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.