2024 CFF Tight Ends Historical Analysis and Positional Primer

With a seemingly endless pool of 40-60 target Tight Ends to sort through, how do we differentiate between the rank-and-file TEs other than a good old-fashioned eyeball test? Projecting Legacy schools like Iowa, Penn State, and Notre Dame who churn out NFL TEs is a tried and true method that most of your league-mates are going to sniff out on Day 1. The next phase of evolution is to play “Follow The Coordinator/HC” based on their historical TE production & chase the pass-heavy TEs who accrued the most targets the previous season.

However, most people don’t dig beyond logical, surface indicators like basic usage rates and school/coordinator legacies because Tight Ends are the most consistently overlooked players in all of CFF. While the raw target test and cursory overview will provide a workable 25-30 player list that will carry you through most 12-team, 1-TE CFF drafts. But what are you going to do now that Underdog is running P4-only leagues? A higher level of analysis is required, and if you can sneak through a high-performing sleeper TE into the double-digit rounds, you’re going to have the advantage of using your high-value draft picks to stockpile RB/WRs.

Friendly reminder to start YOUR very own College Fantasy Football League on Fantrax, click fantrax.com/PlayCFF to get started now!

There’s no such thing as too much football! 2022 is the perfect time to add the college game to your fantasy football repertoire. Whether you want to create your own league or join an existing league, the Fantrax College Football Commissioner is the place to go!

Historical TE Production

2018

TEs with 40+ Targets = 37 (22 P5/15 G5)
TEs with 400+ Yards = 24 (16 P5/8 G5)
TEs with 4 TDs in 2021 = 23 (15 P5/8 G5)
TEs w/ 400+ Yards + 4 TDs = 17 (11 P5/6 G5)
TEs w/400+ Yards + 4 TDs that didn’t have 50 Targets = 2
Lowest amount of targets w/400 yards + 4 TDs = 47 – Romello Brooker, Houston
TE’s w/500 Yards + 5 TDs = 7 (5 P5/2 G5)
Lowest amount of targets with 500 Yards + 5 TDs = 57 (Irv Smith – Alabama – 44-of-57 for 707 Yards, 7 TDs
Average amount of Targets with 500 Yards + 5 TDs = 69.2

Schools that produced 500/5 TEs = Texas A&M (Y1 OC Darrell Dickey) | Iowa X2 – Noah Fant & TJ Hockenson (Y2 OC Brian Ferentz) | Alabama (Y2 OC Mike Locksley) | Texas State (Y2 OC ZaK Kuhr) | Vanderbilt (Y4 OC Andy Ludwig) | Western Kentucky (Y2 OC Junior Adams)

2019

TEs with 40+ Targets = 46 (26 P5/20 G5)
TEs with 400+ Yards = 35 (18 P5/17 G5)
TEs with 4 TDs in 2021 = 42 (22 P5/20 G5)
TEs w/ 400+ Yards + 4 TDs = 25 (12 P5/13 G5)
TEs w/400+ Yards + 4 TDs that didn’t have 50 Targets = 6
Lowest amount of targets w/400 yards + 4 TDs = 35 – Benjamin Waters, Air Force (TEITO)
TE’s w/500 Yards + 5 TDs = 12 (7 P5/5 G5)
Lowest amount of targets with 500 Yards + 5 TDs = 35 – Waters
Average amount of Targets with 500 Yards + 5 TDs = 70.1

2021

TEs with 40+ Targets = 45 (24 P5/21 G5)
TEs with 400+ Yards = 34 (22 P5/12 G5)
TEs with 4 TDs in 2021 = 41 (24 P5/17 G5}
TEs w/ 400+ Yards + 4 TDs = 24 (15 P5/9 G5}
TEs w/400+ Yards + 4 TDs that didn’t have 50 Targets = 6
Lowest amount of targets w/400 yards + 4 TDs = 38 – Cameron Latu
TE’s w/500 Yards + 5 TDs = 12 (7 P5/5 G5)
Lowest amount of targets with 500 Yards + 5 TDs = 45 – Dalton Kincaid, Utah
Average amount of Targets with 500 Yards + 5 TDs = 75.8

2022

TEs with 40+ Targets = 53 (36 P5/17 G5)
TEs with 400+ Yards = 32 (22 P5/10 G5)
TEs with 4 TDs in 2021 = 47 (27 P5/20 G5}
TEs w/ 400+ Yards + 4 TDs = 18 (12 P5/6 G5}
TEs w/400+ Yards + 4 TDs that didn’t have 50 Targets = 3
Lowest amount of targets w/400 yards + 4 TDs = 43 – Mason Fairchild, Kansas
TE’s w/500 Yards + 5 TDs = 7 (6 P5/1 G5)
Lowest amount of targets with 500 Yards + 5 TDs = 59 – Brayden Willis
Average amount of Targets with 500 Yards + 5 TDs = 78.2

2023

Most Targets = Holcker with 105 (#2 = Joly with 80)
TEs with 40+ Targets = 52 (33 P5/19 G5)
TEs with 50+ Targets = 32 (22/11)
TEs with 400+ Yards = 29 (21 P5/8 G5)
TEs with 4 TDs in 2021 = 49 ( P5/ G5}
TEs w/ 400+ Yards + 4 TDs = 19 (13 P5/5 G5}
TEs w/400+ Yards + 4 TDs that didn’t have 50 Targets = 3
TE’s w/500 Yards + 5 TDs = 9 (6 P5/3 G5)
Lowest amount of targets with 500 Yards + 5 TDs = 51 – Cade Stover

TE Position Data Points

In 2018, 37 Tight Ends received at least 40 targets. That baseline number rose to 52 players last season, a 41% increase.
Despite the leap in overall Tight End usage, 12 players hit the 500/5 “Elite TE” mark in 2019 & 2021. Though just 7 players reached that plateau in 2022, that mark increased to 9 last year.
In 2022 Just 1 G5 Tight End achieved Elite 500/5 status – Memphis’ Caden Prieskorn. Unfortunately Prieskorn transferred to Ole Miss, leaving zero Elite Group of Five TEs returning to their respective schools last year.
This season, Bowling Green TE Harold Fannin Jr. is the only returning 500+5 G5 tight end. (RJ Maryland would have been one, but SMU is in the ACC now)
The average targets needed to achieve Elite TE status had been steadily rising in each of the last four seasons, going from 69.2 in 2018 to 78.2 in 2022.
That number dropped to an average of 65 targets needed to hit 500+5 last season.
Between his stints at Vanderbilt and Utah, OC Andy Ludwig is the King of the Tight Ends. In the 4 years listed here, Ludwig’s offenses produced 4 TEs with at least 500 Yards & 5 TDs. No other OC contributed more than 2 to the Elite ranks.

The Wide Rate Corollary

Historically, Tight Ends that are flexed out wide more often and put in position to dominate in 1-on-1 situations are viewed as vital cogs in their teams respective passing offenses. Historically, 9% has been the benchmark I use to judge whether or not a player is Wide Rate Corollary eligible.

2018

1 – Colby Parkinson, Stanford: 14.6% Wide Rate = 29-of-53 | 485 Yards | 7 TDs

2 – Grant Calcaterra, Oklahoma: 13.9% Wide Rate = 26-of-43 | 396 Yards | 6 TDs

3 – Jared Pinkney, Vanderbilt: 10.3% Wide Rate = 50-of-81 | 770 Yards | 7 TDs

4 – Albert Okwuegbunam, Missouri: 9.1% Wide Rate = 43-of-56 | 467 Yards | 6 TDs

2019

1 – Thaddeus Moss, LSU: 34.1% Wide Rate = 47-of-57 | 570 Yards | 4 TDs

2 – Benjamin Waters, Air Force: 25.6% Wide Rate = 22-of-35 | 658 Yards | 29.9 YPC (!) | 7 TDs (TEITO)

3 – Caleb Repp, Utah State: 19% Wide Rate = 36-of-54 | 455 Yards | 12.6 YPC | 4 TDs

4 – Kyle Pitts, Florida: 18.4 Wide Rate = 54-of-80 | 649 Yards | 12.0 YPC | 5 TDs

5 – Armani Levias, Marshall: 14.1% Wide | 45-of-56 | 537 Yards | 11.7 YPC | 3 TDs

6 – Quentin Morris, Bowling Green 13.1% Wide Rate: 54-of-94 | 639 Yards | 11.8 YPC | 4 TDs

2021

1 – Cole Turner, Nevada: 26.8% Wide Rate = 62-of-93 | 677 Yards | 10 TDs

2 – Christian Trahan, Houston: 25.5% Wide Rate = 37-of-47 | 398 Yards | 2 TDs

3 – Brant Kuithe, Utah: 15.8% Wide Rate = 50-of-71 | 611 Yards | 6 TDs

4 – Jaheim Bell, South Carolina: 15% Wide Rate = 30-of-41 | 488 Yards | 5 TDs

5 – Michael Mayer, Notre Dame: 13.6% = 71-of-95 | 840 Yards | 7 TDs

6 – Ryan Jones, ECU: 12.5% Wide Rate = 37-of-49 | 442 Yards | 5 TDs

7 – Peyton Hendershot, Indiana: 12.0% Wide Rate = 46-of-62 | 543 Yards | 4 TDs

8 – Charlie Kolar, Iowa State: 11.4% Wide Rate = 63-of-95 | 764 Yards | 6 TDs

9 – Brock Bowers, Georgia: 10.6% Wide Rate = 56-of-71 | 882 Yards | 13 TDs

10 – Trey McBride, Colorado State: 10.5% Wide Rate = 91-of-122 | 1,125 Yards | 1 TD

2022

1 – Sam LaPorta, Iowa: 20.5% Wide Rate: 58-of-90 | 648 Yards | 1TD

2 – Jack Westover, Washington: 19.4% Wide Rate: 31-of-44 | 342 Yards | 1 TD

3 – Terrence Ferguson, Oregon: 18.1% Wide Rate: 32-of-44 | 391 Yards | 5 TDs

4 – Tanner McLachlan, Arizona: 14.8% Wide Rate: 34-of-51 | 456 Yards | 2 TDs

5 – Tanner Koziol, Ball State: 14.8% Wide Rate: 35-of-65 | 379 Yards | 7 TDs

6 – Michael Mayer, Notre Dame: 14.2% Wide Rate: 67-of-101 | 809 Yards | 9 TDs

7 – Jalin Conyers, Arizona State: 13.1% Wide Rate: 37-of-46 | 411 Yards | 5 TDs

8 – Cameron Latu, Alabama: 12.9% Wide Rate: 30-of-49 | 376 Yards | 4 TDs

9 – Ja’Tavion Sanders, Texas: 12.7% Wide Rate: 54-of-72 | 613 Yards| 5 TDs

10 – Davis Allen, Clemson: 12.0% Wide Rate: 39-of-51 | 443 Yards | 5 TDs

11 – Devin Culp, Washington: 11.4% Wide Rate: 29-of-43 | 266 Yards | 1 TD

12 – Josiah Johnson, UMASS: 10.5% Wide Rate: 24-of-41 | 163 Yards | 0 TDs

13 – Luke Lachey, Iowa: 10.2% Wide Rate: 28-of-43 | 382 Yards | 4 TDs

14 – Mason Taylor, LSU: 9.5% Wide Rate: 38-of-55 | 414 Yards | 3 TDs

15 – Dalton Kincaid, Utah: 9.5% Wide Rate: 70-of-93 | 890 Yards | 8 TDs

16 – George Takacs, Boston College: 9.1% Wide Rate = 26-of-41 | 256 Yards | 1 TD

17 – Ryan Jones, ECU: 9.1% Wide Rate = 42-of-59 | 406 Yards | 4 TDs

(Oronde Gadsden would obviously qualify, but I kept him off the list because he is a TEITO)

2023 (Regular Season Only)

1 – Dallin Holker, Colorado State: 23% Wide Rate: 64-of-105 | 766 yards | 6 TDs

2 – Colston Loveland, Michigan: 18.9% Wide Rate: 37-of-49 | 550 yards | 4 TDs

3 – Terrence Ferguson, Oregon: 17.4%: Wide Rate: 42-of-51 | 414 yards | 6 TDs

4 – Jack Westover, Washington: 16.4% Wide Rate: 36-of-42 | 379 yards | 4 TDs

5 – Jalin Conyers, ASU: 16% Wide Rate: 30-of-50 | 362 yards | 40TDs

6 – Justin Joly, UConn: 15.8% Wide Rate: 56-of-80 | 586 yards | 2 TDs (Now NC State)

7 – Brevyn Spann-Ford: 15.3% Wide Rate: 25-of-46 | 239 yards | 2 TDs

8 – Rivaldo Fairweather, Auburn: 15.2% Wide Rate: 38-of-53 | 393 yards | 6 TDs

9 – Ja’Tavion Sanders, Texas: 15% Wide Rate: 45-of-67 | 682 yards | 2 TDs

10 – Isaac Rex, BYU: 13.2% Wide Rate: 34-of-60 | 422 yards | 3 TDs

11 – Grayson Barnes, NIU: 11.8% Wide Rate: 24-of-40 | 426 yards | 5 TDs

12 – Harold Fannin, Bowling Green: 11.3% Wide Rate: 39-of-50 | 573 yards | 6 TDs

13 – Benjamin Brahmer, Iowa State: 11.2% Wide Rate: 26-of-50 | 320 yards | 2 TDs

14 – Theo Johnson, Penn State: 9.7% Wide Rate: 32-of-43 | 325 yards | 6 TDs

15 – Brock Bowers, Georgia: 9.6% Wide Rate: 51-of-63 | 664 yards | 6 TDs

16 – Mason Taylor, LSU: 9.3% Wide Rate: 29-of-40 | 260 yards | 1 TD

Tight Ends with at least 40 targets and 9% of their pass reps lined up Wide:

2018: 4

2019: 6

2021: 10

2022: 17

2023: 17

Data Points

The Air Raid-ification of CFB has led to a drastic expansion for the tight end position, as astute OCs have flexed out their uber-athletic TEs to take advantage of size/speed mismatches on the boundary. Where only 4 tight ends recorded 9%+ of their reps out wide in 2018, that number spiked to 18 last year (17 in 2022).
In 2021, only 2 of the top-20 TEs in Wide Rate with 40 or more targets didn’t have at least 400 receiving yards = Daniel Bellinger, SDSU – 31-of-41 | 353 yards | 2 TDs) & Christian Trahan, Houston – 37-of-47 | 398 Yards | 2 TDs.
In 2022, 17 of the Top-20 TEs in Wide Rate with at least 45 targets finished with 400+ Receiving Yards.
Of the Top-10 returning 2023 Tight Ends in PPG scoring, 7 of them had a Wide Rate of 9% or more.
Three returning 2024 TEs received at least 10 targets of 20+ yards downfield in 2023: RJ Maryland, SMU (15) | Grayson Barnes, NIU (10) | Rivaldo Fairweather, Auburn (10)
11 TEs broke at least 10+ tackles last year, with 5 returning: Justin Joly (20), Terrance Ferguson (13), Harold Fannin Jr. (13), Mitchell Evans (10) and Maliq Carr (10).

As you might expect, the further downfield a tight end catches passes, the more yardage they are able to pile up. With that statement in mind, these were the Top-10 Returning Tight Ends According to Target Depth (20+ Targets) heading into last year:

Theo Johnson, Penn State – 13.1 Yard ADOT

Bryson Nesbit, UNC – 11.8 Yard ADOT

Tanner Kozioi, Ball State – 11.7 Yard ADOT

Will Kacmarek, Ohio – 11.4 Yard ADOT

Thomas Yassmin, Utah – 11.1 Yard ADOT

JJay Mcafee, Georgia Southern – 10.9 Yard ADOT

Ben Sinnott, Kansas State – 10.5 Yard ADOT

Luke Lachey, Iowa – 10.0 Yard ADOT

Tanner McLachlan, Arizona – 10.0 Yard ADOT

Dominick Mazotti, San Jose State – 9.5 Yard ADOT

Top-10 Active Tight Ends in Target Depth (Favorite ADP Sleepers in Bold)

Grayson Barnes, Northern Illinois – 13.9 ADOT (TEITO)

RJ Maryland, SMU – 12.9 ADOT

Jack Velling, Michigan State – 11.6 ADOT

Maliq Carr, Houston – 11.0 ADOT

Mitchell Evans, Notre Dame – 10.2 ADOT

Drake Dabney, Baylor – 10.2 ADOT

Mark Redman, Louisville – 10.1 ADOT

Kole Taylor, West Virginia – 9.8 ADOT

Colston Loveland, Michigan – 9.6 ADOT

Benjamin Brahmer, Iowa State – 9.4 ADOT

I’m targeting all of the TEs in bold at well into the double-digit rounds in Re-Draft/Best Ball formats, and in redraft leagues with shallow 16-player rosters such at the King’s Classic run by Fantrax’s own guru John Laub, I don’t even draft a 2nd TE due to the cavernous depth at the position.

In deeper Dynasty leagues with 40 + or- roster spots, I generally will carry 3 TEs depending on the strength of my unit and the waiver wire restrictions. However you will want to make sure to keep your bye weeks straight in C2C formats where in many leagues you cannot make more than 4 in-season transactions once the dispersal draft ends. Good luck!

Fantrax is one of the fastest-growing fantasy sites in the fantasy sports industry, and we’re not stopping any time soon. We are the most customizable, easy-to-use, and feature-rich platform in the industry, offering the greatest fantasy experience for your dynasty, keeper, redraft, and best ball leagues. Fantasy sports doesn’t sleep, and neither does Fantrax, with seasons running 365 days a year. Take your fantasy leagues to the next level now at Fantrax.com!