Originally Posted by
bwilliams
You're wrong on three levels:
1. "If you are trying to state that having a good TE does not win superbowls, I can argue that there is much more to the team than the TE causing that."
That isn't what I wrote. Reading is your friend. I said that you should never want your TE to be your primary receiver. Big (and obvious) difference.
2. Tony G. was our leading receiver in 1999 (9-7), 2001 (6-10), 2003 (13-3), 2004 (7-9), 2006 (9-7), 2007 (4-12), and 2008 (2-14). In other words, the Chiefs were 50-62 in the seven seasons in which our Tony G. was our primary receiver. We made two one-and-done playoff appearances (2003 and 2006) in those years. We didn't win a playoff game.
Suffice to say, you are very wrong when you write "Tony G. was our leading receiver time in and time out for many wins for many years."
3. How many playoff wins did the Chargers, Cowboys, and other teams in which the TE was primary receiver get? Yeah, that's what I thought.
Having a great TE is something every team should want. No team should want their TE to be their primary receiver. If your TE is getting most of the yards, it means your WRs stink. It means you aren't stretching the field. And it means that, no matter how good the rest of the team is, you'll almost certainly get killed in the playoffs.