![]() |
|
Locker Room Main Forum Commanders Football & NFL discussion |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
![]() |
#1 |
Playmaker
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Colorado
Age: 37
Posts: 3,593
|
Re: Replace underperformers?
Skinster, who would you want to be #2 behind Davis if we traded Cooley away? Paulsen is decent TE, but not someone that would scare any team. What if Davis smoked and get caught again then suspended. Then Paulsen would become 1st stringer? We do not have plenty of picks where we can draft a TE and expect him to be good enough to be #1 if Davis got injured or suspended. I do not get it, what is frigging wrong with the idea of two TE set??
Hall, on other hand, I do not mind cutting him. I would prefer to ask him to take pay cut first, but if he refuses then if we can find a free agent that is good enough to replace Hall then I won't have any problem with it. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#2 | |
Impact Rookie
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 754
|
Re: Replace underperformers?
Quote:
Plus, backup pass catching TEs grow on trees in the mid rounds. It really shouldn't be that hard to come up with a second one...hell even one TE isn't even necessary, ask eli manning. Even if Cooley were any good, it wouldn't make much sense to keep him and Davis. This years patriots are the only TE combo in the history of football that's been any good. Don't expect that we can repeat that. The next best combo I can think of this year is Shockey and Olsen...and combined they didn't even crack 1000 yds, and only had a combined 83 catches. Jimmy Grahm single handedly annihilated those numbers. However I will say this for cooley. I get the impression that he is the type of guy that sets a good example in the locker room. If he wasn't a leader on the team, I'd say for sure he would be gone. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#3 | |
\m/
![]() Join Date: Feb 2004
Age: 52
Posts: 99,832
|
Re: Replace underperformers?
Quote:
If he's back to his old self, don't be surprised if he's starting over Davis. His contract is not a burden to the cap this year, and they could always re-work it to reduce his number. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#4 | |
Serenity Now
![]() Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Canada
Posts: 2,008
|
Re: Replace underperformers?
Quote:
|
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#5 |
Impact Rookie
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 754
|
Re: Replace underperformers?
Its no burden, I agree, but ditching it creates opportunities to upgrade in greater areas of need. More cap room is never a bad thing when you have alot of holes to fill. TE is not a hole with davis, and I highly doubt Cooley will be here much longer after this year.
Also there is the (hypothetical) potential for his cap number to hinder us from making a move we want to next year through shaving off 2 mil from the possibility of us cutting him then. |
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
#6 | |
Playmaker
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 3,765
|
Re: Replace underperformers?
Quote:
Just like Portis, Cooley is a warrior that I hate to cut, but he is turning 30 this year and his body health is no longer what it was. We have to get younger. I think Skinster is right. Plus it looks like there are several good TE's in FA. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
|