Chris Cooley
 

He's a true Redskin and means so much to the community surrounding the DMV. Once Fred Davis went down with an Achilles injury, Cooley was called by the HC. But since Cooley has been back, he hasn't hardly played due to his lowly position on the depth chart and he hasn't caught a pass this season yet.

I have nothing against Logan Paulsen and I'm sure Mike and Kyle know what they're doing by giving Paulsen playing time and developing him. On most NFL teams though, Cooley would be a starter and Paulsen would be a backing him up. I see the Redskins doing the same thing with Chris Cooley as they did with Mike Sellers last season. I hope Cooley isn't fading out. He should be getting more playing time during games.

Thoughts?

Re: Chris Cooley
 

Cooley was brought back as insurance when Fred Davis went down. That's all. He no longer has the wheels to get open and be the playmaker he used to be. He's in there basically for blocking purposes. Don't get me wrong, I love Chris Cooley! I think he was a top notch playmaker for the 'skins at one point, but his time has passed him buy I'm afraid. Logan Paulsen has performed very well for us. He's not as athletic as Fred Davis, but he's made the plays when the 'skins needed him to.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=REDSKINS4ever;974338]He's a true Redskin and means so much to the community surrounding the DMV. Once Fred Davis went down with an Achilles injury, Cooley was called by the HC. But since Cooley has been back, he hasn't hardly played due to his lowly position on the depth chart and he hasn't caught a pass this season yet.

I have nothing against Logan Paulsen and I'm sure Mike and Kyle know what they're doing by giving Paulsen playing time and developing him. On most NFL teams though, Cooley would be a starter and Paulsen would be a backing him up. I see the Redskins doing the same thing with Chris Cooley as they did with Mike Sellers last season. I hope Cooley isn't fading out. He should be getting more playing time during games.

Thoughts?[/quote]

Cooley was out for several months, and said that when he came back the offense was quite different. Maybe he gets going soon, I have seen him on the field I think, but he's not a 1st team starter on most teams anymore, I don't think

Re: Chris Cooley
 

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.

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. [B]Cooley is better in every facet of the game than Paul.[/B]

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]

Unfortunately, that's just not true anymore. Paul is much faster and has proven to get open quite easily down field. Where he struggles is catching the stupid ball, and even when he does, he always seems to lose his footing and can't pick up yac. But, Niles is much more athletic and has the potential if he could ever gain some concentration.

Cooley is no longer a big play making threat. He was one of my favorite players, but even I realized Cooley's just not the Chris Cooley that was elusive and was a consistent target for Ramsey, Brunell, and anybody else who played QB for the 'skins from '05 to now.

In regards to not seeing production, how much production did you see from Chris Cooley during pre-season? Zilch.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

Cooley has been on the field plenty. Mostly blocking though.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

I think Cooley has been doing a lot of blocking. Kinda what Paulsen was doing before.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

i want to see him run after the catch at least one time

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=skinsguy;974349]Unfortunately, that's just not true anymore. Paul is much faster and has proven to get open quite easily down field. Where he struggles is catching the stupid ball, and even when he does, he always seems to lose his footing and can't pick up yac. But, Niles is much more athletic and has the potential if he could ever gain some concentration.

Cooley is no longer a big play making threat. He was one of my favorite players, but even I realized Cooley's just not the Chris Cooley that was elusive and was a consistent target for Ramsey, Brunell, and anybody else who played QB for the 'skins from '05 to now.

In regards to not seeing production, how much production did you see from Chris Cooley during pre-season? Zilch.[/quote]

I was waiting for someone to make a post like this. If you go back and watch the Ravens game you'll see Cooley burst off the LOS just as quickly as Garcon etc. He's moving faster than I've seen him in years.

Secondly, Cooley's talent for getting open was never based on speed or quickness (which he has plenty of) but on football IQ, reading the coverage/zone and then dropping into the gaps. Afterwards he's a stud at rumbling for yards after contact.

Cooley is a better blocker, route-runner, pass-catcher and far superior after the catch. Paul can run to the sidelines faster lol.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=The Goat;974359]I was waiting for someone to make a post like this. If you go back and watch the Ravens game you'll see Cooley burst off the LOS just as quickly as Garcon etc. He's moving faster than I've seen him in years.

Secondly, Cooley's talent for getting open was never based on speed or quickness (which he has plenty of) but on football IQ, reading the coverage/zone and then dropping into the gaps. Afterwards he's a stud at rumbling for yards after contact.

Cooley is a better blocker, route-runner, pass-catcher and far superior after the catch. Paul can run to the sidelines faster lol.[/quote]

Hate to open the whole Shanahan thing with you, but what Shanahan has said is that Cooley is doing everything that's asked of him. In Shanahan speak, that means Cooley is earning my trust. I am pretty sure that earlier in his time with Mike, Cooley hadn't been earning it, but living more off his fan reputation. If he keeps putting in the time and he is better, you will see him get the calls, but Shanahan isn't going to keep anyone just based on potential. (of course we all remain dumbfounded by Banks)

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=The Goat;974359]I was waiting for someone to make a post like this. If you go back and watch the Ravens game you'll see Cooley burst off the LOS just as quickly as Garcon etc. He's moving faster than I've seen him in years.

Secondly, Cooley's talent for getting open was never based on speed or quickness (which he has plenty of) but on football IQ, reading the coverage/zone and then dropping into the gaps. Afterwards he's a stud at rumbling for yards after contact.

Cooley is a better blocker, route-runner, pass-catcher and far superior after the catch. Paul can run to the sidelines faster lol.[/quote]

If this is true why did no other team pick him up when he was released? I think the game has past him by and he is lucky to be where he is right now.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=Mattyk;974351]Cooley has been on the field plenty. Mostly blocking though.[/quote]

Yep, I've seen him a lot.


In the last game vs Ravens, once I actually saw him wide open over the middle on a play where RGIII tried to force a ball to Garcon instead and ended up not getting the first down.

I was hoping he'd get his first catch.

Big game vs. Dallas? We can always hope. He's always been a Cowboy killer.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

mredskin:

^ The game has not passed him by. After he was on IR all last season, he lost 20-25 pounds in the offseason and got his knee healthy. Cooley has worked hard and I for one can't get my head around the position switch from WR to TE for Niles Paul. The TE rotation should be what it was in 2011 and in 2010 with Davis, Cooley, and Paulsen. But since Davis is on IR, then have Niles Paul play TE. Paul should be listed as a WR/TE because he's not a true TE because he drops to many damn passes.

Regardless of how Mike Shanahan likes to micro manage, Cooley should be involved with the offense more than he is.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=REDSKINS4ever;974338]He's a true Redskin and means so much to the community surrounding the DMV. Once Fred Davis went down with an Achilles injury, Cooley was called by the HC. But since Cooley has been back, he hasn't hardly played due to his lowly position on the depth chart and he hasn't caught a pass this season yet.

I have nothing against Logan Paulsen and I'm sure Mike and Kyle know what they're doing by giving Paulsen playing time and developing him. On most NFL teams though, Cooley would be a starter and Paulsen would be a backing him up. I see the Redskins doing the same thing with Chris Cooley as they did with Mike Sellers last season. I hope Cooley isn't fading out. He should be getting more playing time during games.

Thoughts?[/quote]

The Redskins phased out Sellers because they had a younger, stronger, faster, more talented version of him on the roster. Cooley isnt playing much because he's not as good as Paulsen or Paul. The notion that Cooley would be starting on most NFL rosters is laughable. I'm glad he's on the team, and he is a fan favorite, but his career as a starter is over.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=REDSKINS4ever;974368]mredskin:

^ The game has not passed him by. After he was on IR all last season, he lost 20-25 pounds in the offseason and got his knee healthy. Cooley has worked hard and I for one can't get my head around the position switch from WR to TE for Niles Paul. The TE rotation should be what it was in 2011 and in 2010 with Davis, Cooley, and Paulsen. But since Davis is on IR, then have Niles Paul play TE. Paul should be listed as a WR/TE because he's not a true TE because he drops to many damn passes.

Regardless of how Mike Shanahan likes to micro manage, Cooley should be involved with the offense more than he is.[/quote]

I lost 20 pounds last year - does that mean i should start for the redskins too? If Cooley were playing in practice at a high level, he would be starting. He obviously isnt. I know its sad to accept the fact that one of your favorite athletes is on the decline, but Cooley is. No matter how much you wish he were the player he used to be, he just isnt.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=BigHairedAristocrat;974372]I lost 20 pounds last year - does that mean i should start for the redskins too? If Cooley were playing in practice at a high level, he would be starting. He obviously isnt. I know its sad to accept the fact that one of your favorite athletes is on the decline, but Cooley is. No matter how much you wish he were the player he used to be, he just isnt.[/quote]

I didn't say he should be starting. I said he should be on the field with the offense more than he is.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=REDSKINS4ever;974374]I didn't say he should be starting. I said he should be on the field with the offense more than he is.[/quote]how many snaps does he get, how many do you want him to get?

*edit* trigger happy on the space bar: doe she > does he

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=los panda;974377]how many snaps doe she get, how many do you want him to get?[/quote]

She? What do you mean, she? lol

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=mredskins;974363]If this is true why did no other team pick him up when he was released? I think the game has past him by and he is lucky to be where he is right now.[/quote]

Actually, if I recall right, there were few teams who called Cooley about signing him but Cooley said that all those offers/teams didn't feel right for him to accept. He really want to play for Redskins, and only Redskins.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=mredskins;974363]If this is true why did no other team pick him up when he was released? I think the game has past him by and he is lucky to be where he is right now.[/quote]

Wasn't Cooley holding out for a return to Washington or a starting spot?

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=REDSKINS4ever;974368]mredskin:

^ The game has not passed him by. After he was on IR all last season, he lost 20-25 pounds in the offseason and got his knee healthy. Cooley has worked hard and I for one can't get my head around the position switch from WR to TE for Niles Paul. The TE rotation should be what it was in 2011 and in 2010 with Davis, Cooley, and Paulsen. But since Davis is on IR, then have Niles Paul play TE. Paul should be listed as a WR/TE because he's not a true TE because he drops to many damn passes.

Regardless of how Mike Shanahan likes to micro manage, Cooley should be involved with the offense more than he is.[/quote]


I love when we substitute our judgment for that of a coach that has won the super bowl. Do you really think Shanahan wouldn't play Cooley if he thought we could benefit? 31 teams in the league could have signed this former star to their roster and didn't. If he breaks into our starting TE rotation we're in really serious trouble...

And micro managing is what coaches do, so lets not get on MS for that.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;974362]Hate to open the whole Shanahan thing with you, but what Shanahan has said is that Cooley is doing everything that's asked of him. In Shanahan speak, that means Cooley is earning my trust. I am pretty sure that earlier in his time with Mike, Cooley hadn't been earning it, but living more off his fan reputation. If he keeps putting in the time and he is better, you will see him get the calls, but Shanahan isn't going to keep anyone just based on potential. (of course we all remain dumbfounded by Banks)[/quote]

I think you're probably 100% right, but how/when/why did Paul earn Mike's trust over Cooley?

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=GridIron26;974379]Actually, if I recall right, there were few teams who called Cooley about signing him but Cooley said that all those offers/teams didn't feel right for him to accept. He really want to play for Redskins, and only Redskins.[/quote]

Had someone made him a real offer, he would have signed. Bank on it.

This loyalty thing is way over rated when compared to cash on the kitchen table.

IMHO

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=SCRedskinsFan;974384]I love when we substitute our judgment for that of a coach that has won the super bowl. Do you really think Shanahan wouldn't play Cooley if he thought we could benefit? 31 teams in the league could have signed this former star to their roster and didn't. If he breaks into our starting TE rotation we're in really serious trouble...

And micro managing is what coaches do, so lets not get on MS for that.[/quote]

So you're saying that Logan Paulsen is just as good as Antonio Gates, Martellis Bennett, Jason Witten, Growkoski for the Pats, Jimmy Graham, or Tony Gonzales? Come on, man. Gonzales is undoubtedly the oldest TE starting in the NFL and at 36 he hasn't lost anything. Mike Shanahan has rewarded the starting job to Paulsen because he's worked hard in practice and has been on the team for 3 years. But Logan Paulsen is still not better the Chris Cooley.

I disagree with everything you said.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=REDSKINS4ever;974389][B]So you're saying that Logan Paulsen is just as good as Antonio Gates, Martellis Bennett, Jason Witten, Growkoski for the Pats, Jimmy Graham, or Tony Gonzales?[/B] Come on, man. Gonzales is undoubtedly the oldest TE starting in the NFL and at 36 he hasn't lost anything. Mike Shanahan has rewarded the starting job to Paulsen because he's worked hard in practice and has been on the team for 3 years. But Logan Paulsen is still not better the Chris Cooley.

I disagree with everything you said.[/quote]what? where did you get that from?

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=los panda;974391]what? where did you get that from?[/quote]

When we think of starting TEs in the NFL, we look at the most productive. I simply compared Paulsen to the most productive and he dwarfs all of them in retrospect.

That's where I got that from.....

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=REDSKINS4ever;974389]So you're saying that Logan Paulsen is just as good as Antonio Gates, Martellis Bennett, Jason Witten, Growkoski for the Pats, Jimmy Graham, or Tony Gonzales? Come on, man. Gonzales is undoubtedly the oldest TE starting in the NFL and at 36 he hasn't lost anything. Mike Shanahan has rewarded the starting job to Paulsen because he's worked hard in practice and has been on the team for 3 years. But Logan Paulsen is still not better the Chris Cooley.

I disagree with everything you said.[/quote]

[IMG]http://images.wikia.com/theamazingworldofgumball/images/9/99/Wait-what-meme-rage-face.jpg[/IMG]

????????????????????????

Side related note: Antonio Gates has lost a lot. Even with the Chargers winning big against Pittsburgh, he was dropping easy passes and just doesn't look like his old self.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=The Goat;974385]I think you're probably 100% right, but how/when/why did Paul earn Mike's trust over Cooley?[/quote]

I don't know, maybe he sees him every day at work, and saw him bringing his best every day, while Cooley brought his best once in a while. I would think it is conceivable that once in a while Mike actually watches what happens at practice. But maybe he figures he doesn't need to actually watch the practice in order to judge.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=Ruhskins;974394][IMG]http://images.wikia.com/theamazingworldofgumball/images/9/99/Wait-what-meme-rage-face.jpg[/IMG]

????????????????????????

Side related note: Antonio Gates has lost a lot. Even with the Chargers winning big against Pittsburgh, he was dropping easy passes and just doesn't look like his old self.[/quote]

I mentioned other tight ends besides Antonio Gates. Paulsen is not on any of their levels, I'm afraid. He's serviceable but he's no Witten or Gronkowski.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=REDSKINS4ever;974399]I mentioned other tight ends besides Antonio Gates. Paulsen is not on any of their levels, I'm afraid. He's serviceable but he's no Witten or Gronkowski.[/quote]

I was confused b/c I don't think anyone said that Paulsen was at that level. Although, Paulsen is in his second year so he could very well become more than a serviceable player. Personally, I think he's playing better than the shell of a player that Gates has become.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=REDSKINS4ever;974389]So you're saying that Logan Paulsen is just as good as Antonio Gates, Martellis Bennett, Jason Witten, Growkoski for the Pats, Jimmy Graham, or Tony Gonzales? Come on, man. Gonzales is undoubtedly the oldest TE starting in the NFL and at 36 he hasn't lost anything. Mike Shanahan has rewarded the starting job to Paulsen because he's worked hard in practice and has been on the team for 3 years. But Logan Paulsen is still not better the Chris Cooley.

I disagree with everything you said.[/quote]

Paulsen is better than Cooley doing what Shanahan wants done out there, or he'd be playing. Cooley hasn't done squat for years now, and our sentimental feelings about Chris won't change that.

And I have no idea why you're dragging other teams' TEs into this discussion. I'm very comfortable with your disagreeing with every thing I said. You're entitled to your opinion -- but I still think you're wrong.

Cooley's done. I hope he goes out in a blaze of glory against the Cowboys, but he will not be on an NFL roster in 2013.

And I love Chris Cooley the Redskin.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=SCRedskinsFan;974405]Paulsen is better than Cooley doing what Shanahan wants done out there, or he'd be playing. Cooley hasn't done squat for years now, and our sentimental feelings about Chris won't change that.

And I have no idea why you're dragging other teams' TEs into this discussion. I'm very comfortable with your disagreeing with every thing I said. You're entitled to your opinion -- but I still think you're wrong.

Cooley's done. I hope he goes out in a blaze of glory against the Cowboys, but he will not be on an NFL roster in 2013.

And I love Chris Cooley the Redskin.[/quote]

Cooley's been doing a good job at blocking, and I don't see the need to have more youth at a position when your two best players (Davis and Paulsen) are in their mid-twenties. Maybe Paul and Cooley will battle it out for that final roster spot. Other than being a good special teams player, I don't think Paul has done much to wow anyone.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=CRedskinsRule;974398]I don't know, maybe he sees him every day at work, and saw him bringing his best every day, while Cooley brought his best once in a while. I would think it is conceivable that once in a while Mike actually watches what happens at practice. But maybe he figures he doesn't need to actually watch the practice in order to judge.[/quote]

Who knows? We all know Mike runs a pretty tight ship, and Cooley has a rep for slacking. All I'm saying is Cooley looks quicker than I remember him and Paul looks like shit, but we still see them working Paul into the passing game rather than Cooley.

Mike likes to be right, who doesn't? But if "results" matter more or less for different players (gameday results) I think it's hard to keep a team together. We've seen the guys come together over the last four weeks. Personally, I think it has more to do with locker room leadership (RG and London would be my guesses) than Mike or anything with coaching. Just talking about focus and intensity here.

Coaching/play-calling has definitely improved as well, both offense and defense. I think we're closer to firing on all (available) cylinders than ever before, but forcing a guy like Paul into the mix doesn't help.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=Ruhskins;974404]I was confused b/c [B]I don't think anyone said that Paulsen was at that level.[/B] Although, Paulsen is in his second year so he could very well become more than a serviceable player. Personally, I think he's playing better than the shell of a player that Gates has become.[/quote]that's what i'm saying

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=SCRedskinsFan;974405]Paulsen is better than Cooley doing what Shanahan wants done out there, or he'd be playing. Cooley hasn't done squat for years now, and our sentimental feelings about Chris won't change that.

And I have no idea why you're dragging other teams' TEs into this discussion. I'm very comfortable with your disagreeing with every thing I said. You're entitled to your opinion -- but I still think you're wrong.

Cooley's done. I hope he goes out in a blaze of glory against the Cowboys, but he will not be on an NFL roster in 2013.

And I love Chris Cooley the Redskin.[/quote]

Whether Cooley is capable of starting and contributing or not like he has in the past is unknown because he hasn't received that opportunity. Cooley, despite being injured for just about all of the Shanahans coaching tenure until now has still had great seasons in this offense. If Gibbs was still the HC, Cooley would be starting.

Anyway, I brought other teams TEs into the discussion to see just how Paulsen measures up to them. And the fact of the matter is that he just doesn't. If Paulsen develops into a 65-80 catch/1,040 yard/5-7 TDs a year type of TE I will be greatly surprised because he matter-of-factly isn't that type of threat on offense as those other tight ends that I brought up.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

I think it's time for Cooley to get involved more in passing game.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=REDSKINS4ever;974413]Whether Cooley is capable of starting and contributing or not like he has in the past is unknown because he hasn't received that opportunity. Cooley, despite being injured for just about all of the Shanahans coaching tenure until now has still had great seasons in this offense. If Gibbs was still the HC, Cooley would be starting.

[B]Anyway, I brought other teams TEs into the discussion to see just how Paulsen measures up to them.[/B] And the fact of the matter is that he just doesn't. If Paulsen develops into a 65-80 catch/1,040 yard/5-7 TDs a year type of TE I will be greatly surprised because he matter-of-factly isn't that type of threat on offense as those other tight ends that I brought up.[/quote]

Why would he, since he's the #2 TE, and we already have a #1 TE that has the potential to be that good?

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=Ruhskins;974418]Why would he, since he's the #2 TE, and we already have a #1 TE that has the potential to be that good?[/quote]

Ruhskins, my point of emphasis here is that in place of Fred Davis, Cooley should be starting. Not Logan Paulsen.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

[quote=SCRedskinsFan;974405]Paulsen is better than Cooley doing what Shanahan wants done out there, or he'd be playing. Cooley hasn't done squat for years now, and our sentimental feelings about Chris won't change that.

And I have no idea why you're dragging other teams' TEs into this discussion. I'm very comfortable with your disagreeing with every thing I said. You're entitled to your opinion -- but I still think you're wrong.

Cooley's done. I hope he goes out in a blaze of glory against the Cowboys, but he will not be on an NFL roster in 2013.

And I love Chris Cooley the Redskin.[/quote]

This post is factually dull and pure (unsubstantiated) conjecture. Cooley had his best year in 2010.

[url=http://www.nfl.com/player/chriscooley/2505938/profile]Chris Cooley, TE for the Washington Redskins at NFL.com[/url]

He's also relatively young considering many TE's play well into their 30's in the NFL.

And again, most importantly, he looks quicker than I ever remember him. If you watch the last few games he's coming off the LOS just as quickly as Garcon (who he lines up near to) or any other WR with the exception of Tana who's our quickest guy. And Cooley's football IQ, the ability to find space/gaps in coverage is always there. It's not like he's sustained a head injury.

It's very obvious Mike and/or Kyle or choosing to keep him out of the passing game. Big kudos to Chris for giving it 100% out there and blocking well.

Re: Chris Cooley
 

REDSKINS4ever, you need to take your emotion out of the conversation. You are such a big Cooley fan that it clouds your judgement of him.
You and GOAT are so caught up with TE being a receiver that you lose sight that the main reason Shanahan has Paulsen and Paul in there instead of Cooley is because they are [B][U]winning [/U][/B]and Paulsen & Paul are good blockers and pass protectors. If it ain't broke don't fix it. Ever heard of that?
It is no coincidence that our offense changed and in turn solidified when Fred Davis and Cooley (not known for their blocking) were either injured or cut.
You guys really underestimate the value of good run blocking TE's in THIS offense even if they are not pass catchers. Up to know we have had enough production through the ground game and RGIII and our WR's, that we can win with out our TE's being heavily involved in the passing attack.
If it works why change it?