Warpath  

Home | Forums | Salary Cap Info | Shop | Donate | Stay Connected




Go Back   Warpath > Redskins Forums > Redskins Locker Room


Cooley put on IR

Redskins Locker Room


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 10-26-2011, 02:09 PM   #76
Pro Bowl
 
SirClintonPortis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 6,052
Re: Cooley put on IR

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hog1 View Post
The Skins won a few SB's with arguably NO superstars.......
Playmakers=/=superstars.

Art Monk. Superstar? maybe. Playmaker? **** yeah.
The Hogs. Superstar? No. Playmakers? **** yeah
Manley and Mann. Superstars? maybe. Playmakers? **** yeah
Riggo. Superstar? Maybe. Playmaker? **** yeah.
Dave Butz. Superstar? No. Playmaker? **** yeah.
__________________
Analysis using datasets (aka stats) is an attempt at reverse-engineering a player's "goodness".

Virtuosity remembered, douchebaggery forgotten.

The ideal character profile shoved down modern Western men and women's throats is Don Juan.
SirClintonPortis is offline   Reply With Quote

Advertisements
Old 10-26-2011, 02:45 PM   #77
Living Legend
 
GTripp0012's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Evanston, IL
Age: 26
Posts: 15,994
Re: Cooley put on IR

Quote:
Originally Posted by saden1 View Post
If we can't get a 3rd rounder for him then I would opt to keep him. No sense in letting him walk without a decent compensation similar to what the Bears got for Greg Olsen. Cooley can still be productive for 3 to 4 more years.
Well, then how do we explain the last three years?
__________________
according to a source with knowledge of the situation.
GTripp0012 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2011, 02:54 PM   #78
The Starter
 
Mechanix544's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Fort Bliss, TX
Posts: 2,273
Re: Cooley put on IR

Quote:
Originally Posted by GTripp0012 View Post
Well, then how do we explain the last three years?
I guess you are forgetting that he had 77 receptions for almost 900 yards last year, and that was the year he really picked up on his blocking.

All that while giving Fred Davis some playing time, cause you all know we didnt run any two TE sets last year, lol.

In short, he is a valuable commodity, definitely worth a 3rd rounder to some team, possibly a 3rd and 4th. I still think we should keep him though.
__________________
Ain't Nothin Like a Good B Western.

YEEHAW
Mechanix544 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2011, 02:58 PM   #79
Living Legend
 
Ruhskins's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 15,758
Re: Cooley put on IR

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeRedskin View Post
Green Bay is 7-0 and I would argue that they have only 3 "stud playmakers" on the most prolific offense this year: Jennings, Rogers, and Finchley (possibly J. Nelson). On defense, their NT (whose name I forget) and Clay Mathews are the only "stud playmakers" I can think of. You'll note they do NOT have a "playmaker" at RB.

They have several good and very good players but none other than those named that would be instant starters on any team in the league (which is what a "stud playmaker" means to me).

My point being, solid players, not playmakers, are what make the team. Name me a team today that has 7 playmakers on both sides of the ball. Ain't happening. Get and lock in the good players and the playmakers will come.
Green Bay has six playmakers: Rodgers, Jennings, Finley, Matthews, Raji and Woodson. Personally, I don't think we have a single playmaker, we only have a few solid players (Rak, Landry, and Fletch), but none of them on offense. This team lacks talent period.
__________________
R.I.P. #21

New words created on The Warpath:
Rewalsr - Somretimes - Fualt - Jersesy - Itiot - Composetory
Afeard - Storgn - Empliment - Gaissn - Saftys - Minnisota
Faviort - Hatter - Phsyched - Foof - Heloing - Brutual
Stroried

"Give an opinion and move on. Your life doesn't depend on winning the internet." -FRPLG
Ruhskins is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2011, 03:41 PM   #80
Pro Bowl
 
SirClintonPortis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 6,052
Re: Cooley put on IR

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mechanix544 View Post
I guess you are forgetting that he had 77 receptions for almost 900 yards last year, and that was the year he really picked up on his blocking.

All that while giving Fred Davis some playing time, cause you all know we didnt run any two TE sets last year, lol.

In short, he is a valuable commodity, definitely worth a 3rd rounder to some team, possibly a 3rd and 4th. I still think we should keep him though.
Chris Cooley is not that valuable, not with the TE market being flooded with an influx of athletic TEs that can "do everything". Over 20 teams have an athletic TE worth their salt.
__________________
Analysis using datasets (aka stats) is an attempt at reverse-engineering a player's "goodness".

Virtuosity remembered, douchebaggery forgotten.

The ideal character profile shoved down modern Western men and women's throats is Don Juan.
SirClintonPortis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2011, 03:43 PM   #81
Pro Bowl
 
SirClintonPortis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 6,052
Re: Cooley put on IR

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruhskins View Post
Green Bay has six playmakers: Rodgers, Jennings, Finley, Matthews, Raji and Woodson. Personally, I don't think we have a single playmaker, we only have a few solid players (Rak, Landry, and Fletch), but none of them on offense. This team lacks talent period.
Fletcher is more than solid. He's the MVP or co-MVP of the defense and would be for many other teams. Rak and Landry are debatable for now, but there frequent flashes from them.
__________________
Analysis using datasets (aka stats) is an attempt at reverse-engineering a player's "goodness".

Virtuosity remembered, douchebaggery forgotten.

The ideal character profile shoved down modern Western men and women's throats is Don Juan.
SirClintonPortis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2011, 03:47 PM   #82
The Starter
 
CrustyRedskin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: RatherbeinDC, TX
Posts: 2,427
Re: Cooley put on IR

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hog1 View Post
The Skins won a few SB's with arguably NO superstars.......
Different, era. Different coachin style.
__________________
I yearn......oh do I yearn, for a return to glory...
CrustyRedskin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2011, 03:56 PM   #83
MVP
 
CRedskinsRule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Pasadena, Md
Age: 47
Posts: 12,391
Re: Cooley put on IR

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ruhskins View Post
Green Bay has six playmakers: Rodgers, Jennings, Finley, Matthews, Raji and Woodson. Personally, I don't think we have a single playmaker, we only have a few solid players (Rak, Landry, and Fletch), but none of them on offense. This team lacks talent period.
Looking at those 6:
Rodgers - 1st round (24th overall) 2005 (not going there carlos/campbell)
Jennings - 2nd round (52nd overall) 2006 (we got McIntosh in the 2nd)
Finley - 3rd round (91st overall) 2008 (we got Davis in the 2nd, and he sat behind Cooley under Zorn)
Matthews - 1st round(26th overall) 2009 (we got Orakpo at 13)
Raji -1st round (9th overall) 2009
Woodson -8yr starter picked up in 2006

my point is, these playmakers weren't playmakers year one, the team was built, and it took time to get the system in place, and the qb groomed enough that the team is where it is today. We all know that this team has been to the bottom and back, but in building we have to give the young players a chance before we just look at them and dismiss them. It's hard, especially at WR, because we've seen so many flame out here, but I want to believe that out of our current young group 1, 2 or 3 will develop into a playmaker status. I have high hopes for Austin, Paul, and medium hopes for AA and Hankerson. It would be nice to see some faith made into reality.
CRedskinsRule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2011, 04:07 PM   #84
Pro Bowl
 
Beemnseven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Virginia Beach
Age: 40
Posts: 5,293
Re: Cooley put on IR

Quote:
Originally Posted by CRedskinsRule View Post
Probably because we haven't focused on having a fundamentally sound team for the last decade. Playmakers are great, and I agree that we need to find one, two, or even 3, BUT, when our team fails at the simple things of pass protection, run blocking, or defensive pressure, the playmakers we have brought in (Moss, Portis, etc) generally fail. In most cases you have to have a sound team before you can have an explosive team. I believe we are doing better at building a sound team, admittedly- the last two weeks seem to argue against that.
One of the most important facets of a "fundamentally sound team" are players that can score points. I would argue that all of the things you mentioned, pass pro, run blocking, and defensive pressure, have improved. Granted, the running game is sometimes there, and sometimes it isn't. But when I talk about "playmakers" I'm referring specifically to wideouts who can get separation, run precise routes, and have the speed and elusiveness to find the endzone.

As I said, the only player we have that remotely fits this description has been Santana Moss and even he hasn't been there when we've needed a score most. Fred Davis comes after that, but now all opposing defenses have to do is focus in on him and our offense is effectively grounded.

What bugs me is this idea that you can't rely on young receivers to fill these needs because the learning curve takes so long to go from college to the pros. I'm not sure I buy that. Nonetheless, it's a problem and year after year this franchise doesn't have an answer for it.
Beemnseven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2011, 04:11 PM   #85
Pro Bowl
 
Beemnseven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Virginia Beach
Age: 40
Posts: 5,293
Re: Cooley put on IR

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hog1 View Post
The Skins won a few SB's with arguably NO superstars.......
Disagree totally. The Hogs are probably the most famous offensive line in league history. In their day, 'The Posse' was among the best trio of receivers in the league. Mann and Manley, and Darrell Green and Martin Mayhew, formed defensive tandems that were consistently at or near the top season after season.

Now, were they *Superstars* -- depends on how you define that. But they absolutely were playmakers.
Beemnseven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2011, 04:14 PM   #86
Pro Bowl
 
Beemnseven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Virginia Beach
Age: 40
Posts: 5,293
Re: Cooley put on IR

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mechanix544 View Post
I guess you are forgetting that he had 77 receptions for almost 900 yards last year, and that was the year he really picked up on his blocking. All that while giving Fred Davis some playing time, cause you all know we didnt run any two TE sets last year, lol.

In short, he is a valuable commodity, definitely worth a 3rd rounder to some team, possibly a 3rd and 4th. I still think we should keep him though.
I grew negative on Cooley before most people did. In the beginning he was a difference maker -- a decent touchdown threat. But after a while, defenses started to figure him out and his scoring ability fell off the map at a time when we needed it most.

Hell of a possession receiver, no doubt, but not a scoring threat. I'd be stunned if we get a 3rd rounder for him.
Beemnseven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2011, 04:21 PM   #87
Pro Bowl
 
Beemnseven's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Virginia Beach
Age: 40
Posts: 5,293
Re: Cooley put on IR

Quote:
Originally Posted by JoeRedskin View Post
Green Bay is 7-0 and I would argue that they have only 3 "stud playmakers" on the most prolific offense this year: Jennings, Rogers, and Finchley (possibly J. Nelson). On defense, their NT (whose name I forget) and Clay Mathews are the only "stud playmakers" I can think of. You'll note they do NOT have a "playmaker" at RB.

They have several good and very good players but none other than those named that would be instant starters on any team in the league (which is what a "stud playmaker" means to me).

My point being, solid players, not playmakers, are what make the team. Name me a team today that has 7 playmakers on both sides of the ball. Ain't happening. Get and lock in the good players and the playmakers will come.
You think we're lacking solid players?
Beemnseven is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2011, 05:01 PM   #88
Pro Bowl
 
SirClintonPortis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Posts: 6,052
Re: Cooley put on IR

Playmakers are usually the most technically sound players of their position. Ed Reed probably studies a ton of film to diagnose the play and then make his interceptions. Darelle Revis isn't a shutdown corner without his positioning and other coverage skills. Peyton Manning can diagnose defenses better than most other QBs.
__________________
Analysis using datasets (aka stats) is an attempt at reverse-engineering a player's "goodness".

Virtuosity remembered, douchebaggery forgotten.

The ideal character profile shoved down modern Western men and women's throats is Don Juan.
SirClintonPortis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2011, 05:05 PM   #89
MVP
 
CRedskinsRule's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Pasadena, Md
Age: 47
Posts: 12,391
Re: Cooley put on IR

Quote:
Originally Posted by Beemnseven View Post
One of the most important facets of a "fundamentally sound team" are players that can score points. I would argue that all of the things you mentioned, pass pro, run blocking, and defensive pressure, have improved. Granted, the running game is sometimes there, and sometimes it isn't. But when I talk about "playmakers" I'm referring specifically to wideouts who can get separation, run precise routes, and have the speed and elusiveness to find the endzone.

As I said, the only player we have that remotely fits this description has been Santana Moss and even he hasn't been there when we've needed a score most. Fred Davis comes after that, but now all opposing defenses have to do is focus in on him and our offense is effectively grounded.

What bugs me is this idea that you can't rely on young receivers to fill these needs because the learning curve takes so long to go from college to the pros. I'm not sure I buy that. Nonetheless, it's a problem and year after year this franchise doesn't have an answer for it.
The bolded point is THE point. Playmakers are great but only if an offense, or defense, can - in all other facets- at least keep an opposing teams on an even keel. Much like we hoped RK would allow Orakpo more freedom to blitz. Playmakers still, generally, need a solid team in order for their abilities to shine through, otherwise opponents zero in, and can prevent them from making plays.

Last edited by CRedskinsRule; 10-26-2011 at 05:07 PM.
CRedskinsRule is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10-26-2011, 05:11 PM   #90
Mann Up HOF!
 
Lotus's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Hattiesburg, MS
Posts: 10,446
Re: Cooley put on IR

Quote:
Originally Posted by SirClintonPortis View Post
Playmakers are usually the most technically sound players of their position. Ed Reed probably studies a ton of film to diagnose the play and then make his interceptions. Darelle Revis isn't a shutdown corner without his positioning and other coverage skills. Peyton Manning can diagnose defenses better than most other QBs.
What about T.O. is his heyday? It is hard to argue that he wasn't a playmaker. It is also hard to argue that he was "technically sound." And he is just one example.
__________________
Rooting for the Dallas Cowboys should be recognized as a treatable mental disorder.
Lotus is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:20 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
This site is not officially affiliated with the Washington Redskins or the NFL.
Page generated in 0.33158 seconds with 9 queries

Search Engine Friendly URLs by vBSEO 3.2.0 RC5

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25