Or to be over-rated amd go way too early because of guys like you. 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.Either way, I expect Cooley to be a steal in next year's drafts...
I think I agree with this guy.I'd expect Portis to get more of a pop than Cooley, but Cooley is primed to be a top TE regardless.
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)Or to be over-rated amd go way too early because of guys like you. 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.Either way, I expect Cooley to be a steal in next year's drafts...
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 produceI 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.
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.Or to be over-rated amd go way too early because of guys like you. 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.Either way, I expect Cooley to be a steal in next year's drafts...
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...
You have Cooley as a #1 TE overall in TE starting leagues? I think that may be off.
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 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.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...
Good point. But he the team's 2nd best option unless they address it in the offseason.Do you mean to ask will Cooley become the best receiving option for the team? No, that position is occupied by Santana Moss.
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.
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)
Wasn't he 5th this year after Gates, Shockey, Crumpler and Heap?He will do ok.....Cooley won't ever be a top 5 TE. But I think he can hang in the top 10.
Cooley was 4th, finishing 1 point (119-118) ahead of Crumpler.Wasn't he 5th this year after Gates, Shockey, Crumpler and Heap?He will do ok.....Cooley won't ever be a top 5 TE. But I think he can hang in the top 10.
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.Cooley was 4th, finishing 1 point (119-118) ahead of Crumpler.Wasn't he 5th this year after Gates, Shockey, Crumpler and Heap?He will do ok.....Cooley won't ever be a top 5 TE. But I think he can hang in the top 10.
Cooley was 4th, finishing 1 point (119-118) ahead of Crumpler.Wasn't he 5th this year after Gates, Shockey, Crumpler and Heap?He will do ok.....Cooley won't ever be a top 5 TE. But I think he can hang in the top 10.
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?).If Witten isn't freed up to run more routes I don't see him exceeding Cooley.
No.I stated he's clearly a starting TE in TE required leagues. (Obviously) The sky is also blue.You have Cooley as a #1 TE overall in TE starting leagues? I think that may be off.
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)
on everything but the 10 TDs .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.
+-------------------------+ | 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 |+----------+-----+-------------------------+
OK, so I was a little off on the number of TDs for Clint. He still was one of my favorite Redskins back then.on everything but the 10 TDs .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.
Was wondering when you'd find this.Go Cooley
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: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.
+-------------------------+ | 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 |
Gonzo had two things working for him, first is his talent. Second is the lack of better receiving options on the team.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)Or to be over-rated amd go way too early because of guys like you. 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.Either way, I expect Cooley to be a steal in next year's drafts...
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.....Gonzo had two things working for him, first is his talent. Second is the lack of better receiving options on the team.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)Or to be over-rated amd go way too early because of guys like you. 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.Either way, I expect Cooley to be a steal in next year's drafts...
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.
Ever heard of a guy named Art Monk?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.....Gonzo had two things working for him, first is his talent. Second is the lack of better receiving options on the team.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)Or to be over-rated amd go way too early because of guys like you. 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.Either way, I expect Cooley to be a steal in next year's drafts...
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.
Cooley's 1st 2 years:Year Team G GS No Yards Avg Lg TD 20+ 40+ FDWas wondering when you'd find this.Go Cooley
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.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!Cooley's 1st 2 years:Year Team G GS No Yards Avg Lg TD 20+ 40+ FDWas wondering when you'd find this.Go Cooley
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
at least he had positive yards this week....
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.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.
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.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.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.
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.they've got nothing to point to for optimism.
Brunell isn't getting pulled until his a leg or arm falls off.......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.they've got nothing to point to for optimism.