JessN: 2025 Roster Rundown: Wide Receivers and Tight Ends

[JessN]

2025 Roster Rundown: Wide Receivers and Tight Ends
by Jess Nicholas, TideFans.com Editor-in-Chief

This week, our 2025 Alabama Preview continues with a look at the wide receiver corps and also the tight end group.

For this week, we look not only at the three starting wide receiver positions, but also the tight end spot, which at times breaks down into two positions, the inline Y-tight end position, and the H-back spot, which is a hybrid tight end/fullback position.

CONTINUE READING

2025 Roster Rundown: Wide Receivers and Tight Ends

This week, our 2025 Alabama Preview continues with a look at the wide receiver corps and also the tight end group. As stated in previous articles in this series, in recent years, we’ve waited…

news.tidefans.com

 

[AlistarWills]

Why do we have so many TE’s? Looking for a decent warm body to man the position? I mean we won’t run more than one on a regular basis, sometimes 2 in certain formations and 2 Y and a H in goalline/short yardage situations. No way they are all on scholarship.

 

[Rocky Mtn Bob]

WR and TE struck me as "thin" last season. Looking a lot better in both areas now.

 

[BamaMoon]

The big freshman with ride receiver skills sounds like a sleeper to leapfrog up the DC, as JessN notes.

But why so many TE's???

 

[BamaMoon]

Our WR room is about to be "elite" again. May never get to the 4 horsemen level, but if it approaches it we are in great shape.

Bama QBs ought to be salivating over the opportunity to throw to these guys!

BTW, some have questioned if TS can be a one and done. I think all he needs to do is do the basics and get the ball out on time and accurately to these guys (which is the MO of Grubb/Deboars passing scheme) and he'll be catching NFL scout's eyes!

 

[JustNeedMe81]

Why do we have so many TE’s? Looking for a decent warm body to man the position? I mean we won’t run more than one on a regular basis, sometimes 2 in certain formations and 2 Y and a H in goalline/short yardage situations. No way they are all on scholarship.

Not all is on scholarship. You're right. We'll see Lewis and Cuevas on the field together as Y and H at times.

 

[Jack Bourbon]

What happens with Mbakwe? May have been better off letting him leave.

 

[JustNeedMe81]

What happens with Mbakwe? May have been better off letting him leave.

nobody said anything about him? he's fine. He's on the team.

 

[arthurdawg]

What happens with Mbakwe? May have been better off letting him leave.

I think he'd be better off staying at CB... But maybe he will be a top WR down the road or see the light and move back. I think they felt he was a talent they could use at some point.

 

[BamaMoon]

I think he'd be better off staying at CB... But maybe he will be a top WR down the road or see the light and move back. I think they felt he was a talent they could use at some point.

I'm all for two-way players or for a defensive guy turning into a full-time offensive player if he has the skills to cross over. And, I know he's a former QB that is incredibly athletic and dynamic with the ball in his hands.

However, looking at our recent run on tall wide receivers, I'm not sure Mcbakwe fits our new MO. I mean, it's possible because we have some veteran holdovers who are more like his body-type.

I think the upcoming season will see this play out. If he makes waves on the field with his athleticism, he'll probably stay the course, but it would make little sense to me for him to be buried in the WR DC if he could be playing regularly on the DB side of the ball, especially if we need him more on that side!

 

[arthurdawg]

I'm all for two-way players or for a defensive guy turning into a full-time offensive player if he has the skills to cross over. And, I know he's a former QB that is incredibly athletic and dynamic with the ball in his hands.

However, looking at our recent run on tall wide receivers, I'm not sure Mcbakwe fits our new MO. I mean, it's possible because we have some veteran holdovers who are more like his body-type.

I think the upcoming season will see this play out. If he makes waves on the field with his athleticism, he'll probably stay the course, but it would make little sense to me for him to be buried in the WR DC if he could be playing regularly on the DB side of the ball, especially if we need him more on that side!

Agreed... CKD definitely seems to like his tall rangy guys. And we have several slot guys already.

 

[JessN]

The big freshman with ride receiver skills sounds like a sleeper to leapfrog up the DC, as JessN notes.

But why so many TE's???

Basically we don't know what we have exactly at tight end. I think they signed a bunch of guys, will let the pieces fall where they're going to fall, and adjust accordingly next year.

Plus, Knudson, Cuevas and Dalton are out of eligibility after this season and Lewis might be too (seen conflicting info as to whether he got his redshirt year back). Of the other guys, Hobson is a big-time project (probably a better fit at OG, which is where he played at Mississippi State), and Lindsey is a bit of a project. When you look at 2026, if Lewis is gone you will have Sammarco at Y with Edwards, and Pritchett at H with Lindsey or the walk-on Fox, or a signee.

Agreed... CKD definitely seems to like his tall rangy guys. And we have several slot guys already.

Going forward we'll see bigger guys at WR ... but it won't be universal. Remember that he brought Germie Bernard (6'1" at best) to Washington from Michigan State and then brought him again to Alabama, and also signed Lotzeir Brooks, who may be 5'9" if he's on his tiptoes trying to ask a cute girl out. This staff also like Cole Adams a lot. I think there will always be room for a couple of little guys in this offense, so long as they're either quick or, like Adams, they will catch meteorites even if still on fire.

 

[gtgilbert]

Basically we don't know what we have exactly at tight end. I think they signed a bunch of guys, will let the pieces fall where they're going to fall, and adjust accordingly next year.

Plus, Knudson, Cuevas and Dalton are out of eligibility after this season and Lewis might be too (seen conflicting info as to whether he got his redshirt year back). Of the other guys, Hobson is a big-time project (probably a better fit at OG, which is where he played at Mississippi State), and Lindsey is a bit of a project. When you look at 2026, if Lewis is gone you will have Sammarco at Y with Edwards, and Pritchett at H with Lindsey or the walk-on Fox, or a signee.



Going forward we'll see bigger guys at WR ... but it won't be universal. Remember that he brought Germie Bernard (6'1" at best) to Washington from Michigan State and then brought him again to Alabama, and also signed Lotzeir Brooks, who may be 5'9" if he's on his tiptoes trying to ask a cute girl out. This staff also like Cole Adams a lot. I think there will always be room for a couple of little guys in this offense, so long as they're either quick or, like Adams, they will catch meteorites even if still on fire.

On TE, I honestly hope we evolve away from using as many 2 TE sets as we did last season. 2 TEs means only 2 WRs and we have a lot more skill and potential in the Wr depth chart. In our best most recent years, we used the 3 WR set much more than anything else.

 

[JessN]

On TE, I honestly hope we evolve away from using as many 2 TE sets as we did last season. 2 TEs means only 2 WRs and we have a lot more skill and potential in the Wr depth chart. In our best most recent years, we used the 3 WR set much more than anything else.

If we do that we won't run the football nearly as effectively. We're going to need the schematic flexibility we get from having the Y and H involved together. If you take a close look at what this staff liked to do in Washington (as well as what a lot of NFL staffs are doing now with Ys, Hs and even fullbacks again), it's becoming more commonplace to see some kind of flexible Ace package as a base offense.

 

[arthurdawg]

Basically we don't know what we have exactly at tight end. I think they signed a bunch of guys, will let the pieces fall where they're going to fall, and adjust accordingly next year.

Plus, Knudson, Cuevas and Dalton are out of eligibility after this season and Lewis might be too (seen conflicting info as to whether he got his redshirt year back). Of the other guys, Hobson is a big-time project (probably a better fit at OG, which is where he played at Mississippi State), and Lindsey is a bit of a project. When you look at 2026, if Lewis is gone you will have Sammarco at Y with Edwards, and Pritchett at H with Lindsey or the walk-on Fox, or a signee.



Going forward we'll see bigger guys at WR ... but it won't be universal. Remember that he brought Germie Bernard (6'1" at best) to Washington from Michigan State and then brought him again to Alabama, and also signed Lotzeir Brooks, who may be 5'9" if he's on his tiptoes trying to ask a cute girl out. This staff also like Cole Adams a lot. I think there will always be room for a couple of little guys in this offense, so long as they're either quick or, like Adams, they will catch meteorites even if still on fire.

Those small guys bring a different dynamic, would definitely not want to give them up. Cole seems to be one of those guys who just has the ability to make things happen, looking forward to him being healthy.

I would presume a good bit of TE efforts this year will be to find a second guy at both spots and see what develops and then make adjustments next year. The super frosh and our signee both look like guys who can get it done, but TE can be like the OL, where you just need time to develop. I hope we can continue to sign playmakers here too.

 

[gtgilbert]

If we do that we won't run the football nearly as effectively. We're going to need the schematic flexibility we get from having the Y and H involved together. If you take a close look at what this staff liked to do in Washington (as well as what a lot of NFL staffs are doing now with Ys, Hs and even fullbacks again), it's becoming more commonplace to see some kind of flexible Ace package as a base offense.

I know it's a different scheme and style, but we've had some of the best years rushing recently when we've used the 3WR set more often than not. That 3rd WR not only requires the opposing D to play with a smaller nickel/Star/Husky (instead of another LB), it often requires both Safeties to align differently which creates a LOT more space and the numbers even. 2 TEs adds an LB in the box, and often allows a S to play much closer to the box as well.

 

[JessN]

I know it's a different scheme and style, but we've had some of the best years rushing recently when we've used the 3WR set more often than not. That 3rd WR not only requires the opposing D to play with a smaller nickel/Star/Husky (instead of another LB), it often requires both Safeties to align differently which creates a LOT more space and the numbers even. 2 TEs adds an LB in the box, and often allows a S to play much closer to the box as well.

And the converse to that is if you have an H in the game they typically get matched up against an edge guy who is now forced to play reactive so that he doesn't give up coverage. This is how a lot of teams slowed Will Anderson down and it would frustrate our fans who kept seeing the Jack linebackers having to drop into coverage, but if you get them iso'ed on a tight end, they really don't have a choice. I also like the way DeBoer designs pre-snap motion in two-TE sets because it's different than just dragging all the WRs across the formation; when you do it with the tight ends you get a lot of good information about two different levels of the defense and sometimes even part of the third.

The H has made a comeback on the pro level, to the point that some teams are even drafting real fullbacks again. I pay attention to that stuff because it tends to trickle downhill to the college level over time (or sometimes, it's a reflection of what they know colleges are already working on). I think we'll see a 60/40 mix of 3WR vs. Ace on most downs, special situations (i.e., 5-wide empty) notwithstanding.

 

[gtgilbert]

And the converse to that is if you have an H in the game they typically get matched up against an edge guy who is now forced to play reactive so that he doesn't give up coverage. This is how a lot of teams slowed Will Anderson down and it would frustrate our fans who kept seeing the Jack linebackers having to drop into coverage, but if you get them iso'ed on a tight end, they really don't have a choice. I also like the way DeBoer designs pre-snap motion in two-TE sets because it's different than just dragging all the WRs across the formation; when you do it with the tight ends you get a lot of good information about two different levels of the defense and sometimes even part of the third.

The H has made a comeback on the pro level, to the point that some teams are even drafting real fullbacks again. I pay attention to that stuff because it tends to trickle downhill to the college level over time (or sometimes, it's a reflection of what they know colleges are already working on). I think we'll see a 60/40 mix of 3WR vs. Ace on most downs, special situations (i.e., 5-wide empty) notwithstanding.

so that's not actually what happened most of the time with Anderson.

We ran nickel that year (22, Andersons last year) on 83.7% of our snaps, so we were not in a 3-4 much (we ran this less than 5% of the time) with OLBs having a lot of coverage responsibilities. From that, I'd make the jump to say we didn't face a lot of 2 TE sets, or if we did, we stayed with the nickel regardless - maybe the other TE was a flex or hybrid. Even though we grouped it different, we were essentially running an even front (4 guys on the line) so all 4 of those guys should have been able to rush the passer, then have 2 LBs and 5DBs behind them.

Golding did this ridiculous thing where he'd rush an inside backer (or sometimes a DB) and drop Anderson into that blitzers responsibility. I had been a bit of a Golding apologist until he started doing this (and also making Anderson slide inside some). That mentality stopped with this criminal misuse of the talent Anderson was (and HTT for that matter). It was just stupid to drop the best pass rusher in the game into coverage while rushing an ILB whose best attribute was pass coverage.

I watch almost none of the pro game so no idea if that type of stuff will trickle down or not.

 

[JessN]

so that's not actually what happened most of the time with Anderson.

We ran nickel that year (22, Andersons last year) on 83.7% of our snaps, so we were not in a 3-4 much (we ran this less than 5% of the time) with OLBs having a lot of coverage responsibilities. From that, I'd make the jump to say we didn't face a lot of 2 TE sets, or if we did, we stayed with the nickel regardless - maybe the other TE was a flex or hybrid. Even though we grouped it different, we were essentially running an even front (4 guys on the line) so all 4 of those guys should have been able to rush the passer, then have 2 LBs and 5DBs behind them.

Golding did this ridiculous thing where he'd rush an inside backer (or sometimes a DB) and drop Anderson into that blitzers responsibility. I had been a bit of a Golding apologist until he started doing this (and also making Anderson slide inside some). That mentality stopped with this criminal misuse of the talent Anderson was (and HTT for that matter). It was just stupid to drop the best pass rusher in the game into coverage while rushing an ILB whose best attribute was pass coverage.

I watch almost none of the pro game so no idea if that type of stuff will trickle down or not.

What we were running was straight out of Pete Carroll's early Seahawks stuff, a 2-4-5 sub front with the Jack and the SLB playing down. It was somewhat predictive of what Wommack had last year until they figured out that our Wolf LB spot got really weak if they either didn't have both Robinson and Russaw healthy or if those guys were having difficulty with the opposing blocking schemes that week. We ended up doing a twin-Bandit look in a lot of those cases against teams that could run (and they're leaning into that this year, too, especially in light of Latham dropping weight).

The point I was making was that when Anderson was playing 6-technique and was on the strongside, Golding (and it had to get Saban's blessing or it wouldn't have kept happening) had him fall back if that guy went into the pattern. It looked like an automatic key. Why they didn't flip Anderson with an ILB, I don't know, but I have a feeling it's because they had a couple of things going on at that level: One, we've had some ILBs during the Saban years who couldn't cover a bed with a sheet; two, the weak spot of Saban's defense has always been over the top of the ILBs down the middle so they might have been trying to defend it a different way. Whatever the case, Anderson was dropping on what looked like a pure key.

As to your question about how we pattern matched to two TEs, we almost never were in dime against Ace. We would go regular, regular with a heavy safety (i.e., a safety playing LB -- we liked this against HUNH offenses) or nickel and/or nickel sub, and in the latter you sort of hope for the best and want them to throw it.

 

[gtgilbert]

I've always focused a bit more on the D side of things than the O, but this thread got me thinking so I spent some time reading this weekend and found a great article that went pretty deep into the CKB/CNG offense at UW in 2023 to see what their general tendencies are and what made it so noteworthy.

Ryan Grubb's offense, explained by a coordinator expert

Will the Seahawks have as much success with Ryan Grubb as the Huskies did? I asked an EXPERT to find out: Seaside Joe 1991

www.seasidejoe.com

Yes, the title says seahawks, but it's a guy writing about what UW did in 2023 and what that might be for the NFL.

Here are three key aspects he noted:

"Seaside Joe: What made their offense different than the rest? Like, can you summarize "Deboer offense" in a few words?


TCP: In some ways, the DeBoer/Grubb offense was a typical 2023 college spread. They overwhelmingly lineed up in 11 Personnel (1 RB, 1 TE, 3 WR’s), and their run game makes heavy use of Run/Pass Option plays, where the QB has the ability to either hand the ball off, or to pull it and throw it, with that decision being made either by reading a specific defender, or by simply counting the number of defenders in the box. It is NOT, however, a big QB run offense, and in that way a good NFL comparison might be the 2017 Eagles, who ran a lot of RPO’s with Carson Wentz and Nick Foles at QB. "

" One thing that I would disagree with a little bit, though, is that Grubb and DeBoer did a little bit of everything that you’ll see in the NFL. While they did have some two- and three-TE sets that looked a little more like the traditional definition of a “pro style” offense, at Washington those were almost exclusively for short yardage situations, and so they didn’t have all of the versatility and complexity that you’d need, say, to develop a full gameplan around them if that happened to be the thing that gave them the biggest advantage in any given week. "

and finally:

"Seaside Joe: What would you say are the 'non-negotiable must-have qualities' in a quarterback if he was tasked with successfully running Grubb's offense?


TCP: In spite of this being a spread offense, the QB really doesn’t need much that’s different from a typical NFL pocket passer. You’d like him to have some mobility, but if the OL can give him good protection then you don’t need a ton of it. The system really runs through the QB’s mind, pocket presence, and downfield accuracy. A nice, underrated secondary trait would be good ball-faking, since there are a number of delayed routes and different types of backfield action that open up a lot more with good mis-direction. These are often sequenced with bread-and-butter plays, so the more wily a guy is, and the more able to make everything look the same, the more you’re going to get from the whole package. "