tuck? That's just BEGGING for a penalty, which ended up happening, and in PFF, they grade horribly negative for getting penalties.

Regardless... say you "part ways" with Gresham.. what then? You move forward with Charles and Quinn as your TEs? One guy has 8 career catches in 16 games (6 started), and the other guy has 1 career catch in FOUR SEASONS. I don't see how that improves the Bengals in the slightest.

Did he have a god awful game? Most certainly. But he's also only 24 years old. 24! Averaging 57 caches, 600 yards, and 5 TDs a season in his first three. To put in perspective, that's roughly on pace with the start of Jason Witten and Tony Gonzalez's careers.

Who's going to pick up that slack? Maybe we should see if Daniel Coats is still available.

yep..............It's the old "be careful what you wish for" mantra....

[PApinhead]

Originally Posted by Tommy Casanova 72-77

They could trade him like they did the LB last year and get at least a 2nd for him. There are good TE's available this year in the draft. Since they do not make their TE a focal point of the O anyways...maybe they can get one who can block better and has better hands at least.

I'd be all for that!!

Gresham is decent, maybe even good, and could be great, but he is not due to his inconsistency. We can't rely on him to catch passes when we need it, but we can rely on him to get at least one false start or holding call a game. Can better coaching fix these things? I just don't know. They can to an extent, but a lot of it is on him.

I'd love to keep him here, see our offense change, and see him turn into the next Gronk. But I really don't see it happening. I'm ready to find a tight end that we can count on to catch the ball and that can block too. I think Charles could surprise a lot of people and could be our man. If not, then let's go out and find him. Our offense will not be that good until we do find the man.

[higametz]

Originally Posted by Tommy Casanova 72-77

They could trade him like they did the LB last year and get at least a 2nd for him. There are good TE's available this year in the draft. Since they do not make their TE a focal point of the O anyways...maybe they can get one who can block better and has better hands at least.

Bengals rank 7th in the league this past season in TE rankings in catches and only 6 other teams had more receiving yards from that position and you say they don't make the TE a "focal point"?.And this from a kid who has played 3 total years who was still recovering from major knee surgery and missed his last year in college..You need to do your homework here rather than assume..

[gardner30]

Originally Posted by BengalRugby

A 1st round TE should be good at everything, but he's more like a big Hernandez. Gresham just simply wasn't worth the pick. He's dropped too many passes when it really matters and he goes stretches without really making an impact.

After next season we should probably move away from him and see what Charles can do.


Or just use him as a true receiving TE...


If he were in New England, he would be producing like Gronkowski. It is a matter of scheme and coaching. Consider the coaching staff's track record of using and developing TE's and you will see where the problem is.

This is laughable.

New England had some 1st Rd TEs before Gronk got there and none of them performed to that level.

There is a difference in terms of athlete between Gronk and Gresham, Gronk being the better all around athlete.

Gronk is more explosive and would perform in ANY offense, even Bratkowski's lol.

If you can't see the difference between the 2 you are blind.

[basballguy]

Originally Posted by gardner30

This is laughable.

New England had some 1st Rd TEs before Gronk got there and none of them performed to that level.

There is a difference in terms of athlete between Gronk and Gresham, Gronk being the better all around athlete.

Gronk is more explosive and would perform in ANY offense, even Bratkowski's lol.

If you can't see the difference between the 2 you are blind.

I'm not sure that you can argue someone saying "Put them in Tom Brady's offense and their numbers will improve"

[gardner30]

Originally Posted by basballguy

I'm not sure that you can argue someone saying "Put them in Tom Brady's offense and their numbers will improve"

I'm sure they would improve, but not like Gronkowksi last year.

That is special.

Gresham is good but not on Gronks level, in any offense.

[THE PISTONS]

Originally Posted by higametz

Bengals rank 7th in the league this past season in TE rankings in catches and only 6 other teams had more receiving yards from that position and you say they don't make the TE a "focal point"?.And this from a kid who has played 3 total years who was still recovering from major knee surgery and missed his last year in college..You need to do your homework here rather than assume..

And when you factor in blocking, penalties, and all aspects of play...he ranks last on PFF among TE's. That's telling!

[Derrick]

Originally Posted by PApinhead

I'd be all for that!!

Gresham is decent, maybe even good, and could be great, but he is not due to his inconsistency. We can't rely on him to catch passes when we need it, but we can rely on him to get at least one false start or holding call a game. Can better coaching fix these things? I just don't know. They can to an extent, but a lot of it is on him.

I'd love to keep him here, see our offense change, and see him turn into the next Gronk. But I really don't see it happening. I'm ready to find a tight end that we can count on to catch the ball and that can block too. I think Charles could surprise a lot of people and could be our man. If not, then let's go out and find him. Our offense will not be that good until we do find the man.

I defer to the Hard Knocks series. There was a lot of hoopla about the TE position - Coffman specifically. Therefore, I fault the TE coach(s) for our inability to field a really competent TE.

[gardner30]

Originally Posted by basballguy

I'm not sure that you can argue someone saying "Put them in Tom Brady's offense and their numbers will improve"

You guys do realize that Gresham has been targeted more (269) than Gronkowski (262) in their careers right?

Gronk, on the Bengals, would be like a 2nd AJ Green, not a complement to AJ, like Gresham is.

[shaolinghost]

Originally Posted by BengalRugby

Or just use him as a true receiving TE...


If he were in New England, he would be producing like Gronkowski. It is a matter of scheme and coaching. Consider the coaching staff's track record of using and developing TE's and you will see where the problem is.

That would mean running more 2 TE sets, which IM all for, but I'm not sure the coaching staff wants to run those the majority of the time...

Even still though, the point about his drops during key moments wouldn't improve because he doesn't have to block anymore. His potential is great, and he's a top 5 TE when he's on, but he's pretty inconsistent.
For example, there were 7 games last season where he had less than 40yards, 5 of them against our division opponents. That's not good any way you slice it.


I'm just saying we'd be smart to at least consider another option long-term.

[Abspara]

Originally Posted by gardner30

I'm sure they would improve, but not like Gronkowksi last year.

That is special.

Gresham is good but not on Gronks level, in any offense.

Just because someone switches teams does not mean they will automatically improve.

Remember Ocho's trip to New England? He was less productive there than he was here.

Gresham strikes me as the kind of player that needs things simplified for him.

[momadance02]

Originally Posted by jsr18

While I don't disagree with your 2 points, I think you missed the biggest factor: Either ML is calling offensive plays or is seriously limiting the playbook with his game plan.

We all thought Bratkowski forgot about the TE too, remember...

Gruden is calling the plays

[XenoMorph]

Originally Posted by shaolinghost

That would mean running more 2 TE sets, which IM all for, but I'm not sure the coaching staff wants to run those the majority of the time...

Even still though, the point about his drops during key moments wouldn't improve because he doesn't have to block anymore. His potential is great, and he's a top 5 TE when he's on, but he's pretty inconsistent.
For example, there were 7 games last season where he had less than 40yards, 5 of them against our division opponents. That's not good any way you slice it.


I'm just saying we'd be smart to at least consider another option long-term.

We did it for 1/2 of one game and marched down the Field...

Charles and Gresham are more Pass catchers than Blockers Switch up which one stays in and which runs a route and use them to mismatch the D... They dont have to line up on the line either... You could have Both TEs wide left. With hawkins/Green 3 yards behind waiting for a screen pass.

[shaolinghost]

Originally Posted by BengalsFan024

We did it for 1/2 of one game and marched down the Field...

Charles and Gresham are more Pass catchers than Blockers Switch up which one stays in and which runs a route and use them to mismatch the D... They dont have to line up on the line either... You could have Both TEs wide left. With hawkins/Green 3 yards behind waiting for a screen pass.

I agree with all of that. Line Charles up in the slot, or even in the backfield, and put Gresham out wide opposite Green. 6'5" beats 5'11" every time.

Re-thinking my previous post a little I could see how taking away him having to block could free his mind up to totally focus on just catching the ball. Like Abspara said, Gresham seems like a guy you should try to keep things simple for.