What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Welcome to Our Forums. Once you've registered and logged in, you're primed to talk football, among other topics, with the sharpest and most experienced fantasy players on the internet.

Does Chris Cooley take on the Tony Gonzales role? (1 Viewer)

Otis

Footballguy
I just pieced together the fact that Saunders coming to WAS could mean a substantial increase in TE production there. Cooley has already demonstrated that he is a very athletic and very able member of the offense. Does Cooley now take a big step up to elite TE status next year?

 
Vermeil and Saunders made it a point when they joined the Chiefs...they're not going to make the Chiefs O identical to that of Rams but they'll use the strength of the players they got. To answer your question, no, Cooley will not automatically turn into Gonzalez.

 

TheFanatic

Footballguy
Gonzo wasn't Gonzo under Saunders. His TD's have gone down the last 2 years. The yards are there, but the TD's have suffered. He had 10 three years ago, 7 last year and 2 in 2005. His yards have been pretty high, but his production is tapering.....Maybe that's age, I don't know. But I don't see Cooley becoming Gonzo. That being said, I expect solid numbers from Cooley for years to come. He was hot down the stretch this year. I expect him to build on that....

 

iSnitch

Footballguy
Do you mean to ask will Cooley become the best receiving option for the team? No, that position is occupied by Santana Moss.

 

Portis 26

Madden Freak
Either way, I expect Cooley to be a steal in next year's drafts...
Or to be over-rated amd go way too early because of guys like you. :P Let's not forget that one reason why Cooley caught so many balls this year was because the Redskins had no second WR. They were reduced to playing James Thrash there where he caught a ball a game. They had to throw to Cooley a ton because there was no-one else to go to. If they sign a stud #2 WR that will change.
 

bagger.

The One Play Quiz
I'd expect Portis to get more of a pop than Cooley, but Cooley is primed to be a top TE regardless.

 

diesel7982

Footballguy
Either way, I expect Cooley to be a steal in next year's drafts...
Or to be over-rated amd go way too early because of guys like you. :P Let's not forget that one reason why Cooley caught so many balls this year was because the Redskins had no second WR. They were reduced to playing James Thrash there where he caught a ball a game. They had to throw to Cooley a ton because there was no-one else to go to. If they sign a stud #2 WR that will change.
:goodposting: This is the correct answer, barring a major jump in passing yardage for the offense as a whole. (And with that defense, that isnt likely to happen)

 

Kleck.

Footballguy
I don't see Cooley being a big steal in many drafts next year unless he really tops his 2005 season. After being a huge steal this year and finishing the year as the #4 fantasy TE with 71 catches, 774 yards and 7 TD's, and now with Saunders coming to town, he will be plenty noticed/hyped. I will like the value though if he can be had after Gates, Shockey, Gonzo, Heap, Crumpler and Whitten, or fall to the 8th round or so. I'm not doubting Cooley's talents, he helped me plenty on a few teams this year, but just because Saunders will be there next year doesn't make me believe he will enter a Gonzo role. The two play a very different style of TE, or in Cooley's case HB, and now Saunders finally gets a much better #1 WR in Moss to work with.

 

Sopranos

Footballguy
I don't see Cooley being a big steal in many drafts next year unless he really tops his 2005 season. After being a huge steal this year and finishing the year as the #4 fantasy TE with 71 catches, 774 yards and 7 TD's, and now with Saunders coming to town, he will be plenty noticed/hyped.

I will like the value though if he can be had after Gates, Shockey, Gonzo, Heap, Crumpler and Whitten, or fall to the 8th round or so.

I'm not doubting Cooley's talents, he helped me plenty on a few teams this year, but just because Saunders will be there next year doesn't make me believe he will enter a Gonzo role. The two play a very different style of TE, or in Cooley's case HB, and now Saunders finally gets a much better #1 WR in Moss to work with.
He is a totally different player. He doent have the size,hands or speed. He also does not have the moves. He is a tough hardworking down to earth player. I like him but he isnt at the same talent level as the top 2-3 TE'e. He IS in the perfect offense for his style.So he will produce
 

redman

Footballguy
Either way, I expect Cooley to be a steal in next year's drafts...
Or to be over-rated amd go way too early because of guys like you. :P Let's not forget that one reason why Cooley caught so many balls this year was because the Redskins had no second WR. They were reduced to playing James Thrash there where he caught a ball a game. They had to throw to Cooley a ton because there was no-one else to go to. If they sign a stud #2 WR that will change.
Of all the potential results, this is the most likely IMHO as an avid 'Skins watcher. The 'Skins are going to add somebody as a new #2 WR. Wayne appears not to be the guy, but that still leaves Jurevicious, Boerigter, KRob, Randle-El, Givens, and various others out there. It bears mentioning that while Patten's stats don't reflect this, he was getting open but for some reason Brunell never threw his way; he's still a viable WR out there, but should be a third option. Thrash is still capable as the #4.

It occurred to me that the other receiving option this year besides Moss and Cooley was Sellers, but I also know that Sellers only receives catches in short yardage and the red zone situations; in the open field he's almost never looked to and frankly rarely runs receiving routes. He's essentially the Leroy Hoard of TE's because he steals TD's though. That leaves Moss and Cooley as effectively the only "donors" of receptions and yardage out there.

Moss, is the deep threat. The #2 WR will more likely fill the Art Monk role, which is to say running routes between 10 and 20 yards deep and moving the chains. That more closely correllates to what Cooley is doing than to what Moss is doing.

To a certain degree, the offense may actually produce more overall receiving yardage with a viable #2 WR, but that's probably only worth 200-300 additional yards all season long.

In the end, I think the best you can hope for is that Cooley's stats remain the same - which they may well do more or less. I think expecting him to improve statistically is unjustifiably optimistic as the chance for decline is IMHO greater.

 

zamboni

Footballguy
Do we know for sure that Cooley will actually be the primary TE in a traditional TE role, considering that he's been a H-back thus far? And if he's not equipped to be a traditional TE, what's to say they don't bring in another TE that can also catch the ball?Just thinking out loud...

 

Otis

Footballguy
Do we know for sure that Cooley will actually be the primary TE in a traditional TE role, considering that he's been a H-back thus far? And if he's not equipped to be a traditional TE, what's to say they don't bring in another TE that can also catch the ball?

Just thinking out loud...
:no:
 

Tony Jabroni

Footballguy
:shrug: Only the Lord knows, Otis. On the flipside, am I the only one that thinks the TE market is as good as it will ever be? (For the upcoming FF season)I think you can go 8-10 deep at TE this year, and be content.Thoughts?(For the record, I put Cooley at the #6 TE as of now. Clearly, a '#1' in any TE starting leagues)
 
Last edited by a moderator:

SofaKings.

Footballguy
:shrug:

Only the Lord knows, Otis.

On the flipside, am I the only one that thinks the TE market is as good as it will ever be? (For the upcoming FF season)

I think you can go 8-10 deep at TE this year, and be content.

Thoughts?

(For the record, I put Cooley at the #6 TE as of now. Clearly, a '#1' in any TE starting leagues)
You have Cooley as a #1 TE overall in TE starting leagues? I think that may be off.
 

dgreen

Footballguy
Do we know for sure that Cooley will actually be the primary TE in a traditional TE role, considering that he's been a H-back thus far? And if he's not equipped to be a traditional TE, what's to say they don't bring in another TE that can also catch the ball?

Just thinking out loud...
I don't think they'll shy away from a TE that can catch, but he'll have to be a really good blocker. They aren't going to sacrifice blocking ability at that position for another solid receiving option.
 

Family Matters

Footballguy
Do you mean to ask will Cooley become the best receiving option for the team? No, that position is occupied by Santana Moss.
Good point. But he the team's 2nd best option unless they address it in the offseason.
 

Verbal Kint

Footballguy
:shrug:

Only the Lord knows, Otis.

On the flipside, am I the only one that thinks the TE market is as good as it will ever be? (For the upcoming FF season)

I think you can go 8-10 deep at TE this year, and be content.

Thoughts?

(For the record, I put Cooley at the #6 TE as of now. Clearly, a '#1' in any TE starting leagues)
I've been thinking the same thing. Unless you want to spend a 2nd on Gates, there are about 7-8 others that will all be in the same tier.
 

houndirish

Footballguy
I like Cooley moving forward although I won't be making any major adjustments to his ranking based on Saunders. Cooley can't do a lot of things Gonzo did, especially in the blocking game. As has already been mentioned, Cooley fills an h-back role where Gibbs and Saunders can move him around to create mismatches. He can top last years numbers but I wouldn't expect him to shatter them. I think you can make an argument for him as a top 5 tight end based on Heap's injury prevalance and Witten's targets being decreased due to blocking assignments. If Witten isn't freed up to run more routes I don't see him exceeding Cooley.

 

houndirish

Footballguy
He will do ok.....Cooley won't ever be a top 5 TE.  But I think he can hang in the top 10.
Wasn't he 5th this year after Gates, Shockey, Crumpler and Heap?
Cooley was 4th, finishing 1 point (119-118) ahead of Crumpler.
Just doublechecked, in my league Cooley was in fact top 5, finishing 5th behind Gates, Shock, Heap and Crumpler. Alge was 2 points higher than Cooley who was 2 points higher than Witten.
 

zamboni

Footballguy
If Witten isn't freed up to run more routes I don't see him exceeding Cooley.
Witten had to block more with the loss of Flozell Adams. That should probably change next year with a healthy Adams, unless the team gets a big upgrade at WR (TO?).
 

Tony Jabroni

Footballguy
:shrug:

Only the Lord knows, Otis.

On the flipside, am I the only one that thinks the TE market is as good as it will ever be? (For the upcoming FF season)

I think you can go 8-10 deep at TE this year, and be content.

Thoughts?

(For the record, I put Cooley at the #6 TE as of now. Clearly, a '#1' in any TE starting leagues)
You have Cooley as a #1 TE overall in TE starting leagues? I think that may be off.
No.I stated he's clearly a starting TE in TE required leagues. (Obviously) The sky is also blue.

;)

 

DCThunder

Footballguy
Do you guys remember Clint Didier from the Gibbs I days? That's the guy who Cooley is the reinvention of. Didier ran the deep routes from the H-back/TE spot, while Don Warren was the blocker/short-yardage guy (Sellers' spot now). I think one year Didier had about 10 TDs, all on fairly long passes.Oh and Thrash will be around next year because he's a very valuable special teams guy. The WR who will definetly not be back it Taylor Jacobs.

 

softball

Footballguy
You may not remember but when Vermiel got to KC Gozo #####ed and moaned about how he was being underused. Because Vermeils offense ran through those stud WR's in St. Louis and his TE's production was nothing.They then focused on changing where the ball went when thrown to the best receiver they had, Gonzo.Also, Vermeil dates back to the tree of Don Correll(sp) and although he used Winslow1 as a receiver, it was again, because of adjusting the offense to the talent. Those old S.D. teams had some damn fine WR's.So to answer the original question, YES Cooley increases. Because Saunders will come in and adjust to the talent.Moss=Kennison(but Moss is more explosive)Cooley=GonzoTaylor Jacobs/Thrash/et al = the "other" KC receivers.Can't wait for September already.....

 

dgreen

Footballguy
Do you guys remember Clint Didier from the Gibbs I days?

That's the guy who Cooley is the reinvention of. Didier ran the deep routes from the H-back/TE spot, while Don Warren was the blocker/short-yardage guy (Sellers' spot now). I think one year Didier had about 10 TDs, all on fairly long passes.

Oh and Thrash will be around next year because he's a very valuable special teams guy. The WR who will definetly not be back it Taylor Jacobs.
:goodposting: on everything but the 10 TDs ;) .
+-------------------------+ | Receiving |+----------+-----+-------------------------+| Year TM | G | Rec Yards Y/R TD |+----------+-----+-------------------------+| 1982 was | 8 | 2 10 5.0 1 || 1983 was | 16 | 9 153 17.0 4 || 1984 was | 11 | 30 350 11.7 5 || 1985 was | 16 | 41 433 10.6 4 || 1986 was | 14 | 34 691 20.3 4 || 1987 was | 9 | 13 178 13.7 1 || 1988 gnb | 15 | 5 37 7.4 1 || 1989 gnb | 16 | 7 71 10.1 1 |+----------+-----+-------------------------+| TOTAL | 105 | 141 1923 13.6 21 |+----------+-----+-------------------------+20.3 yds/rec in 1986. :eek: Didier was a forgotten man in the passing game, considering the Washington passing game went to Monk and Clark first and also had guys like Ricky Sanders and Charlie Brown. And, don't forget about Kelvin Bryant out of the backfield. He was a very good receiver.Donnie Warren under Gibbs:

Code:
+-------------------------+                 |        Receiving        |+----------+-----+-------------------------+| Year  TM |   G |   Rec  Yards   Y/R   TD |+----------+-----+-------------------------+| 1981 was |  16 |    29    335  11.6    1 || 1982 was |   9 |    27    310  11.5    0 || 1983 was |  13 |    20    225  11.2    2 || 1984 was |  16 |    18    192  10.7    0 || 1985 was |  16 |    15    163  10.9    1 || 1986 was |  16 |    20    164   8.2    1 || 1987 was |  12 |     7     43   6.1    0 || 1988 was |  14 |    12    112   9.3    0 || 1989 was |  15 |    15    167  11.1    1 || 1990 was |  16 |    15    123   8.2    1 || 1991 was |  10 |     5     51  10.2    0 || 1992 was |  11 |     4     25   6.2    0 |+----------+-----+-------------------------+|  TOTAL   | 193 |   244   2536  10.4    7 |+----------+-----+-------------------------+
Then you can throw in guys like Doc Walker, Jimmie Johnson, and Terry Orr and you can see that Gibbs used to really spread out the TE/H-back passes. Robert Royal and Mike Sellars had their fair share of targets, as Gibbs did in the past with TE/H-back, but most it was short and Cooley was more downfield and screens.
 

DCThunder

Footballguy
Do you guys remember Clint Didier from the Gibbs I days? 

That's the guy who Cooley is the reinvention of.  Didier ran the deep routes from the H-back/TE spot, while Don Warren was the blocker/short-yardage guy (Sellers' spot now).  I think one year Didier had about 10 TDs, all on fairly long passes.

Oh and Thrash will be around next year because he's a very valuable special teams guy.  The WR who will definetly not be back it Taylor Jacobs.
:goodposting: on everything but the 10 TDs ;) .
OK, so I was a little off on the number of TDs for Clint. He still was one of my favorite Redskins back then. :P
 

redman

Footballguy
Do you guys remember Clint Didier from the Gibbs I days?

That's the guy who Cooley is the reinvention of. Didier ran the deep routes from the H-back/TE spot, while Don Warren was the blocker/short-yardage guy (Sellers' spot now). I think one year Didier had about 10 TDs, all on fairly long passes.

Oh and Thrash will be around next year because he's a very valuable special teams guy. The WR who will definetly not be back it Taylor Jacobs.
Didier was certainly the best receiving TE that Gibbs had during his first tenure. In truth, however, Didier was only modestly talented and Gibbs had a good enough receiving corps that he didn't need to throw to his TE's or H-backs all that often. Here are Didier's career numbers, which Cooley would appear to be on track to easily exceed:
Code:
+-------------------------+                 |        Receiving        |+----------+-----+-------------------------+| Year  TM |   G |   Rec  Yards   Y/R   TD |+----------+-----+-------------------------+| 1982 was |   8 |     2     10   5.0    1 || 1983 was |  16 |     9    153  17.0    4 || 1984 was |  11 |    30    350  11.7    5 || 1985 was |  16 |    41    433  10.6    4 || 1986 was |  14 |    34    691  20.3    4 || 1987 was |   9 |    13    178  13.7    1 || 1988 gnb |  15 |     5     37   7.4    1 || 1989 gnb |  16 |     7     71  10.1    1 |+----------+-----+-------------------------+|  TOTAL   | 105 |   141   1923  13.6   21 |
Didier ran good routes and had good hands. Cooley has both of those attributes plus he's head and shoulders above Didier with the ball in his hands; he may even be a better blocker than Didier was (Warren was more of the blocking TE).
 

-OZ-

Footballguy
Either way, I expect Cooley to be a steal in next year's drafts...
Or to be over-rated amd go way too early because of guys like you. :P Let's not forget that one reason why Cooley caught so many balls this year was because the Redskins had no second WR. They were reduced to playing James Thrash there where he caught a ball a game. They had to throw to Cooley a ton because there was no-one else to go to. If they sign a stud #2 WR that will change.
:goodposting: This is the correct answer, barring a major jump in passing yardage for the offense as a whole. (And with that defense, that isnt likely to happen)
:yes: Gonzo had two things working for him, first is his talent. Second is the lack of better receiving options on the team.

Now, Cooley may very well be a better red zone target than any other player. Moss is great, but he isn't as physical. If the Skins got a physical #2 WR, one that will fight for a ball, Cooley drops some.

Oh, Kennison is nowhere near the talent that Santana is.

 

softball

Footballguy
Either way, I expect Cooley to be a steal in next year's drafts...
Or to be over-rated amd go way too early because of guys like you. :P Let's not forget that one reason why Cooley caught so many balls this year was because the Redskins had no second WR. They were reduced to playing James Thrash there where he caught a ball a game. They had to throw to Cooley a ton because there was no-one else to go to. If they sign a stud #2 WR that will change.
:goodposting: This is the correct answer, barring a major jump in passing yardage for the offense as a whole. (And with that defense, that isnt likely to happen)
:yes: Gonzo had two things working for him, first is his talent. Second is the lack of better receiving options on the team.

Now, Cooley may very well be a better red zone target than any other player. Moss is great, but he isn't as physical. If the Skins got a physical #2 WR, one that will fight for a ball, Cooley drops some.

Oh, Kennison is nowhere near the talent that Santana is.
Joe Gibbs AND Saunders don't use big physical WR's. They use fast,cutting guys and Gibbs, as displayed uses TE's heavily.Kennision=Moss as the Primary production of WR position on the O' if it must be spelled out.....

 

redman

Footballguy
Either way, I expect Cooley to be a steal in next year's drafts...
Or to be over-rated amd go way too early because of guys like you. :P Let's not forget that one reason why Cooley caught so many balls this year was because the Redskins had no second WR. They were reduced to playing James Thrash there where he caught a ball a game. They had to throw to Cooley a ton because there was no-one else to go to. If they sign a stud #2 WR that will change.
:goodposting: This is the correct answer, barring a major jump in passing yardage for the offense as a whole. (And with that defense, that isnt likely to happen)
:yes: Gonzo had two things working for him, first is his talent. Second is the lack of better receiving options on the team.

Now, Cooley may very well be a better red zone target than any other player. Moss is great, but he isn't as physical. If the Skins got a physical #2 WR, one that will fight for a ball, Cooley drops some.

Oh, Kennison is nowhere near the talent that Santana is.
Joe Gibbs AND Saunders don't use big physical WR's. They use fast,cutting guys and Gibbs, as displayed uses TE's heavily.Kennision=Moss as the Primary production of WR position on the O' if it must be spelled out.....
Ever heard of a guy named Art Monk?
 

ChrisCooleyFan

Footballguy
Go Cooley :thumbup:   :thumbup:   :thumbup:   :thumbup:   :thumbup:
Was wondering when you'd find this. :)
Cooley's 1st 2 years:Year Team G GS No Yards Avg Lg TD 20+ 40+ FD

2004 Washington Redskins 16 9 37 314 8.5 31 6 3 0 23

2005 Washington Redskins 16 16 71 774 10.9 32 7 6 0 44

TOTAL 32 25 108 1088 10.1 32 13 9 0 67

Gonzo 1st 2 years:

Year Team G GS No Yards Avg Lg TD 20+ 40+ FD

1997 Kansas City Chiefs 16 0 33 368 11.2 30 2 5 0 21

1998 Kansas City Chiefs 16 16 59 621 10.5 32 2 6 0 33

Cooley has pretty much surpassed Gonzo 1st 2 years!!!! Does this make Colley better? No, but can he possibly be the next great Te, like Gates? Yes

 

dgreen

Footballguy
Cooley has pretty much surpassed Gonzo 1st 2 years!!!! Does this make Colley better? No, but can he possibly be the next great Te, like Gates? Yes
I love Cooley, but his production is sometimes a mystery to me. He's not very fast. He's not very big. He doesn't run the best routes. He doesn't have the best hands. He does a pretty good job breaking tackles, but he's not a steamroller or anything. He just produces.
 

redman

Footballguy
Go Cooley :thumbup:   :thumbup:   :thumbup:   :thumbup:   :thumbup:
Was wondering when you'd find this. :)
Cooley's 1st 2 years:Year Team G GS No Yards Avg Lg TD 20+ 40+ FD

2004 Washington Redskins 16 9 37 314 8.5 31 6 3 0 23

2005 Washington Redskins 16 16 71 774 10.9 32 7 6 0 44

TOTAL 32 25 108 1088 10.1 32 13 9 0 67

Gonzo 1st 2 years:

Year Team G GS No Yards Avg Lg TD 20+ 40+ FD

1997 Kansas City Chiefs 16 0 33 368 11.2 30 2 5 0 21

1998 Kansas City Chiefs 16 16 59 621 10.5 32 2 6 0 33

Cooley has pretty much surpassed Gonzo 1st 2 years!!!! Does this make Colley better? No, but can he possibly be the next great Te, like Gates? Yes
Gonzo and Gates are at another athletic level from Cooley. I love the guy but c'mon!
 

redman

Footballguy
The offense simply looks horrible. Brunell looks indecisive, the line can't pass block to save their lives, and no pass seems to travel more than 15 yards downfield while the majority seem to go less than five.

I can't even detect a partcular game plan or strategy, e.g. let's run and then set up the play action pass. It's as if plays are getting picked out of a hat and called. :wall:

 

zamboni

Footballguy
Portis not being healthy clearly has to be a big factor, as defenses can focus on the pass. Still, I agree that the offense is way out of synch. Hard to believe based upon last year and the addition of Saunders.

 

redman

Footballguy
I have no clue where this team will end up. I do know that Gibbs historically has his teams playing their best football late, so it's going to improve, whether they're playing Brunell or Campbell.

I'd suggest monitoring this and looking for good buy low candidates here. Moss and Cooley are probably the best two for such a move.

 

fatness

against the grain
The offense simply looks horrible. Brunell looks indecisive, the line can't pass block to save their lives, and no pass seems to travel more than 15 yards downfield while the majority seem to go less than five.

I can't even detect a partcular game plan or strategy, e.g. let's run and then set up the play action pass. It's as if plays are getting picked out of a hat and called. :wall:
Agreed, this is absolutely horrible. It looks like the offense of 2 years ago. Brunell bounces passes, Brunell will not throw to open receivers over the middle, Brunell seems anxious to get rid of the ball and throws it out of bounds, they do not stick with any sort of running game, Santana Moss is forgotten, Chris Cooley is forgotten. Really, if they're going to play this way, put Campbell in. At least "learning" would be the reason for bad performances. At present there is no excuse. Yes, Portis being hurt is a big loss. But that in no way explains the lack of a clue in playcalling, play execution, or performance by other players.

 

redman

Footballguy
The offense simply looks horrible. Brunell looks indecisive, the line can't pass block to save their lives, and no pass seems to travel more than 15 yards downfield while the majority seem to go less than five.

I can't even detect a partcular game plan or strategy, e.g. let's run and then set up the play action pass. It's as if plays are getting picked out of a hat and called. :wall:
Agreed, this is absolutely horrible. It looks like the offense of 2 years ago. Brunell bounces passes, Brunell will not throw to open receivers over the middle, Brunell seems anxious to get rid of the ball and throws it out of bounds, they do not stick with any sort of running game, Santana Moss is forgotten, Chris Cooley is forgotten. Really, if they're going to play this way, put Campbell in. At least "learning" would be the reason for bad performances. At present there is no excuse. Yes, Portis being hurt is a big loss. But that in no way explains the lack of a clue in playcalling, play execution, or performance by other players.
What's funny is that this is how bad they looked during their first two games last year (until those final 5 minutes at Dallas), but they were 2-0 at this point and that finish to the Dallas game seemed to jump start their offense. Now they've done nothing but look bad, they're 0-2, and they've got nothing to point to for optimism.
 

dgreen

Footballguy
they've got nothing to point to for optimism.
Other than playing Houston next week, I agree.Brunell is not right. He looked worse last night than in 2004, IMO. I'd make the move to Campbell now. A road game against Houston with Portis in the lineup would be a nice place to start for him.
 

thayman

Footballguy
they've got nothing to point to for optimism.
Other than playing Houston next week, I agree.Brunell is not right. He looked worse last night than in 2004, IMO. I'd make the move to Campbell now. A road game against Houston with Portis in the lineup would be a nice place to start for him.
Brunell isn't getting pulled until his a leg or arm falls off.......
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top