What's new
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Thoughts On Chris Cooley This Year? (1 Viewer)

zamboni

zamboni

Footballguy
Just saw this blurb on KFFL, which indicates that Cooley has moved from H-back to TE. Of course, this was expected given the new offensive scheme under Saunders.

Obviously TEs have flourished in Saunders' offense (i.e., Gonzo), but I view that more of Gonzo being a rare talent and a dearth of solid WRs. And Cooley has a lot of company for receptions in Moss, Lloyd and ARE, plus the TD machine Mike Sellers. I don't really view Fauria as much of a threat.

In any event, any thoughts on what kind of production we can expect from Chris this year?

-------------------------

Redskins | Cooley excited with new offense

Tue, 16 May 2006 22:27:02 -0700

David Elfin, of the Washington Times, reports Washington Redskins TE Chris Cooley, who has moved from H-back to tight end, is excited with the team's new offense. "I'm excited," said Cooley. "We're moving around even more than we did last year. We're going to try to stretch the field more, get more guys downfield, get huge chunks (of yardage) more than we have in the past."

 
Just saw this blurb on KFFL, which indicates that Cooley has moved from H-back to TE. Of course, this was expected given the new offensive scheme under Saunders.

Obviously TEs have flourished in Saunders' offense (i.e., Gonzo), but I view that more of Gonzo being a rare talent and a dearth of solid WRs. And Cooley has a lot of company for receptions in Moss, Lloyd and ARE, plus the TD machine Mike Sellers. I don't really view Fauria as much of a threat.

In any event, any thoughts on what kind of production we can expect from Chris this year?

-------------------------

Redskins | Cooley excited with new offense

Tue, 16 May 2006 22:27:02 -0700

David Elfin, of the Washington Times, reports Washington Redskins TE Chris Cooley, who has moved from H-back to tight end, is excited with the team's new offense. "I'm excited," said Cooley. "We're moving around even more than we did last year. We're going to try to stretch the field more, get more guys downfield, get huge chunks (of yardage) more than we have in the past."
Click to expand...
Moving from TE, to H-Back won't really effect Cooley's numbers at all. Mike Sellers is more of a blocking TE/FB. Had some TD catches last year, but that is more of an annomally. Lot's of WRs here this year, I would look for Cooley to remain the go to guy across the middle though.
 
in my mind the sky is the limit for him. it will mostly depend on the QB. If Brunell starts and remains healthy and productive...(wow...that is a lot to ask for), I know I am in the minority but I think he is a top 5 fanatsy TE this year.

looking at his numbers from year 1 to year 2, (receptions and yardage) doubling.......and he is still developing as an NFL player.

i would be nervous as a Skins fan this year since so much hinges on the QB.

i think Moss will see his numbers drop substantially, but Cooley's maybe taking a slight increase.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I agree the move to TE won't change anything in Cooley's fantasy production. What will change his production is the increase in weapons and Saunders' apparent desire to run the ball for TDs inside the five.

ETA: I don't have any hard data for this, but I seem to recall Cooley lining up more as a TE than FB last year anyways. As an h-back, he did both. But, most of his fantasy production (receptions) came when he lined up more like a TE or even out wide. When he started more like a FB, it seemed that was more for run blocking. I think that will be Sellers' job now.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Chris Cooley - TE - Redskins

Redskins coordinator Al Saunders envisions using Chris Cooley in the same way as Tony Gonzalez in Kansas City.

Saunders, from Kansas City, offers Cooley owners hope. Whatever minor blocking responsibilities Cooley had are probably out the window. That's good news because he's fighting a deeper receiver group for a slice of the yardage pie.

Source: Redskins.com

 
Disclaimer: I am a Chris Cooley dynasty owner.

I have tempered expectations this year and expect about the same numbers as last year. Sanders liked to use the TE in KC but I think that was because he had Gonzo.

 
First of all, I agree with the premise that Brunell's health is the key here. People deride him and have a tendency to assume he's the worst QB in that division, but that's based too often on watching him play while dinged in 2004 and late in 2005. When healthy, his passes are crisp and he makes plays. There's no reason he can't repeat or even slightly improve upon his numbers from last year if he stays healthy. If he's injured, then all bets are off.

Sellers is the one whose numbers will take a drastic hit - I'd be a bit surprised if he reaches 4 TD's this year; I'm expecting fewer than that for him.

Moss' numbers will come down simply because last year, as with Steve Smith in Carolina, he was practically the only WR to catch passes. I would expect numbers near or above Lloyd's career highs for receptions and yardage (48/733) with 5-6 TD's.

I'd expect career high receiving numbers for Randle El - not as bold of a statement as it sounds because the only year in which he's been anything more than a #3 WR was last year in an offense that ran 60% of the time. I'd project probably 45/650 with 4-5 TD's.

Cooley to me is the big question mark and is the hardest to evaluate. That said, I have a tough time believing that his numbers will drop drastically from last year's numbers. As dgreen said, he was used more as a classic TE last year (lining up on the line of scrimmage, not in the backfield) anyway while Sellers was used more as a true H-back. OTOH, I have a tough time accepting that they're going to complete 71 passes to their TE when they've added two swift WR's who should open up both their passing and running games.

I think Cooley's # of receptions will decline a bit, perhaps to 55-60, but his yards per catch (10.9) will increase because the middle of the field will soften up for him with the other receiving targets out there. I'd project around 58/667/6 for him this year.

 
First of all, I agree with the premise that Brunell's health is the key here. People deride him and have a tendency to assume he's the worst QB in that division, but that's based too often on watching him play while dinged in 2004 and late in 2005. When healthy, his passes are crisp and he makes plays. There's no reason he can't repeat or even slightly improve upon his numbers from last year if he stays healthy. If he's injured, then all bets are off.

Sellers is the one whose numbers will take a drastic hit - I'd be a bit surprised if he reaches 4 TD's this year; I'm expecting fewer than that for him.

Moss' numbers will come down simply because last year, as with Steve Smith in Carolina, he was practically the only WR to catch passes. I would expect numbers near or above Lloyd's career highs for receptions and yardage (48/733) with 5-6 TD's.

I'd expect career high receiving numbers for Randle El - not as bold of a statement as it sounds because the only year in which he's been anything more than a #3 WR was last year in an offense that ran 60% of the time. I'd project probably 45/650 with 4-5 TD's.

Cooley to me is the big question mark and is the hardest to evaluate. That said, I have a tough time believing that his numbers will drop drastically from last year's numbers. As dgreen said, he was used more as a classic TE last year (lining up on the line of scrimmage, not in the backfield) anyway while Sellers was used more as a true H-back. OTOH, I have a tough time accepting that they're going to complete 71 passes to their TE when they've added two swift WR's who should open up both their passing and running games.

I think Cooley's # of receptions will decline a bit, perhaps to 55-60, but his yards per catch (10.9) will increase because the middle of the field will soften up for him with the other receiving targets out there. I'd project around 58/667/6 for him this year.
Click to expand...
:goodposting: :thumbup: :thumbup: :thumbup:

 
Nice assessment, Redman.

The Brunell factor, IMO, is probably the most important thing to factor into projecting Cooley, rather than the additional WR, the addition of Al Saunders or any concerns about Cooley himself. Interestingly, it's a factor that could possibly benefit Cooley either way. If Brunell stays healthy, you can expect to see the offense run in an efficient manner and stay highly productive. If Brunell misses time, you'd have to think a big part of the game plan will be to send all those home run threats screaming down the field allowing the middle to soften for safe, high percentage quick dumpoffs to Cooley and Portis (two very reliable targets) - the kind of throws designed to instill confidence in a young signal caller manning the pivot.

Important thing to keep in mind: Both Gibbs and Saunders are Coryell disciples. While Gibbs never had a TE in own offense in the 80's the equal of Kellen Winslow Sr in SD, or Tony Gonzalez in the Saunders-run offenses in KC, he did have an Art Monk to play that role in the 80's and they've got a Chris Cooley to play that role now.

When Gibbs went to back to back SB's in 82-83 and 83-84, the offense featured a power running game and a collection of 3 small, fast WR (Charlie Brown, Alvin Garrett, Virgil Seay) and, in relative comparison, a monster possession WR in Art Monk, who played that 'safety valve' short pass YAC guy. There's an almost eerie comparison to that team going on right now. Of course, SMoss, Lloyd and R-El are a much more talented trio, and Cooley is no Monk, but they aren't square pegs and round holes either. Now, last year was a monster year for him in terms of receptions, and I don't think we're going to see that again, but while I have his catches decreasing, I have his YAC rising, and the two play off each other to produce a roughly identical statistical year as last. I'm projecting him to catch one more TD as well, bringing his total to 8...Redman and I are basically in the same ballpark, although I think I'm slightly more bullish. I've got a 10% decrease in catches, a 10% increase in YAC and an additional TD (vultures one from Sellers without losing any of his own):

2005: 71/774/7

2006: 64/762/8 (proj)

...I think most folks are overhyping the additions of Lloyd and Randle El and their perceived effect on Cooley's #s, when in reality it's Moss' #'s that actually bear more scrutiny. Because of this, I think it's likely you'll be able to get Cooley relatively cheap in relation to his production, enabling you to pass on Gates, Gonz, Crumpler, Shockey and Heap while building strength at QB, RB and WR, and still coming away with a Top 10 TE with Top 5 potential upside...

 
When Gibbs went to back to back SB's in 82-83 and 83-84, the offense featured a power running game and a collection of 3 small, fast WR (Charlie Brown, Alvin Garrett, Virgil Seay) and, in relative comparison, a monster possession WR in Art Monk, who played that 'safety valve' short pass YAC guy. There's an almost eerie comparison to that team going on right now. Of course, SMoss, Lloyd and R-El are a much more talented trio, and Cooley is no Monk, but they aren't square pegs and round holes either.
Click to expand...
Very interesting comparison. I'll need to think on that one awhile. To the extent that those '82-'83 'Skins teams are at all a good guide as to what to expect, remember that they passed for a combined 42 TD's vs. 20 INT's, and over 5700 yards in just 25 games ('82 was strike-shortened). The '83 team in particular, was the most prolific scoring offense in history until overtaken by the '88 Vikings and the '99 Rams (who were of course coached by Saunders).

And more to the point about nittanylion's comparison of Cooley and Monk, those were some of Monk's most productive years.

Laugh if you want to at the comparison of this year's team with those prolific offenses, but there's no doubt that the addition of the speedy Lloyd and Randle El, and Saunders to coach them, signals an attempt at least to greatly open up the offense to reach that level of success.

 
With the WR additions that have been made I'd say about the same numbers for him. 800 yards 7-9 TD's wouldn't be out of the question. Perhaps a little less since there are more targets to go to.

 
The Brunell factor, IMO, is probably the most important thing to factor into projecting Cooley...Interestingly, it's a factor that could possibly benefit Cooley either way.
Click to expand...
If Cooley could benefit either way, wouldn't that make the Brunell Factor the least important. It sounds to me like you are saying if Brunell plays, Cooley could do well. If Brunell doesn't play, Cooley could do well. Seems to me you are saying Brunell's health is irrelevant.Am I misreading that?

 
The Brunell factor, IMO, is probably the most important thing to factor into projecting Cooley...Interestingly, it's a factor that could possibly benefit Cooley either way.
Click to expand...
If Cooley could benefit either way, wouldn't that make the Brunell Factor the least important. It sounds to me like you are saying if Brunell plays, Cooley could do well. If Brunell doesn't play, Cooley could do well. Seems to me you are saying Brunell's health is irrelevant.Am I misreading that?
Click to expand...
I'm not sure what it means either, but as an aside, Cooley starting emerging two years ago with Ramsey at QB. He started off slowly last year, with Brunell not looking his way much early in the year. But as time went on, Brunell starting going to Chris more and more.Granted, a lot of that had to do with the lack of WRs beyond Moss, but it's clear that Cooley is a solid target that whoever is at QB will utilize.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've got a 10% decrease in catches, a 10% increase in YAC and an additional TD (vultures one from Sellers without losing any of his own):

2005: 71/774/7

2006: 64/762/8 (proj)
Click to expand...
I hadn't looked at it like that before with Sellers. I've been assuming Cooley would lose production to Lloyd and ARE and, as I said earlier, a desire to run the ball for TDs inside the five, but I hadn't really considered that Cooley could make up that lost production by taking from Sellers' numbers. Interesting.How many total passing TDs do you see out of the Skins?

 
The Brunell factor, IMO, is probably the most important thing to factor into projecting Cooley...Interestingly, it's a factor that could possibly benefit Cooley either way.
Click to expand...
If Cooley could benefit either way, wouldn't that make the Brunell Factor the least important. It sounds to me like you are saying if Brunell plays, Cooley could do well. If Brunell doesn't play, Cooley could do well. Seems to me you are saying Brunell's health is irrelevant.Am I misreading that?
Click to expand...
I actually considered augmenting my post with a similar statement to nittanylion's in this regard, though I don't know whether my analysis is identical. I've already offered you my take on Cooley's numbers with a healthy Brunell. With Campbell in the lineup, we're dealing with an unknown quantity. However, a capable receiving TE is often a young QB's best friend, so I could easily envision Cooley still putting up good numbers with Campbell in the lineup, while the other receivers' numbers dropped as a group.

 
I've got a 10% decrease in catches, a 10% increase in YAC and an additional TD (vultures one from Sellers without losing any of his own):

2005: 71/774/7

2006: 64/762/8 (proj)
Click to expand...
I hadn't looked at it like that before with Sellers. I've been assuming Cooley would lose production to Lloyd and ARE and, as I said earlier, a desire to run the ball for TDs inside the five, but I hadn't really considered that Cooley could make up that lost production by taking from Sellers' numbers. Interesting.How many total passing TDs do you see out of the Skins?
Click to expand...
I may be wrong about a couple of those TD's, but every TD that Sellers scored that I can remember came inside the 5-yard line on a play-action pass (he also had a rushing TD on the goalline). I wouldn't necessarily assume that all of those TD's would go to other receivers, given that the relatively mediocre short yardage running game should, if anything, improve a bit this year because of the additional receiving targets. A few of those TD's could well go to Portis.
 
May not be worth much, but a blurb on Cooley from KFFL:

Redskins | New offense should fit Cooley well

Sat, 20 May 2006 18:11:00 -0700

Paul Woody, writing for the Sporting News, reports Washington Redskins TE Chris Cooley should thrive in the team's new offensive system. Cooley will be used more as a tight end for the 2006 season, but will still do many of the same things he did last year. On occasion, he will be a motion man in the backfield and will either go out as a receiver or become a lead blocker. He has improved on his blocking.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

K
Official #3 Pick Strategy Discussion (Redraft, PPR, 12 Teams)
Replies
10
Views
2K
kyoun1e
K
Ministry of Pain
Projected Win totals for all 32 teams
Replies
24
Views
865
Alex P Keaton
A
Ministry of Pain
Atlanta Falcons Offense '24- WR/RB/TE/QB and the OL
Replies
3
Views
1K
zamboni
zamboni

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top