Quote:6. Vance McDonald, TE, Rice (6050 E, 255 E and 4.65 E): As tight ends like Rob Gronkowski and Jimmy Graham are in more demand, the search for big play, receiving tight ends never ends and McDonald has the physical tools to warrant inclusion in that group. A tall and versatile offensive weapon, McDonald has made big plays catching passes from different alignments. While his offensive production does not compare with some of the top tight ends in the country, his combination of size, athleticism, speed and hands is better than most. This game gives McDonald a similar opportunity to the one that Jimmy Graham had when he came to the Senior Bowl viewed as a raw, but very gifted prospect.

Quote:Vance McDonald, TE, Rice: I didn't even know who Vance McDonald was 24 hours ago, but my Twitter time line from Monday morning told the tale. He was a weigh-in revelation, checking in at 6'4" and 260 pounds with massive 10" hands and an 81 5/8" wingspan; for the cherry on top, he dominated during the afternoon practice.

(01-22-2013 10:48 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  Continues to boggle the mind how ineffectively Reagan used our trio of elite TEs (Wilson, Cook, McDonald); hardly ever-- save for obviously running plays-- using the two TE set. You'd think he might have learned something from watching the Patriots.

(01-22-2013 11:11 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(01-22-2013 10:48 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  Continues to boggle the mind how ineffectively Reagan used our trio of elite TEs (Wilson, Cook, McDonald); hardly ever-- save for obviously running plays-- using the two TE set. You'd think he might have learned something from watching the Patriots.

Agreed to a certain extent. But was it more play call or play execution that didn't use these three more effectively?

Obviously I don't remember every single play/formation during the season, and because of that I don't know how Reagen actually aligned our big TEs throughout the season.

But I wonder if the bigger issue wasn't the play calling/design but rather that the defense keyed in on Vance or that, as good as McHargue has become, he still isn't Chase, who could seemingly hit anyone and everyone.

Just pondering.

(01-22-2013 12:11 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  

(01-22-2013 11:11 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(01-22-2013 10:48 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  Continues to boggle the mind how ineffectively Reagan used our trio of elite TEs (Wilson, Cook, McDonald); hardly ever-- save for obviously running plays-- using the two TE set. You'd think he might have learned something from watching the Patriots.

Agreed to a certain extent. But was it more play call or play execution that didn't use these three more effectively?

Obviously I don't remember every single play/formation during the season, and because of that I don't know how Reagen actually aligned our big TEs throughout the season.

But I wonder if the bigger issue wasn't the play calling/design but rather that the defense keyed in on Vance or that, as good as McHargue has become, he still isn't Chase, who could seemingly hit anyone and everyone.

Just pondering.

Therefore using two tight ends in passing situations.

The Owls didn't play too many teams that could key on both tight ends and outside receivers. Somebody is going to have one on one coverage typically with a significant size advantage.

(01-22-2013 12:13 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(01-22-2013 12:11 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  

(01-22-2013 11:11 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(01-22-2013 10:48 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  Continues to boggle the mind how ineffectively Reagan used our trio of elite TEs (Wilson, Cook, McDonald); hardly ever-- save for obviously running plays-- using the two TE set. You'd think he might have learned something from watching the Patriots.

Agreed to a certain extent. But was it more play call or play execution that didn't use these three more effectively?

Obviously I don't remember every single play/formation during the season, and because of that I don't know how Reagen actually aligned our big TEs throughout the season.

But I wonder if the bigger issue wasn't the play calling/design but rather that the defense keyed in on Vance or that, as good as McHargue has become, he still isn't Chase, who could seemingly hit anyone and everyone.

Just pondering.

Therefore using two tight ends in passing situations.

The Owls didn't play too many teams that could key on both tight ends and outside receivers. Somebody is going to have one on one coverage typically with a significant size advantage.

That's the point. Reagan totally wasted our personnel advantage by hardly ever using a 2 TE set in passing situations. No defense-- not even in the NFL-- can effectively cover that; certainly not in CUSA.

(01-22-2013 12:13 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  That's the point. Reagan totally wasted our personnel advantage by hardly ever using a 2 TE set in passing situations. No defense-- not even in the NFL-- can effectively cover that; certainly not in CUSA.

Quote: Rice tight end Vance McDonald was far and away the top player at his position. He is explosive in his release and is a very smooth route-runner. He did drop one ball, but made several other impressive grabs. He looked like a second-round talent.

(01-22-2013 02:13 PM)talon owl Wrote:  This is from an NFL.com article:

Quote: Rice tight end Vance McDonald was far and away the top player at his position. He is explosive in his release and is a very smooth route-runner. He did drop one ball, but made several other impressive grabs. He looked like a second-round talent.

(01-22-2013 01:04 PM)d1owls4life Wrote:  

(01-22-2013 12:13 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(01-22-2013 12:11 PM)Tomball Owl Wrote:  

(01-22-2013 11:11 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(01-22-2013 10:48 AM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  Continues to boggle the mind how ineffectively Reagan used our trio of elite TEs (Wilson, Cook, McDonald); hardly ever-- save for obviously running plays-- using the two TE set. You'd think he might have learned something from watching the Patriots.

Agreed to a certain extent. But was it more play call or play execution that didn't use these three more effectively?

Obviously I don't remember every single play/formation during the season, and because of that I don't know how Reagen actually aligned our big TEs throughout the season.

But I wonder if the bigger issue wasn't the play calling/design but rather that the defense keyed in on Vance or that, as good as McHargue has become, he still isn't Chase, who could seemingly hit anyone and everyone.

Just pondering.

Therefore using two tight ends in passing situations.

The Owls didn't play too many teams that could key on both tight ends and outside receivers. Somebody is going to have one on one coverage typically with a significant size advantage.

That's the point. Reagan totally wasted our personnel advantage by hardly ever using a 2 TE set in passing situations. No defense-- not even in the NFL-- can effectively cover that; certainly not in CUSA.

As FBO just said, Willson and McD were both hurt this year. Willson's ankle injury lingered for most of the season and he just wasn't effective. The coaches must have decided that having one of our stable of RBs or another WR on the field was more advantageous than Taylor Cook or a limited Willson.

Quote:Adam Caplan ‏@caplannfl
Rice TE Vance McDonald with play of the day. Caught ball over opposite shoulder for deep TD.

(01-22-2013 01:26 PM)Volente Beach Owl Wrote:  

(01-22-2013 12:13 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  That's the point. Reagan totally wasted our personnel advantage by hardly ever using a 2 TE set in passing situations. No defense-- not even in the NFL-- can effectively cover that; certainly not in CUSA.

I don't think that's fair criticism. The analysis is too superficial -- plenty of defenses can cover a two TE set when they can blow past the OL or if they feel like they can easily cover the WRs or if they don't respect the running game.

(01-22-2013 05:38 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(01-22-2013 01:26 PM)Volente Beach Owl Wrote:  

(01-22-2013 12:13 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  That's the point. Reagan totally wasted our personnel advantage by hardly ever using a 2 TE set in passing situations. No defense-- not even in the NFL-- can effectively cover that; certainly not in CUSA.

I don't think that's fair criticism. The analysis is too superficial -- plenty of defenses can cover a two TE set when they can blow past the OL or if they feel like they can easily cover the WRs or if they don't respect the running game.

??? Covering an elite TE requires either a big, athletic safety or a very fast linebacker who is competent in pass coverage. Those are few and far between at the college level; especially within C-USA...and few if any teams-- even at the NFL level-- have two such defenders to effectively cover two quality, pass catching TEs.

(01-22-2013 05:50 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(01-22-2013 05:38 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(01-22-2013 01:26 PM)Volente Beach Owl Wrote:  

(01-22-2013 12:13 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  That's the point. Reagan totally wasted our personnel advantage by hardly ever using a 2 TE set in passing situations. No defense-- not even in the NFL-- can effectively cover that; certainly not in CUSA.

I don't think that's fair criticism. The analysis is too superficial -- plenty of defenses can cover a two TE set when they can blow past the OL or if they feel like they can easily cover the WRs or if they don't respect the running game.

??? Covering an elite TE requires either a big, athletic safety or a very fast linebacker who is competent in pass coverage. Those are few and far between at the college level; especially within C-USA...and few if any teams-- even at the NFL level-- have two such defenders to effectively cover two quality, pass catching TEs.

Agreed, but it isn't as if every single player open at every second on the field gets the ball put in their hands.

There is a QB that's part of this equation, and they have to be able to recognize who is open and when, and then deliver the ball.

Just playing devil's advocate.

(01-22-2013 06:02 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(01-22-2013 05:50 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(01-22-2013 05:38 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  

(01-22-2013 01:26 PM)Volente Beach Owl Wrote:  

(01-22-2013 12:13 PM)waltgreenberg Wrote:  That's the point. Reagan totally wasted our personnel advantage by hardly ever using a 2 TE set in passing situations. No defense-- not even in the NFL-- can effectively cover that; certainly not in CUSA.

I don't think that's fair criticism. The analysis is too superficial -- plenty of defenses can cover a two TE set when they can blow past the OL or if they feel like they can easily cover the WRs or if they don't respect the running game.

??? Covering an elite TE requires either a big, athletic safety or a very fast linebacker who is competent in pass coverage. Those are few and far between at the college level; especially within C-USA...and few if any teams-- even at the NFL level-- have two such defenders to effectively cover two quality, pass catching TEs.

Agreed, but it isn't as if every single player open at every second on the field gets the ball put in their hands.

There is a QB that's part of this equation, and they have to be able to recognize who is open and when, and then deliver the ball.

Just playing devil's advocate.

Hard for a QB to recognize and locate when we hardly ever practice or play in games with two TEs in anything but running plays. The point i was trying to make is that Reagan failed to capitalize on one of the team's clear strengths by making passing plays with a 2 TE set a cornerstone of our passing attack. As we've seen repeatedly even at the pro level, it is very, very difficult for teams to neutralize an elite pass catching TE, and almost impossible to defense against two such TEs. Just another example of Reagan failing to optimize the talent that we had on offense. McGuffie is another obvious example.