He was always more important to this offense than Hill. When Mahomes absolutely had to make a play he always defaults to Kelce.

Oft-injured, playing with terrible QBs, or from an era in which TEs didn't consistently post 1,000 yard seasons.

I'd love to see the numbers because I always thought it was about 50/50.

I can remember many got-to-have-it moments in which Mahomes went to Hill.

I imagine some stat head out there has those numbers. I would be interested as well because it looks like from the eye test it’s Kelce more often than not.

Andrews had 2 catches for 15 yards Sunday. He is really good generally but he aint Kelce.

Oh yeah, of course I understand that. Kelce is a potential GOAT while Andrews is a guy who just wants to be in the conversation for now. As a homer I would easily take kelce over Andrews. But understandably there are people who believe blocking plays a critical role when evaluating a tight end and that’s where an outsider will press any of us on why they prefer gronk. I obviously am a huge fan of kelce but gronk has every right to be considered the best too. Both exceptional and complete players in very different ways.

Was it a hot girl by any chance?

In all seriousness, to answer someone's question, Gonzalez did two things better than Kelce.

One was running people over. Kelce is big but doesn't usually bulldoze anyone. Defenders bounced off Gonzalez constantly. He wanted to punish tacklers.

The other skill is catching the ball in traffic. Gonzalez had better hands, better leaping ability, and a superhuman will to take the ball away from others. There's countless highlights of him catching TDs with two or three defenders all over him. He was special.

It's nuts to me that we're going to act like Kelce isn't an incredible contested catch guy. Moreover, what Kelce does in space is absolutely insane and yes, gets back to his innate athletic ability.

Gonzalez does NOT house that catch that Kelce made for the first score Sunday. That agility and immediate ability to get upfield at speed just doesn't happen. Oh sure, Tony probably makes the catch but he doesn't catch it, get upfield, eat up that much space and then hurdle the damn safety to get clean into the end zone.

Kelce is the evolutionary version of Tony G. He's the same guy...but better. Gonzalez was one of the very first of the new breed of TEs who could move in space, overpower smaller defenders and abuse LBers. But the LBers he was abusing were Marvcus Patton and not Devin White.

I'm sorry but you're just wrong here. Travis Kelce is very probably the most athletically gifted TE in history. He's physical, he's agile, he's fast, his hands are elite. He's fearless in traffic and smart in space.

There's literally not a single goddamn thing he doesn't do amazingly well. And he does it in part because he's a very smart football player but the league has been FULL of smart football players. He's not elite because he's smart - he's elite because he's smart AND among the most physically gifted players to ever play the position.

This is crazy. I'm not sure what you're trying to accomplish here but it's not worth the trouble. If you're trying to build the guy up by making some bizarre underdog story out of the guy and claim he's a lunchpail player who gets more with less or something - you're just wrong. This guy has gifts unlike anything the position has ever seen. And yes, he puts them to their highest and best use, but that's why he's a damn HoFer and not some flash in the pan.

You take Kelce's physical tools and eliminate his football savvy and you probably get...i dunno - Jimmy Graham? Take his brains and eliminate his tools and you get...uh...Ben Coates?

In either event, trying to diminish the exceptional physical gifts Travis Kelce brings to the table to make him some sort of lunch pail grinder story is just asinine. There has never been a peak that approaches Travis Kelce. His top end strafes anyone that's ever done this before.

Who said he wasn’t hall of fame gifted? Who said he was a mediocre player who just worked hard? Your words, not mine.

We are talking about a really, really high bar when you’re talking GOAT and you’re acting like it’s offensive to say that the other guys in that conversation are really damn good too. Gonzalez and gronk were considered GOAT until kelce established himself and threw his hat in the ring.

I know gonzo rubbed people the wrong way. But he earned his right to be in that convo. There are things kelce can do that gonzo can’t. But vice versa too. Gonzo excelled across eras even when he was old and defenses adjusted to the tight end. Gonzalez was an insanely good jump ball and red zone target, and he did it while carrying absolutely lousy receivers and qbs for much of his career. Including in an era when qbs were heaving up prayer balls to him as our offensive strategy. That doesn’t mean kelce can’t do that. They are gifted in different ways. But we don’t need to undermine gonzos talents to prop up kelce. And if anyone brings this noise outside the kc bubble they’ll get laughed out of the room if they suggest gronk isn’t heavily in this conversation. I don’t think it does us any favors to walk in to these discussions with a distorted view of the competition. It’s not that kelce can’t do these things at a high level. But we are talking about calling him the most physically gifted tight end among the best tight ends IN HISTORY.

I think people are misremembering history. The homer in me believes kelce is the GOAT. But there is nothing wrong with anyone who thinks it’s gonzo or gronk.

<iframe src="https://giphy.com/embed/a0Lgc1JvbfS4o" width="480" height="360" frameBorder="0" class="giphy-embed" allowFullScreen></iframe><p><a href="https://giphy.com/gifs/star-trek-a0Lgc1JvbfS4o">via GIPHY</a></p>

It's you downplaying his elite physical traits. Nothing else.

just because of brady

Kelce is the GOAT TE

others might try and argue and say Gonzo is because of his longevity and he 'changed the position'

but nobody has had as much impact as Kelce, plus Kelce's playoff stats have to count for something as well.

This you, bucko?

Maybe just go with "I come not to bury Caesar, but Praise him..." or something...

Like I said - I suspect your point was to make some scrappy underdog tale and build Kelce up by trying to argue that hard work and effort put him alongside guys who he couldn't hang with athletically.

And I'm telling you - you're wrong. 100% unequivocally, absolutely wrong.

Travis Kelce hangs with and/or demolishes every single person you've named from a strictly athletic perspective. FFS - Jason !@#$ing Witten? What are we even talking about here?

Travis Kelce's is as physically gifted as any TE to ever step between the lines. Full stop. Trying to argue otherwise in some inane effort to prop up his football savvy does a disservice to how extraordinary and rare his combination of intelligence, dedication and athleticism truly is.

I mean FFS, has Zilla not seen Kelce dance?

I’m not downplaying his physical abilities. People are downplaying the best of all timers to prop our own guy up. Imagine finding it horrible and insulting to suggest a player has hall of fame abilities.

Appreciation is due. For sure it ends in the HOF.

He’s 34 now or will be. We saw him on the sidelines more, recovering or catching his breath. No one avoids aging. I’m going to miss him when he retires. One of my favorite all time Chief players.

always looking for the ball.....always

Imagine saying that Travis Kelce is athletically inferior to Jason Witten and trying to use that as a feather in his cap.

Again - think of the defenses Gonzalez was going against. These were defenses built around stopping the run. Devin White didn't exist back then. There was Derrick Brooks and then...yeah, Derrick Brooks.

There are a dozen guys who can give you the size/speed combo of Derrick Brooks these days. Willie Gay can do it. Shit, Leo Chenal can do it.

These are COMPLETELY different guys that Kelce is beating out there. The guy can run a simple dig route and have cornerbacks literally tripping over their own feet.

But because Tony G caught passes in traffic I'm supposed to say he's somehow athletically superior to Travis Kelce? Because Gronk can run over guys I'm supposed to say he's a better athlete - shit, Dontari Poe can run over guys, was he a better athlete than Travis Kelce?

You're just completely out to lunch here. No, these guys were absolutely not better athletes than Travis Kelce.

Oh good grief. I brought witten and Andrews up because blocking is part of the conversation for GOAT. You cannot walk into a debate outside this bubble comparing him to gronk and completely dismiss if. You’ll get throttled. Kelce is solid enough as a blocker but he’s not elite.

You are trying to have your cake and eat it too. You believe he’s a blowout in every category? I don’t believe that’s true. Even noting his extraordinary football iq, route running, and effort the GOAT discussion is really close. And it’s not crazy to suggest guys like gonzo and gronk belong in this conversation. So if you’re suggesting that he’s also more physically gifted than these guys than you’re claiming this is a blowout.

I agree with you that it’s his unique combo of everything that makes him GOAT. I don’t think it’s crazy or upsetting at all to suggest that on physical talent alone, he isnt. Again that is not saying he’s anything short of exceptional on physical talent alone.

I said witten was a more gifted blocker. And he was.

I’ve said many times that MJ was the best to ever play any sport. The eyeball test says differently. Lebron should mop the floor for best ever to play the game. That doesn’t mean MJ wins this because he’s scrappy or lunch pail. He used his talents way better than Lebron did physically and mentally. That ultimately is what puts kelce over the top of some tight ends who had absolutely outstanding careers.

He is a curator of his trade

Blocking comes up in GOAT conversations if you are talking about Olinemen, not TEs. No one remembers who the greatest TEs are based on blocking. That’s like judging GOAT QBs based off of their play action pass ability. How good of a blocker was Jerry Rice? No one knows or cares. History will look back on Kelce and see one of if not the greatest TE to ever suit up.

Peak ability it IS a blowout.

Tony Gonzalez had more than 1,000 yards 4 times in 17 years, Kelce's done it 6 times in a row. Tony G had 5 years of greater than 90 receptions - Kelce's gonna click off his 5th consecutive such season this year.

Tony never once had a single season where he averaged more than 9 yards/target. Kelce has averaged 9 yards/target for his career.

Moreover, you're acting like your counter-examples were some pile of lazy, braindead mongoloids. They weren't - those guys were extremely smart players in their own right.

I ask again - what do ANY of those guys bring to the table physically that Kelce can't answer? Gonzalez doesn't have a single thing on him. Not one. Size, strength, speed, agility - none of it. He didn't beat Kelce in a single one of those areas physically. Gronk is stronger - Kelce beats him in every other metric.

Gates didn't have anywhere near the fluidity Kelce has. Straight line speed? He may have had Kelce for a couple of years there, I'll give you that. But he didn't use his speed as well as Kelce does and frankly Kelce's ability to retain speed while moving gave him a better athletic profile than Gates. It made him far more dangerous.

You say we're overselling Kelce's athleticism. I say you're underselling the rest of these guy's savvy and work ethic. Trait for trait, I don't see how you can say Kelce isn't the equal of the rest of these guys.

And what in the actual hell does that have to do with their athleticism? Was Jason Dunn a superior athlete to Travis Kelce?

Wait - I've gone one. And god help me I think I know the answer.

Blake Bell. Please please PLEASE tell me you're not going to try to argue that Blake Bell is a superior athlete to Travis Kelce because he timed well and can block his ass off.

Acting like you have to "prop up" a guy who has the most 1,000 yard seasons for the position, the most 100+ reception seasons for the position, and the record for the most receiving yards in a season for the position, is the single dumbest argument anyone could make.

In his prime, Jerry Rice was considered the best blocking WR of his era and all time. It was brought up in just about every televised game he ever played.

It's kind of funny looking at this argument from outside. I mean, there was a time not all that long ago when TEs were valued principally for their blocking skills. Catching the ball was secondary for TEs before TG, who singlehandedly initiated a sea change in how TEs were viewed, used, and ultimately drafted.

Kellen Winslow was probably the guy who started that ball rolling. Todd Christensen was also doing the H-Back sort of thing before TG.

And I think we have to grudgingly acknowledge that Shannon Sharpe from 1993 to 1997 was every bit of what Tony G was and Tony didn't really break out until 2000.

Hard to say Tony really reset anything. He was the gold standard, but he wasn't the first.

Did they bring that up when he was inducted into the HOF? Something like listing his stats and then adding a blurb about how amazing of a blocker he was?

Blocking is way more of an important consideration for a tight end. Of course a pure blocker is not going to be considered GOAT. But with witten you have an exceptional blocker who was also a very good receiver (no, I’m not suggesting he’s anywhere near kelce overall). But with gronk you have an exceptional receiver who was also a dominant blocker. It absolutely matters if you’re talking best of the best of the best .

For anyone suggesting blocking doesn’t matter, there is going to be lots of debate in the coming years about who the true GOAT is at TE. And it won’t be because of receiving.

Damn dude you just can’t figure out when to stop and keep
doubling down on wrong. Your argument sucks stop trying to sell it.

First rule of holes, when you are in one stop digging.

All true. Forgot about Winslow. Kind of before my time.

I watched Sharpe and TG; I believe that TG was better, though Sharpe was probably faster.

My point about TG resetting the position had more to do with how offenses were built by the time he passed his prime; in Sharpe's time TEs still weren't as highly valued by the NFL, not yet. RBs in general wee more highly valued than TEs then.

He was valued very highly by DEN, but even by the Broncos they neglected to use him as a primary target in the RZ, often preferring to either run the ball or find a WR instead fairly often. As such he only had 5 seasons out of 14 where he averaged more than 55 yds/game, while Kelce only has 2 seasons of less than 55 yds/game so far in his career. Sharpe has just 7 seasons being targeted more than 100 times/season, Kelce has just one season in his career being targeted less than 100 times. Kelce already has nearly 100 more catches for 1st downs than Sharpe.

And so on. Just illustrating that TEs, even on a (for that era) pass-happy DEN team, weren't used the way receiving TEs are used today. So if we can agree that TG didn't start the receiving TE trend, he was the bridge between the old school use of TEs vs. the modern era? That feels more accurate.

Whatever, at some point it's almost semantics. Tony is the gold standard of TEs, mostly for his receiving abilities, but he was also just about the most complete TE in the modern era, able to do a lot more than just catch contested balls thrown almost entirely by JAG QBs over his career. If he'd had his prime years with an elite QB, who knows how many more yards, TDs, etc. he would've had. It's actually more impressive that he accomplished everything that he did n spite of the fact that his QBs were mostly scrubs.

Jerry did in his speech, iirc. Someone did. Maybe it was one of the commentators. Don't believe a particular stat was brought up though it could've happened.

Not sure why this is an emotional issue for you. I related an indisputable fact, nothing more.

And part of a TEs responsibilities is blocking. In fact, TEs that don't/won't block are not long in the NFL. See Jimmy Graham as the most recent and visible example. He specifically declined to block after leaving NO and became a non-factor as any kind of offensive weapon immediately after.

Kelce (still) gets from point A to point B like an elite WR. He’s not 4.3 in 40 yd dash terms, but he’s 4.3 in functional football route running terms. On our first TD he got from the 10 yd line into the end zone as fast as anyone in the game could have. He took the “as-the-crow-flies” route, and I’m not sure anyone else playing the game right now could’ve done that the way he did it.

If that’s not elite, freakish athleticism then I don’t know what is. From a man-beast who turns 33 years old in two days and might have the best personality in the history of the NFL.

Everyone should savor every play of the rest of his career, because he is an irreplaceable L E G E N D.

It’s not really emotional for me. If it came out as such my apologies. I don’t disagree that blocking is important for TEs, just that when deciding on the GOAT or not blocking won’t be the factor that it’s being made out to be.

Ditka helped as well.

Kelce makes it look effortless. He is so dialed in it's incredible.

I think he has another 4-5 years left.

Cool.

Maybe someday. But the case is still being made right now that Gronk is the greatest TE to ever play because of his elite receiving skills plus his incredible blocking skills in combination.

It's the alchemy of the two skillsets in one package that make Gronk a serious candidate for greatness, not one vs. the other.

Now someday maybe TEs will become so receiver-oriented that they won't be asked to block anymore, or maybe the league will install a reg that prohibits TEs from blocking or whatever. But for now, at least as i hear it discussed, blocking is still integral to what a TE does.

It’s the exact opposite.

Anyone who discounts blocking when comparing two legends like kelce and gronk isn’t taking the debate seriously.

I am still picking kelce. But without a doubt it is a huge factor when comparing two tight ends who are both elite receivers.

Kelce has 26 catches on the season. 3 tds. 21 first downs.

When the yards aren’t close nobody will care about blocking. Kelce’s job is to make plays catching the ball and he is literally a #1 WR level producer catching the ball in the NFL.

His blocking is more then adequate.

All the guys on the top TE are judged by catching the ball. You yourself used Gates as some level of comparison. He was known for one thing.

Blocking is cool and all but it’s not catching 10 passes for 120 and a TD.

Gronk gets injured falling out of bed every morning. Same with Antonio Gates. Those guys were both great but too fragile.

Meanwhile, Kelce and Gonzalez had crazy durability.

Gronk is in the discussion for 3 reasons:

1) Rings (thanks Brady)
2) TDs (no question he's an elite red zone weapon)
3) Age

It sucks but there's no escaping it - Travis Kelce wasn't playing until he was 25 years old. Gronk and Tony G were 21.

That's 3-4 more years those guys have to rack up numbers in their respective athletic primes. Gronk had 42 touchdowns by the time he was 25. He got a head start that would be considered an outstanding career for 90% of the TEs to ever play. Tony G had a 20 touchdown and 3K yard head start.

Gronk also has rings and an east coast media bias to help him out.

But I'm still not sure what this has to do with your assertion that Travis Kelce isn't the athlete either of those guys were. Because you've still yet to even attempt to argue that fact other than provide a sort of back-door "well if he WERE the athlete these guys were, he'd blow them out of the water" sort of logically untenable mess.

Facts.

If Gronk could've been a lot healthier over his career, his numbers would've been even more outrageous. In all, Gronk missed 36 games over his 12-year career as well as the entire 2019 season. If he'd played in like 90% of those missed games, he'd probably have another 3,600 yds, for a total of nearly 13,000 yds, second to just TG in that regard. And another 16 or so TDs, for a total of 108? (Btw, isn't ludicrious to look at those numbers and Gonzalez would still in all likelihood be no.1 in both those stats? Crazy)

Gronk was a mutant freak, but a fragile one.

Kelce's gonna be an interesting hybrid of the two from a production standpoint when all is said and done.

Won't have that insane 80 game stretch like Gronk had (65 TDs in 80 games...just - wow). But he'll blow past him in most productivity categories because of longevity. Meanwhile pick any sample size of games and Kelce's productivity will beat TGs over the same stretch and yet he ain't gonna play 270 of a possible 272 games over a 17 year career.

You really do have to look at Tony G's durability and longevity and just shake your head. After playing 240 career games, the guy still averaged right at 900 yards/season his last 2 seasons.

Wanna know what's incredible? Travis Kelce STILL hasn't played half as many games as Tony Gonzalez played in his career. I mean Gonzalez was just a war horse.

Truth.

TG spoiled Chiefs fans beyond recognition, not only with his level of execution, but with his sheer reliability. Just a freak. Maybe THE freak.

Kelce is the second coming, kind of. Somehow KC lucked into another HOF TE, and not only that, Travis will go down statistically as the second-best TE in NFL history.

But in my book, Travis is the better of the two because he almost singlehandedly brought the Chiefs their second SB victory. His level of play during the playoffs was beyond elite (after that first quarter and a half of the HOU game, of course). As much as Mahomes, Travis deserves credit for bringing that beautiful trophy home. He was just a monster.

Tony probably gets a ring if he has Mahomes at QB. I have a hard time using rings as part of the argument.

For me it's just a question of peak vs. duration. Do I value Tony's impossibly long prime more than Kelce's impossibly high standard during his peak?

My answer is Kelce and the reason why comes down to two words, words we've used in this very thread: Jason. Witten.

Jason Witten is the nearest thing the league has ever seen to TG in terms of reliable production and longevity. Witten played in 271 games to Tony's 270. he had 1220 receptions to TGs 1320. 13K yards to Tony's 15K.

He was, by virtually any measure, about 90% of what Gonzalez was and in a virtually indistinguishable manner.

Did you EVER concern yourself with Jason Witten? Was he ever someone you thought to yourself 'man, we have GOT to gameplan for Witten or he'll just destroy us'? I don't believe either of those things to be true.

And can Jason Witten say "hey, I just never had a quarterback I could win a championship with?" I don't believe this to be true either. Witten had Pro Bowl quarterbacks throwing the ball to him at various points throughout his prime. And in the end it just didn't mean that much.

So it makes me ask, in all sincerity - did Tony G do THAT much more for us than Jason Witten did for the Cowboys? And since neither team ever won a damn thing - did what they did really move the needle as much as we think it did?

At a point I have to wonder if BOTH of those guys greatness isn't dependent on being compilers. And in the process of compiling those stats, did they really make a major difference?

We have a hard time answering the question when it's Kelce vs. Tony but none of us would hesitate for a millisecond if it's Kelce vs. Witten. And Witten is a hell of a lot closer to Tony across the board than he is to Kelce.

So...should this question actually be that difficult afterall?

I kinda think that maybe it shouldn't be.

Can't argue with any of that. Though imo, TG was a lot better than Witten, the eye test, if you will.

But yeah, Witten, though a very solid TE, never scared me. He was never going to take over a game. He'd just do Witten things.

TG was far more athletic and so could and did on occasion, but Kelce seems capable of doing it nearly every week. But then, the game is quite different than it was when TG was in his prime. The middle was a much more dangerous place back then.

https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/202...31cce2c507.jpg


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Yes, I used gates as a point of comparison based on pure athletic ability. You’re proving my point that the reason nobody puts him into the TE conversation was because he was a lousy blocker. I used witten as an example because he was an outstanding blocker but while he was once in the GOAT conversation he never really could get legs because he wasn’t even close to the elite level of other TEs as a receiver. I am using one attribute to discuss these guys, not saying these guys are in the conversation for GOAT. They’re not.

It doesn’t necessarily mean that. I think there is a ton to be said about playing the position the right way and I believe kelce did it better than anybody in history. Can you imagine if Jerry rice had speed or size like Randy moss? Rice isn’t even close to the most athletic receiver among the all time greats. That doesn’t mean athletic ability would’ve added a whole ton of stats to an insanely productive career. In fact I think kelce in a lot of ways is a more athletic version of Jerry rice. Much of their success is due to always being in the right place, running slick routes, and having outstanding ball instincts. Because they’re both absolutely elite in those areas.

While kelce had a head start over gonzo he’s also born a little bit on first base. As was gronk. Neither player has played much with a bad qb and they played in an aerial passing era. Both played for HOF coaches and kelce lined up next to a legit top tier WR. TG didn’t have those advantages. In fact I’d say his TD totals given his red zone skills would have been significantly better. Again, Without a shadow of a doubt im still taking kelce but it’s not quite the gap you’re making it to be. What gonzo did with the kind of talent he was surrounded with is really incredible too.

I know this much. If Travis had Mahomes when he started he would be passing TG's records. All of them.

And what if TG had mahomes for even half of his career? In an era where 5k passing yards is the norm?

If Travis can play 15 years and that's being hopeful he will be very close. He may get past Gates in yards.

Do you think Gonzalez played with the same physicality as Gronk?

I think Kelce takes way more hits than Gonzalez did and thus there is no way he will have the longevity.

And I'd have said exactly the same thing until I did just a little more digging. It's what made me wonder if my fan lenses didn't make the eye test a little more unreliable.

I mean - a 17 year career is a LOOOOOONG career. 270 games.

So you know what that means on a pro-rata basis? 8 more yards/game. It means every other game Tony G had a one more catch than Witten. It means every 8 games he had a TD that Witten didn't have.

I mean that's not nothing, don't get me wrong. It means that yes, Tony Gonzalez was definitely better than Witten. But 'a lot better'? Hmmm....I dunno.

Those two played in pretty similar environments. And for several years they were direct contemporaries. And yes, Witten had a better QB but I've said all the way back to the Dwayne Bowe era - I just don't think that bad quarterbacks impact the production of possession receivers that much, if at all. Because for every ball Damon Huard misfired trying to get the ball to TG, there's another that he forced into triple coverage to his security blanket. Or that he aborted his reads and fired to 88 as soon as he could.

I said it in the Hopkins vs. Hill conversations when people tried to talk about Hopkins having worse QB play and then I pointed out that having a better QB didn't meaningfully impact Hopkins production.

Does it make a player more IMPACTFUL? Sure - but in terms of raw counting stats, I don't think it makes a difference for guys like Witten and Gonzo. They get as much through 'security blanket' and garbage times catches/yards as they give up through missed connections.

And again - I'm not saying that Witten is TGs equal. He isn't. I'm just saying that those guys are awfully damn close in terms of their era, their style of play, their strengths and their production. So if you're willing to use Witten as a proxy for TG when you're 'ranking' guys, it starts to make things a whole lot more straightforward.

My eye test says that Kelce is the great TE of all time, and it's not close.

Gates isn't in that conversation because he got hurt. All the time. And then he fell apart physically, essentially becoming a glorified offensive lineman.

But for about a 6 year period there when he was healthy and dynamic, before the feet started messing with him, people were ABSOLUTELY putting him in the conversation as 'the new Tony Gonzalez' - oftentimes to the great chagrin of Chiefs fans.

But again - I'm not sure how this speaks to anyone's raw athleticism. Blocking is about technique and desire, especially for TEs. You're sitting here saying on one hand that Kelce's approach is what makes him great while simultaneously saying that his blocking is beneath the level of certain HoF caliber players. But...blocking IS about approach. Kittle isn't notably stronger than Kelce, if at all. He doesn't get out there and pancake guys because he's significantly stronger than Kelce. It's because he LOVES hitting guys. That's not athleticism - it's approach.

Gronk is the only guy to ever maul his way while blocking to any sort of prominence among the 'hushed tones' tight ends. And again, that style crippled his durability and his build made him LESS dynamic in most ways than Kelce has been. I just circle back around, again, to this 'athleticism' claim you're making. It simply doesn't hold up.

These guys were NOT more athletic than Kelce. And blocking wouldn't speak to it even if they were.

You creamed your jeans over Christian Watson, didn't you?

Being tall and running fast in a straight line is not the end all, be all of athleticism. Trying to say that Jerry Rice isn't among the most athletic WRs of all time demonstrates that you just have a real odd definition of athletic. He absolutely was.

He's ability to make cuts without losing any speed and all then immediately hit his top end was remarkable. It's what made him absolutely uncoverable in that WCO system. Was he gonna sky over dudes like Moss? No, but that's why Moss became a damn verb. But Moss wasn't out there making those speed cuts either. Moss was a different kind of athlete, but not a clearly better one that Rice.

Before he got hurt, over his first 11 seasons Jerry Rice averaged 16 yards per reception (Moss managed 16 yards/reception in 4 seasons over his entire career). You think he 'smarted' his way to that? No way - he ran around and past guys to rack up that kind of damage.

Was Larry Fitzgerald among the most athletic of the all-time great WRs? No, no he was not. Was Jerry ****ing Rice - the best football player of all time - among the most athletic WRs ever? Jesus Christ...dafuq do I even need to answer that question for? Of COURSE he was. That dude was a monster.

I don't know who was more physical than who, but I definitely remember Gonzalez as a physical player. DBs had a hell of a time bringing him down.

He still wouldn't be as productive as Kelce. Because he's not as athletic as Kelce - at all.

What if TG had a QB that went through progressions instead of force-feeding him the ball? What if TG had a guy like Tyreek Hill out there siphoning off targets?

What if, what if, what if....

Again - Tony Gonzalez was not appreciably more productive than Jason Witten over the course of their careers. Careers that overlapped for a significant portion and careers that didn't see an enormous change in playing style for their respective peaks.

Tony Gonzalez was an excellent possession receiver and one of the best red zone weapons of all time. He was NOT the route runner Kelce is. He was not as fast or fluid as Kelce is.

Oh - and can we stop acting like TG has shit-ass quarterbacks and coaches his entire career? Dude played for 5 years with Trent Green and Dick Vermeil - Y'know, the same number of years that Travis Kelce has played with Reid/Mahomes. Those Chiefs offenses led the league in scoring and/or yards 4 times in that span, IIRC. He didn't have some pile-driving mongoloid and scattershot spread monkey throwing him footballs his whole career.

But good offense/bad offense - good HC/Bad HC - it didn't make much difference to his productivity. Because it just typically doesn't for possession receivers. And that's what TG was.

TG was pretty athletic remember he played basketball. TG smoked corners and was routinely guarded by 2-3 players. Baldy does a good breakdown of TG and this is a good reminder how awesome he was.

<iframe width="560" height="315" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/eDyApaKUNhw" title="YouTube video player" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture" allowfullscreen></iframe>

And like I said - I think it's all relative.

Tony Gonzalez was toasting Marvcus Patton. Those guys can't get on the field anymore. He was eating against Bernard Pollard types - nowadays the Raiders convert a first round pick in Jonathan Abrams to LBer. Can you see a guy like a 32 yr old James Hasty making an All-Pro team these days? I LOVED Hasty, but he made Richard Sherman look like Deion Sanders. These were different levels of athlete out there.

And again - I am not arguing for a second that he wasn't an historically great contested catch guy. He absolutely was - he knew his angles and how to go after the football. And developed outstanding hands as his career progressed. Like I said - one of the best red zone weapons ever. A great player, absolutely.

Kelce's stats are insane. Really starting in 2017 when Alex had his great last season in KC and especially when Mahomes took over in 2018. He's just been absolutely tearing the league apart at the ****ing seams.

Guess what. He just might be on track for his best season ever this year. Scary...

Holy hell I forgot about Marvcus Patton. What a chiseled Greek marble statue that guy was. My god. That's one linebacker you don't wanna meet in a dark alley.

Don't disagree just wanted to watch a video to remind myself how great he really was. His last year in 2013 I would consider in the modern era and at age 37 had 83 catches for 859 yds and 8 TD's. I have no doubt he would eat in 2022 just the same.

Kelce is the greatest ever. Period. End of story. :clap: :D

I question whether anyone who says Gonzalez is better than Kelce ever watched Gonzalez play, other than highlight videos.

Gonzalez is Karl Malone. Kelce is Jordan.

Ooohhhhhhh.....I like that.

Well done, sir.

Jerry rice by the eye test was not GOAT level athletic. You really think he comes close to the speed and vertical of moss, or the size/speed combo of megatron? Of course he was extremely athletic but on the eye test there’s no way you can throw him in a combine and predict he would be the GOAT at his position by a wide margin. You seem to use athleticism and feel for the position interchangeably. I’m separating those things out. So much of rices success is built off of absurdly next level route running, awareness, and the best ball skills and hands in football history. There were so many little things that added up. Hell, nobody reacted to the snap quicker than jerry rice. He was an absurdly, practically perfect tactician of the position. He was Tim Duncan on the most potent of steroids. Not to mention being known as easily the hardest working player in the league. Rice was the best at these things by a very wide margin when compared to the greats. And I’d say kelce will be considered the best at these things too.

But there is no way on pure athletic talent alone rice compares to some guys who are physical freaks of nature. I mean, megatron alone may as well have been built out of a science lab. Even if megatron played with bill Walsh and Montana rice would still destroy megatron.

What the hell does Christian Watson have to do with anything? Are there people creaming their jeans for cooper kupp? You’re damn right they are, as they should

Again - I feel like you're just substituting straight line speed for athleticism.

If your eyes don't tell you that peak Jerry Rice wasn't a freak athlete, imma say your eyes are broken.

Of course you have to be a hell of an athlete to be that productive. But you’re going to argue he was even close to the freak megatron was? It’s not like he had tyreek like quickness. By all measures he was not even close to the fastest, strongest or quickest. The best you can say athletically is that he was incredible with his feet. But Chad Johnson gave you elite foot speed and route running while being faster, stronger and generally more athletic.

He was a freak athlete but that doesn’t mean he is even close to being the freakiest of the all time greats. It does not explain how he is not only better than every single wr in history, he is better by a wide margin.

It's virtually impossible to compare players across decades with rule changes/enforcement regarding contact downfield and legal/illegal hits, defenseless receiver etc.

I have watched both in person and if I had to rank them currently I would put TG at 1 and TK at 2. Even if TK plays 5 more years to age 37 (unlikely) he wouldn't come close to TG's yards and TD's but obviously TG doesn't have the playoff\SB stats and wins like TK has.

I could probably make the argument if TG was playing in this era with Mahomes he would put up similar stats to TK and probably more TD's. Looking at pro football reference TG and TK are getting the same amount of targets per year and TG started out in era where they didn't pass near as much as they do today.

While true, Kelce is pushing GOAT status. His skill set would fit any era.

That's going too far. The gap between Jordan and Malone is much higher than Kelce/Gonzalez.

I compared TG to Malone because both have amazing stats. Malone had far more career points than Jordan thanks to longevity, but few would argue that Malone was even close to Jordan as a player.

Malone was also a HOFer who never got a ring.