Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=Mattyk;974574][quote=The Goat;974572]

You once again somehow manage to sum up yourself without even realizing it.

Perfect.[/quote]

LOL...now I definitely feel like there's a child at the other end of the convo.

Pretty soon you'll say start in with "Sticks and stones..."

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=REDSKINS4ever;974525]How about they make Cooley a fullback and put Darrell Young back at LB?[/quote]

I can't tell if you're being serious or if we're all being trolled here. Are you really being serious about this?

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=The Goat;974575][quote=Mattyk;974574]

LOL...now I definitely feel like there's a child at the other end of the convo.

Pretty soon you'll say start in with "Sticks and stones..."[/quote]

I was actually thinking more along the lines of "takes one to know one".

Just keeping with the theme here.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=mooby;974576]I can't tell if you're being serious or if we're all being trolled here. Are you really being serious about this?[/quote]

amazing isnt it? Young is playing like a borderline probowler.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=mooby;974576]I can't tell if you're being serious or if we're all being trolled here. Are you really being serious about this?[/quote]

We need to put Doughty as RG3's back up and throw Trent Williams back at safety. We can put out an APB for Haynesworth and he can come back and play NT.

Dead serious.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[YT]iKwbMtfU9jA[/YT]

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=Mattyk;974577][quote=The Goat;974575]

I was actually thinking more along the lines of "takes one to know one".

Just keeping with the theme here.[/quote]

Touche...I'm a big kid at heart. Last word goes to you on this one if you choose daddio.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=los panda;974581][YT]iKwbMtfU9jA[/YT][/quote]As a certified Maryland secondary school wrestling referee I'd have hit Fred for stalling a couple of times there.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=The Goat;974583][quote=Mattyk;974577]

Touche...I'm a big kid at heart. Last word goes to you on this one if you choose daddio.[/quote]

Truce?

Til next time at least.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=los panda;974581][YT]iKwbMtfU9jA[/YT][/quote]

It's tough to grapple with someone who knows what they're doing.

I had a buddy in college who was a beast on the mat, I must have had about 25 pounds on him at least but I knew I was in trouble if he got me on the ground.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=The Goat;974562][quote=Mattyk;974539]

I don't want to come across as overtly insulting so I won't explain what conspiracy means, or post a definition.

There's two different issues, which are intertwined. One is why Paul sees the field on offense? The other is why Cooley hasn't gotten more looks?

I tend to think Cooley should get more looks, like split targets with Lunch Pail. More strongly though, I don't see any evidence that Paul deserves to play on offense...anywhere.

To the last thing, yeah I still seriously doubt Shanahan will take us anywhere. Still happy to be wrong about it if things really come together, and I love wearing my Skins apparral right now btw. But no, I don't think Mike's going anywhere. My intuition is he's done just enough to keep his job into next year, and maybe even turn the team over to his kiddo afterward. I don't think we'll ever be a real contender with a Shanahan as HC, OC etc for myriad reasons that have been long debated here. I think better coaching prospects will be available next year, and the year after.

I don't mind being the minority in this regard, in part because I find the pro-Shanny posts/posters pretty amusing :)[/quote]


Man, it must be tough to be you over the past month or so. Your Shanahan hate will not abate (hey, that rhymes), and there's just nothing that'll change that. Apparently ever. Too bad, your problem, though.

Obviously Paul hasn't produced, even with the little action he's seen. But just maybe his coach sees something in practice that, as a young guy, he could replicate in games. Like catching the ball. Turn Paul around though, you'll have a tough (we know that from ST) tight end, with speed that Cooley could only dream about even in his best days. So just maybe they're trying to develop a player. Think of the concept!

And tell me again how my posts make no sense, you make my day!

Re: Chris Cooley
 

9 pages on a burned out TE?? Really? I'd rather go back to talking about the penalties and 3rd down conversions.


You Cooley fans get over it. He'll never be like he was back in the mid to late 2000's. He had a great run here and gave us some memorable moments, but it's over. Done. Finished. Move on.


When Paulsen is on the field and Cooley is not, that is telling you how far he's dropped.

Cooley=Grossman for the team this year. Just here because he is familiar with the team after Davis got hurt. I would even say Grossman has more of impact on game day. Cooley is done we need to just move on.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=redskins5044;974596]Cooley=Grossman for the team this year. Just here because he is familiar with the team after Davis got hurt. I would even say Grossman has more of impact on game day. Cooley is done we need to just move on.[/quote]

One block late in the 4th quarter against the Giants while going for a first down to seal the game is more than Grossman has contributed all year. Hes good about talking with RG3 and Cousins, but Cooley is a good locker room guy as well.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=Skinzman;974611]One block late in the 4th quarter against the Giants while going for a first down to seal the game is more than Grossman has contributed all year. Hes good about talking with RG3 and Cousins, but Cooley is a good locker room guy as well.[/quote]

i was being sarcastic, but your exactly right Cooley is no more that the 3rd TE, which is usually a blocker.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=NC_Skins;974594]9 pages on a burned out TE?? Really? I'd rather go back to talking about the penalties and 3rd down conversions.


You Cooley fans get over it. He'll never be like he was back in the mid to late 2000's. He had a great run here and gave us some memorable moments, but it's over. Done. Finished. Move on.


When Paulsen is on the field and Cooley is not, that is telling you how far he's dropped.[/quote]

If Cooley isn't fit to play football anymore, which is what this sounds like, then I'll agree with what you said. But if he still has something then he should be used and not sparingly like he is. Tony Gonzales is still a starter and Cooley is younger be is unable to do what he did four or five seasons ago? I highly doubt that. Kyle and Mike want Logan Paulsen in there because of his work ethic and because he's a young, big tight end.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

I thought Cooley was second string to Davis but his contract was too high. I want to see Cooley get the ball. Cooley is not washed up in my opinion. He is just not better than Davis and not worth his previous contract. I think he is worth his contract now, and I think he will contribute in the playoffs. Niles Paul has alot of growing to do as a TE. Hopefully he will grow in the offseason at TE.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=REDSKINS4ever;974619]If Cooley isn't fit to play football anymore, which is what this sounds like, then I'll agree with what you said. But if he still has something then he should be used and not sparingly like he is. Tony Gonzales is still a starter and Cooley is younger be is unable to do what he did four or five seasons ago? I highly doubt that. Kyle and Mike want Logan Paulsen in there because of his work ethic and because he's a young, big tight end.[/quote]

I'm going to render a guess that if 31 other teams passed on Cooley, he's probably not the TE he was in his heyday. Tony Gonzales is a freak. Doubt there'll be many dominant TE's playing in their late 30's.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

So long as he continues to block like has been he still has value to the team. I am sure there is a plan to use him in the passing game at some point.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=The Goat;974345]I'm not so concerned about Paulsen getting reps, but the fact Paul sees the field (instead) of Cooley is really dumb. Cooley is better in every facet of the game than Paul.

This is a Mike thing i.e. picking favorites, be they coaches or players, that don't make much sense because you don't see production. It's partly why I doubt he ever achieves much success in pro football again.[/quote]

I think this sums it up. Maybe because I am a Cooley fan, I try to watch Paulsen as much as I can to see what he is doing that CC can't do. Frankly Paulsen is a lousy blocker; his technique is bad and he holds frequently. Cooley is better as a blocker, by far. At least I remember him that way, hard to tell this season, since he has not played much.

I think Cooley is also the better receiver but we don't target the TE position that much, so again it is somewhat hard to judge. Paulsen also looks awkward trying to catch the ball. Paulsen is bigger and perhaps he can do a better job with high throws.

Bottom line, Paulsen is Mike's guy and so he plays. Coach's prerogative. I would love to see Cooley more, but darn, things have gone so well the last four games, it is hard to get overly excited about the situation. I think Cooley would improve the offense, if he were used more often and effectively, but winning cures most problems so I'm not too worried about the situation!

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=redskin29633;974633]I think this sums it up. Maybe because I am a Cooley fan, I try to watch Paulsen as much as I can to see what he is doing that CC can't do. Frankly Paulsen is a lousy blocker; his technique is bad and he holds frequently. Cooley is better as a blocker, by far. At least I remember him that way, hard to tell this season, since he has not played much.

I think Cooley is also the better receiver but we don't target the TE position that much, so again it is somewhat hard to judge. Paulsen also looks awkward trying to catch the ball. Paulsen is bigger and perhaps he can do a better job with high throws.

Bottom line, Paulsen is Mike's guy and so he plays. Coach's prerogative. I would love to see Cooley more, but darn, things have gone so well the last four games, it is hard to get overly excited about the situation. I think Cooley would improve the offense, if he were used more often and effectively, but winning cures most problems so I'm not too worried about the situation![/quote]

It is because you are a Cooley fan....Paulsen is by far the best blocking TE on the team. Yes, he makes mistakes now and then but when he is on he eats up DEs and LBs like no other. Get NFL Rewind and watch the tapes.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=REDSKINS4ever;974619]If Cooley isn't fit to play football anymore, which is what this sounds like, then I'll agree with what you said. But if he still has something then he should be used and not sparingly like he is. Tony Gonzales is still a starter and Cooley is younger be is unable to do what he did four or five seasons ago? I highly doubt that. Kyle and Mike want Logan Paulsen in there because of his work ethic and because he's a young, big tight end.[/quote]

Yes, CC is evidently unable to do what he did 4 or 5 years ago. Otherwise he would play more. Simple as that. Don't doubt it, trust the evidence, if he gives the Skins a better chance of winning the Shannys would play him more. Why in the world would they not play guys that give them the best chance to win?

I guess that's what we do here, substitute our fan judgment for legitimate coaching decisions. May be fun, but some of us look really foolish in the process...

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=saden1;974637]It is because you are a Cooley fan....Paulsen is by far the best blocking TE on the team. Yes, he makes mistakes now and then but when he is on he eats up DEs and LBs like no other. Get NFL Rewind and watch the tapes.[/quote]

I have the last four on DVD, so I'll try to look more objectively. Even if you are correct, I think Cooley is deserving of the Niles Paul snaps. His prominent role on the field (as receiver & return man) convinces me that Mike is not infallible in his judgments.

You are absolutely right about looking stupid. I freely admit that part of the fun of being a fan is projecting yourself into the coach's role, especially for those of us who are too old to even dream about playing.

Bottom line, I'm not concerned about it. Nevertheless, Paulsen did look as if he held a lot against the Ravens, but he was only called once or twice. If he can hold and get away with it, then I suppose it qualifies as skillful blockling.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

So if Cooley gets targeted 4 times in the remaining games, will people get over this whole "Paul is taking time away from Cooley" argument?

[QUOTE=The Goat;974562][quote=Mattyk;974539]

I don't want to come across as overtly insulting so I won't explain what conspiracy means, or post a definition.

There's two different issues, which are intertwined. One is why Paul sees the field on offense? The other is why Cooley hasn't gotten more looks?

I tend to think Cooley should get more looks, like split targets with Lunch Pail. More strongly though, I don't see any evidence that Paul deserves to play on offense...anywhere.

To the last thing, yeah I still seriously doubt Shanahan will take us anywhere. Still happy to be wrong about it if things really come together, and I love wearing my Skins apparral right now btw. But no, I don't think Mike's going anywhere. My intuition is he's done just enough to keep his job into next year, and maybe even turn the team over to his kiddo afterward. I don't think we'll ever be a real contender with a Shanahan as HC, OC etc for myriad reasons that have been long debated here. I think better coaching prospects will be available next year, and the year after.

I don't mind being the minority in this regard, in part because I find the pro-Shanny posts/posters pretty amusing :)[/QUOTE]

What is it, exactly, that you don't see with Paul? You're just saying you see stuff without substantiating it.

What about the countless articles during the summer that said Cooley had just lost a step? Those guys actually watched more plays than any of us. No one thinks Paul is a barnburner but he's probably faster than Cooley. Why do you think the coaches would purposely put the worst player higher up in the lineup? Its not in their own interest, it makes zero sense. They see these guys practice everyday and they pick the best to help them win. If folks like you were actually right you'd be sitting drawing up gameplans for an NFL team at this hour instead of on a football forum.

Cooley has a place on this team as a blocking TE. He's still pretty good at that and showed that vs. the giants. But it starts and ends there.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=hooskins;974659][QUOTE=The Goat;974562]

What is it, exactly, that you don't see with Paul? You're just saying you see stuff without substantiating it.[/quote]

Earlier in the thread we talked about blocking, pass-catching, and YAC. Specifically, Paul has missed a lot of blocks. Some stand out because he missed a backfield assignment and RG got trucked. This happened in several games earlier in the season, but if you notice we're not putting Paul in the backfield as much now.

He also drops way too many passes. And finally, aside from the blown coverage TD he's shown nothing in the YAC dept.

I think, in plain words, Paul has shown nothing on gamedays that he deserves to play on gamedays. It sounds like a silly complaint when we're winning, but then again we're only winning by a play or two each game, right? Paul vs Logan/Chris could be the difference.

[QUOTE=The Goat;974661][quote=hooskins;974659]

Earlier in the thread we talked about blocking, pass-catching, and YAC. Specifically, Paul has missed a lot of blocks. Some stand out because he missed a backfield assignment and RG got trucked. This happened in several games earlier in the season, but if you notice we're not putting Paul in the backfield as much now.

He also drops way too many passes. And finally, aside from the blown coverage TD he's shown nothing in the YAC dept.

I think, in plain words, Paul has shown nothing on gamedays that he deserves to play on gamedays. It sounds like a silly complaint when we're winning, but then again we're only winning by a play or two each game, right? Paul vs Logan/Chris could be the difference.[/QUOTE]

Cooley isn't getting more YAC than Paul. Much slower, as you previously admitted. Regarding missed blocks you gave me one example. Not sure how that translates to "many", but sure lets go with that: Cooley is a better blocker. I would argue Cooley isn't in on as many passing plays because he's lost a step and would be an even worst pass blocker. Cooley is a better run blocker and you see him used as that. Finally the drops. I think that's an issue that is being improved on.

Overall, based on the above, its really a toss. I'd say go with the younger more athletic player.

I think what you are "seeing" is just wrong. Paul isn't as bad as you make him out to be and Cooley definitely isn't as great as you think he is. The grass is always greener on the other side of the hill.

also I am waiting for the answer to the rest of my previous post.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

The only reason why Paul gets snaps is because of his speed and long term prospect as a backup TE. He cant catch a cold but he is a decent blocker. Cooley cant run fast anymore hence his snaps on short yardage dive/belly plays. He is simply not quick enough on stretch plays nor is he able to get separation from LBs/DBs.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=hooskins;974665][QUOTE=The Goat;974661]

Cooley isn't getting more YAC than Paul. Much slower, as you previously admitted. Regarding missed blocks you gave me one example. Not sure how that translates to "many", but sure lets go with that: Cooley is a better blocker. I would argue Cooley isn't in on as many passing plays because he's lost a step and would be an even worst pass blocker. Cooley is a better run blocker and you see him used as that. Finally the drops. I think that's an issue that is being improved on.

Overall, based on the above, its really a toss. I'd say go with the younger more athletic player.

I think what you are "seeing" is just wrong. Paul isn't as bad as you make him out to be and Cooley definitely isn't as great as you think he is. The grass is always greener on the other side of the hill.

also I am waiting for the answer to the rest of my previous post.[/quote]

The rest of your post was too dumb for comment, but I just remembered also talking about Cooley's quickness on field. If you go back and watch him line up along LOS and head down field he's covering ground as quickly as Garcon and the rest. I think Cooley looks quicker than he ever house, which is plausible since he's lighter and evidently in better condition.

And Paul has missed a few backfield blocks that led to a sack or knockdown, but again earlier in the season. They're not relying on him now.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

Goat, you've said on more than one occasion that another poster's comments are dumb. Yet in the past you've gotten all twisted when someone else ("especially a mod!!!") has done so. So don't be hypocritical

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=saden1;974666]The only reason why Paul gets snaps is because of his speed and long term prospect as a backup TE. He cant catch a cold but he is a decent blocker. Cooley cant run fast anymore hence his snaps on short yardage dive/belly plays. He is simply not quick enough on stretch plays nor is he able to get separation from LBs/DBs.[/quote]

Nailed it

Re: Chris Cooley
 

I dont think Cooley would be on a lot of NFL teams let alone a starter since it seems like he wast exactly being bombarded with a ton of offers from other teams. I llike Cooley and he has done a very good job after being brought back but lets not pretend he's still the star he used to be.

All this for a 3rd string TE.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

One of my favorite plays of the year was the last play of the Giant game in which Morris rumbled for four yards despite the Giant defense knowing what was coming, and in doing so to picked up the first down and sealed the victory. Cooley was as responsible for that first down as Morris. He's been a valuable blocker.

Paulsen, on the other hand, is often a liability. He's had too many penalties and drops too many passes. Maybe he is more fit for the passing game, but I feel more comfortable with Cooley out there.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=irish;974673]I dont think Cooley would be on a lot of NFL teams let alone a starter since it seems like he wast exactly being bombarded with a ton of offers from other teams. I llike Cooley and he has done a very good job after being brought back but lets not pretend he's still the star he used to be.[/quote]

Yeah crappy ones that have no other option. Its a blessing to have him playing as much as he does. "Great teams have great depth" - John Wooden

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=saden1;974666]The only reason why Paul gets snaps is because of his speed and long term prospect as a backup TE. He cant catch a cold but he is a decent blocker. Cooley cant run fast anymore hence his snaps on short yardage dive/belly plays. [B]He is simply not quick enough on stretch plays nor is he able to get separation from LBs/DBs[/B].[/quote]

Goat's DVR disagrees with you sir.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

I haven't watched Cooley's play but he is our best TE by far. [COLOR="White"]just kidding for anyone that took it serious.[/COLOR]

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;974678]Goat's [B]IMAGINATION [/B]disagrees with you sir.[/quote]

I fixed this for you

[QUOTE=The Goat;974667][quote=hooskins;974665]

The rest of your post was too dumb for comment, but I just remembered also talking about Cooley's quickness on field. If you go back and watch him line up along LOS and head down field he's covering ground as quickly as Garcon and the rest. I think Cooley looks quicker than he ever house, which is plausible since he's lighter and evidently in better condition.

And Paul has missed a few backfield blocks that led to a sack or knockdown, but again earlier in the season. They're not relying on him now.[/QUOTE]

Too dumb? I said it detrimental to a coach to start worst players in front of better ones. I also said coaches see these players much more than your dvr or anything. They are better qualified and have access to more information than you to assess skill/value.

Sounds like it's a bit too logical for you to handle and you've resorted to calling my post "dumb".

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=The Goat;974667]

The rest of your post was too dumb for comment, but I just remembered also talking about Cooley's quickness on field. If you go back and watch him line up along LOS and head down field [B]he's covering ground as quickly as Garcon and the rest.[/B] I think Cooley looks quicker than he ever house, which is plausible since he's lighter and evidently in better condition.

And Paul has missed a few backfield blocks that led to a sack or knockdown, but again earlier in the season. They're not relying on him now.[/quote]

Let's be clear here. Are you suggesting that Cooley has Garcon speed? Garcon is one of the fastest players in the league- Cooley in his prime wouldn't smell the pure speed Garcon possesses even at 70%.

I love Cooley as much as the next guy- but let's be honest with ourselves here. He is a has been that has a spot on the team solely because of his knowledge of the playbook and his blocking.

There is a reason he got cut.