Quote:
Originally Posted by chiefzilla1501
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.
|
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.