Why no Tight Ends

Does anyone know why the CFL doesn't use tight ends anymore?

I think it's because there's more emphasis on the wide-outs and slotbacks in today's game than there was in previous years.

I always did like tight ends..... 8)

Don't all women? It's the pants; all about the pants.. and apparently, according to jm, what's in those pants too. cough33cough

The Ticats use a TE. He is also a hybrid FB. Dickerson.

In some formations, especially short yardage, some teams will still use a tight end. (Sometimes ones that can even catch).

i believe it goes back to the EE,s team that won 5 G.C,s with the 2 slot set,Pro football has never been the same IMO-

I think the change was afoot before that (Tom Campana was a "slotback"), but you might be able to argue the Esks perfected it.
On the other hand, in recent years teams have actually gone back to a double tight end formation, primarily for pass protection or to run the ball.

Or maybe just for Jm.

But very few "true" tight-ends.

As to the why, of it all, deciding exactly why the change happened when it did might take some research, but I suspect at least in part it is not a coincidence that there were significant changes in the blocking rules circa 1972. Within just a few years the tight end had vanished.
But what it really boils down to, is a natural evolution of the game.
I think it is two fold.
First, todays players are bigger, faster, stronger. That changes the way the game is played. Primarily the speed.
And second, as coaches developed strategies it eventually dawned on them that with our huge field and unlimited motion in the backfield, the best use of a receiving position was not to stay in and block, but to spread the defence and make them chase in open space.

The NFL still features the tight-end, because with a narrower field and very limited motion, they cannot get the benefits out of a smaller faster player at that spot. But even there, they have gone more and more to an extra "receiver" rather than a true tight-end.

Question answered?

Thanks everyone good answeers, Kinda miss those big guys that would get into the defensive backfield

...those prototypical big guys are still there, albeit in a different role....Fantuz, Borighter, Clermont, et al, they could easily switch to TE if required...

I always thought the cheerleaders had the tighest ends.... :wink:

Not according to the view from my chair.... 8)

They do have male cheerleaders now.. so if you see any with tight ends we will take your word for it... :wink:

Oh man, that had me rolling. :lol: Love jm's response, too. :stuck_out_tongue:

Yeah, but that would mean jm would have to become an Eskies fan, and I don't think she's really willing to do that anytime soon. She'd rather stick to oogling a certain #33 wearer. :lol:

Not quite, mongo....the Riders now have male cheerleaders, too....I'm safe....provided I want to look at people that young, which I most certainly do not.....

True, jm. Although they may be legal, in your book, they might as well be jailbait. :lol:

A few years ago, BC used Tight Ends against Montreal, when Montreal was “Blitz” happy. I think the “Bunch” formation that Calgary and BC Use may incorporate Tight Ends from time to time.

But you are right. Tight Ends are few and far between.

The Als used a TE against Toronto.

Since this topic is all over the place, let me tell you a joke I heard a long, long time ago:

A famous Quarterback was taking his wife to court for divorce. The judge asked "On What grounds?" The famous QB replied "Infidelity, damaged goods." Puzzled, the judge asked him to explain, to which the Quarterback replied...."Your honour, I thought I was getting a tight end, not a wide receiver."

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Bada Boom!