[washingtonismoney]

He has seven interceptions (though admittedly, a 3 percent interception is pretty good.) And the idea that a passing offense cannot be effective without tight ends is silly. Prior to the Harbaugh era, tight ends were an ancillary component of the Stanford passing game. While you can certainly find some excellent receiving tight ends in our record books (Bob Moore, Greg Baty, Greg Clark), the passing-first regimes of Jim Plunkett, Mike Boryla, Guy Benjamin, John Elway, John Paye, Steve Stenstrom and the rest were built on throws to wide receivers, not tight ends.

I agree that the absence of tight ends shouldn't necessarily be a brobdingnagian problem, but in this specific case it is: Shaw keeps on throwing TEs out there who aren't much good. I don't think you can play modern offense while voluntarily conceding some of your skill position threats. And there are viable guys who are being underused. Why not go more to one-back formations with 3 WRs and Hewitt at TE? Why not play 3 WRs with Hewitt at FB and Gaffney at RB? (Put Cajuste at slot, where his mismatch ability would cause major problems to the defense). I don't understand Shaw's insistence on sticking with the converted DE crew at TE; because he's doing that, he's voluntarily handicapping the offense.

[washingtonismoney]

He has seven interceptions (though admittedly, a 3 percent interception is pretty good.) And the idea that a passing offense cannot be effective without tight ends is silly. Prior to the Harbaugh era, tight ends were an ancillary component of the Stanford passing game. While you can certainly find some excellent receiving tight ends in our record books (Bob Moore, Greg Baty, Greg Clark), the passing-first regimes of Jim Plunkett, Mike Boryla, Guy Benjamin, John Elway, John Paye, Steve Stenstrom and the rest were built on throws to wide receivers, not tight ends.

I agree that the absence of tight ends shouldn't necessarily be a brobdingnagian problem, but in this specific case it is: Shaw keeps on throwing TEs out there who aren't much good. I don't think you can play modern offense while voluntarily conceding some of your skill position threats. And there are viable guys who are being underused. Why not go more to one-back formations with 3 WRs and Hewitt at TE? Why not play 3 WRs with Hewitt at FB and Gaffney at RB? (Put Cajuste at slot, where his mismatch ability would cause major problems to the defense). I don't understand Shaw's insistence on sticking with the converted DE crew at TE; because he's doing that, he's voluntarily handicapping the offense.