Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor?

12thMan · 05-11-2007, 09:42 AM

Of course, we all know neither of them are actually eligible to be franchised this year. But if they were, and if you could only franchise one of them, and had to, perhaps, release the other, which one would it be?

Personally I would franchise Sean Taylor at the drop of a hat.

Just to be clear, I think Chris Cooley is unquestionably, at least in my mind, a franchise type player. Save Antonio Gates, there isn't one TE/H-Back or whatever you want to call him, I would rather have on my team than Chris Cooley.

But if I had to choose, I would throw my money at Sean Taylor.

Daseal · 05-11-2007, 09:45 AM

Yeah, I love both but I'd have to take Taylor.

MTK · 05-11-2007, 09:47 AM

I wouldn't franchise either of them, just get deals done with them long before it comes to that. Franchising a player usually only makes things ugly, and with the way the Skins stretch the cap to the limit, I don't see how they could afford to franchise a player.

12thMan · 05-11-2007, 09:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

I wouldn't franchise either of them, just get deals done with them long before it comes to that. Franchising a player usually only makes things ugly, and with the way the Skins stretch the cap to the limit, I don't see how they could afford to franchise a player.

But all things being equal, and for the sake of discussion.....and that was the only option what would you do?

Daseal · 05-11-2007, 09:50 AM

He made it pretty clear this is a hypothetical question, Matty.

MTK · 05-11-2007, 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Daseal

He made it pretty clear this is a hypothetical question, Matty.

I get that, the realist in my couldn't resist though.

GhettoDogAllStars · 05-11-2007, 09:51 AM

I'd franchise Taylor, simply because he would be more difficult to replace. He's a safety in a linebacker's body, with great speed and coverage skills (I don't care what anyone says, he can cover. He doesn't get 10 picks at Miami w/o coverage skills)

MTK · 05-11-2007, 09:54 AM

I really don't know. Taylor was wildly inconsistent last year and overall at this point in his career he just hasn't taken full advantage of his physical skill set. He has the potential to be one of the top safeties of all time, so in that respect he's been a bit of a disappointment to me. Fair or not, he hasn't lived up to the lofty expectations we all have for him.

Cooley on the other hand has proven to be an absolute steal. I think a QB's best friend in this league is a quality TE, and Cooley is definitely a top 10 TE. I think he's really in for a big year.

Also, taking into consideration the off the field issues of Taylor, his enigmatic behavior at times, vs. the fan-favorite type of personality that Cooley has, I'd probably push harder to retain Cooley over Taylor.

12thMan · 05-11-2007, 09:56 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mattyk72

I really don't know. Taylor was wildly inconsistent last year and overall at this point in his career he just hasn't taken full advantage of his physical skill set. He has the potential to be one of the top safeties of all time, so in that respect he's been a bit of a disappointment to me. Fair or not, he hasn't lived up to the lofty expectations we all have for him.

Cooley on the other hand has proven to be an absolute steal. I think a QB's best friend in this league is a quality TE, and Cooley is definitely a top 10 TE. I think he's really in for a big year.

Also, taking into consideration the off the field issues of Taylor, his enigmatic behavior at times, vs. the fan-favorite type of personality that Cooley has, I'd probably push harder to retain Cooley over Taylor.

I think there is a strong case for Cooley - very strong. Like I said, I think the only guy I clearly take over Cooley is Gates.

jdlea · 05-11-2007, 09:59 AM

I think you would have to keep Taylor. However, that also depends how much of a security blanket Cooley becomes for Campbell this year and, and I think this is really important, Taylor's happiness with the team. I'm sure people are gonna say he should shut his mouth and play, but if he got franchised and refused to play, they'd end up trading him. If that's gonna happen, I guess it's better to get something for him, but I wouldn't want to see him go.

I think the franchise tag has become something that it was never intended to be. It's a huge negative for a guy to get franchised now, they rarely ever get extensions. I'd rather not be in the situation, but should it arise, you have my answer.

MTK · 05-11-2007, 10:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdlea

I think the franchise tag has become something that it was never intended to be. It's a huge negative for a guy to get franchised now, they rarely ever get extensions. I'd rather not be in the situation, but should it arise, you have my answer.

I agree, players seem to take it as a sign of disrespect. Players always want that monster signing bonus, after all it's the only guaranteed portion of their deal so you really can't blame them.

Schneed10 · 05-11-2007, 10:23 AM

I really, really, really, really, really hate hypothetical questions.

Especially when you consider that Cooley will be a free agent in 2008, and Taylor will be in 2010 (or 2009 if he hits enough escalators to void the last year). Either way, neither will bump up against each other in a choice for a franchise tag.

But I guess in dream world where I'm forced to choose, I'd rather keep Chris Cooley.

This debate is stupid.

12thMan · 05-11-2007, 10:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schneed10

I really, really, really, really, really hate hypothetical questions.

Especially when you consider that Cooley will be a free agent in 2008, and Taylor will be in 2010 (or 2009 if he hits enough escalators to void the last year). Either way, neither will bump up against each other in a choice for a franchise tag.

But I guess in dream world where I'm forced to choose, I'd rather keep Chris Cooley.

This debate is stupid.

What's stupid about it? And who said it was a debate?

Schneed10 · 05-11-2007, 10:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 12thMan

What's stupid about it? And who said it was a debate?

It's stupid because there is no foreseeable circumstance in real life in which Taylor and Cooley would be competing for the franchise tag.

It's a debate because some people are choosing Taylor, others are choosing Cooley, and arguing the merits of either choice.

12thMan · 05-11-2007, 10:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Schneed10

It's stupid because there is no foreseeable circumstance in real life in which Taylor and Cooley would be competing for the franchise tag.

It's a debate because some people are choosing Taylor, others are choosing Cooley, and arguing the merits of either choice.

Of course there is no foreseeble circumstance in real life, I think I was pretty clear in stating that.

This really wasn't about franchising, per se, but rather which player fellow Warpathers feel is more valuable to the team.

05-11-2007, 09:42 AM	#1
12thMan MVP Join Date: May 2005 Location: washington, D.C. Posts: 11,460	Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor? Of course, we all know neither of them are actually eligible to be franchised this year. But if they were, and if you could only franchise one of them, and had to, perhaps, release the other, which one would it be? Personally I would franchise Sean Taylor at the drop of a hat. Just to be clear, I think Chris Cooley is unquestionably, at least in my mind, a franchise type player. Save Antonio Gates, there isn't one TE/H-Back or whatever you want to call him, I would rather have on my team than Chris Cooley. But if I had to choose, I would throw my money at Sean Taylor.

05-11-2007, 09:45 AM	#2
Daseal Puppy Kicker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Arlington, Virginia Age: 42 Posts: 8,341	Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor? Yeah, I love both but I'd have to take Taylor. __________________ Best. Player. Available.

05-11-2007, 09:47 AM	#3
MTK \m/ Join Date: Feb 2004 Age: 52 Posts: 99,832	Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor? I wouldn't franchise either of them, just get deals done with them long before it comes to that. Franchising a player usually only makes things ugly, and with the way the Skins stretch the cap to the limit, I don't see how they could afford to franchise a player. __________________ Support The Warpath! \| Warpath Shop

05-11-2007, 09:50 AM	#5
Daseal Puppy Kicker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Arlington, Virginia Age: 42 Posts: 8,341	Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor? He made it pretty clear this is a hypothetical question, Matty. __________________ Best. Player. Available.

05-11-2007, 09:51 AM	#7
GhettoDogAllStars Playmaker Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Denver Age: 43 Posts: 2,762	Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor? I'd franchise Taylor, simply because he would be more difficult to replace. He's a safety in a linebacker's body, with great speed and coverage skills (I don't care what anyone says, he can cover. He doesn't get 10 picks at Miami w/o coverage skills) __________________ To succeed in the world it is not enough to be stupid, you must also be well-mannered.

05-11-2007, 09:54 AM	#8
MTK \m/ Join Date: Feb 2004 Age: 52 Posts: 99,832	Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor? I really don't know. Taylor was wildly inconsistent last year and overall at this point in his career he just hasn't taken full advantage of his physical skill set. He has the potential to be one of the top safeties of all time, so in that respect he's been a bit of a disappointment to me. Fair or not, he hasn't lived up to the lofty expectations we all have for him. Cooley on the other hand has proven to be an absolute steal. I think a QB's best friend in this league is a quality TE, and Cooley is definitely a top 10 TE. I think he's really in for a big year. Also, taking into consideration the off the field issues of Taylor, his enigmatic behavior at times, vs. the fan-favorite type of personality that Cooley has, I'd probably push harder to retain Cooley over Taylor. __________________ Support The Warpath! \| Warpath Shop

05-11-2007, 09:59 AM	#10
jdlea Playmaker Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Arlington, VA Age: 41 Posts: 3,109	Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor? I think you would have to keep Taylor. However, that also depends how much of a security blanket Cooley becomes for Campbell this year and, and I think this is really important, Taylor's happiness with the team. I'm sure people are gonna say he should shut his mouth and play, but if he got franchised and refused to play, they'd end up trading him. If that's gonna happen, I guess it's better to get something for him, but I wouldn't want to see him go. I think the franchise tag has become something that it was never intended to be. It's a huge negative for a guy to get franchised now, they rarely ever get extensions. I'd rather not be in the situation, but should it arise, you have my answer.

05-11-2007, 10:23 AM	#12
Schneed10 A Dude Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Newtown Square, PA Age: 46 Posts: 12,458	Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor? I really, really, really, really, really hate hypothetical questions. Especially when you consider that Cooley will be a free agent in 2008, and Taylor will be in 2010 (or 2009 if he hits enough escalators to void the last year). Either way, neither will bump up against each other in a choice for a franchise tag. But I guess in dream world where I'm forced to choose, I'd rather keep Chris Cooley. This debate is stupid. __________________ God made certain people to play football. He was one of them.

Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor?

Locker Room Main Forum