Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor?
 

Of course, we all know neither of them are actually eligible to be franchised this year. But if they were, and if you could only franchise one of them, and had to, perhaps, release the other, which one would it be?

Personally I would franchise Sean Taylor at the drop of a hat.

Just to be clear, I think Chris Cooley is unquestionably, at least in my mind, a franchise type player. Save Antonio Gates, there isn't one TE/H-Back or whatever you want to call him, I would rather have on my team than Chris Cooley.

But if I had to choose, I would throw my money at Sean Taylor.

Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor?
 

Yeah, I love both but I'd have to take Taylor.

Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor?
 

I wouldn't franchise either of them, just get deals done with them long before it comes to that. Franchising a player usually only makes things ugly, and with the way the Skins stretch the cap to the limit, I don't see how they could afford to franchise a player.

Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor?
 

[quote=Mattyk72;309153]I wouldn't franchise either of them, just get deals done with them long before it comes to that. Franchising a player usually only makes things ugly, and with the way the Skins stretch the cap to the limit, I don't see how they could afford to franchise a player.[/quote]


But all things being equal, and for the sake of discussion.....and that was the only option what would you do?

Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor?
 

He made it pretty clear this is a hypothetical question, Matty.

Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor?
 

I'd franchise Taylor, simply because he would be more difficult to replace. He's a safety in a linebacker's body, with great speed and coverage skills (I don't care what anyone says, he can cover. He doesn't get 10 picks at Miami w/o coverage skills)

Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor?
 

I really don't know. Taylor was wildly inconsistent last year and overall at this point in his career he just hasn't taken full advantage of his physical skill set. He has the potential to be one of the top safeties of all time, so in that respect he's been a bit of a disappointment to me. Fair or not, he hasn't lived up to the lofty expectations we all have for him.

Cooley on the other hand has proven to be an absolute steal. I think a QB's best friend in this league is a quality TE, and Cooley is definitely a top 10 TE. I think he's really in for a big year.

Also, taking into consideration the off the field issues of Taylor, his enigmatic behavior at times, vs. the fan-favorite type of personality that Cooley has, I'd probably push harder to retain Cooley over Taylor.

Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor?
 

[quote=Mattyk72;309163]I really don't know. Taylor was wildly inconsistent last year and overall at this point in his career he just hasn't taken full advantage of his physical skill set. He has the potential to be one of the top safeties of all time, so in that respect he's been a bit of a disappointment to me. Fair or not, he hasn't lived up to the lofty expectations we all have for him.

Cooley on the other hand has proven to be an absolute steal. I think a QB's best friend in this league is a quality TE, and Cooley is definitely a top 10 TE. I think he's really in for a big year.

Also, taking into consideration the off the field issues of Taylor, his enigmatic behavior at times, vs. the fan-favorite type of personality that Cooley has, I'd probably push harder to retain Cooley over Taylor.[/quote]

I think there is a strong case for Cooley - very strong. Like I said, I think the only guy I clearly take over Cooley is Gates.

Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor?
 

[quote=Daseal;309159]He made it pretty clear this is a hypothetical question, Matty.[/quote]

I get that, the realist in my couldn't resist though.

Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor?
 

I think you would have to keep Taylor. However, that also depends how much of a security blanket Cooley becomes for Campbell this year and, and I think this is really important, Taylor's happiness with the team. I'm sure people are gonna say he should shut his mouth and play, but if he got franchised and refused to play, they'd end up trading him. If that's gonna happen, I guess it's better to get something for him, but I wouldn't want to see him go.

I think the franchise tag has become something that it was never intended to be. It's a huge negative for a guy to get franchised now, they rarely ever get extensions. I'd rather not be in the situation, but should it arise, you have my answer.

Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor?
 

[quote=jdlea;309170]I think the franchise tag has become something that it was never intended to be. It's a huge negative for a guy to get franchised now, they rarely ever get extensions. I'd rather not be in the situation, but should it arise, you have my answer.[/quote]

I agree, players seem to take it as a sign of disrespect. Players always want that monster signing bonus, after all it's the only guaranteed portion of their deal so you really can't blame them.

Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor?
 

I really, really, really, really, really hate hypothetical questions.

Especially when you consider that Cooley will be a free agent in 2008, and Taylor will be in 2010 (or 2009 if he hits enough escalators to void the last year). Either way, neither will bump up against each other in a choice for a franchise tag.

But I guess in dream world where I'm forced to choose, I'd rather keep Chris Cooley.

This debate is stupid.

Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor?
 

It's a very strange thing to me. You know, how you could make millions and millions of dollars and still be unhappy.

Still, I can see where the players are coming from. It's like I bust my balls for 'minimum wage' for a few years, you as my employer start to finally recognize that I'm the man, but you compensate me for one year...only to wait and find out whether I'll be the man again next season.

Oh, and if I'm older or I get injured, all bets are off.

Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor?
 

[quote=Schneed10;309180]I really, really, really, really, really hate hypothetical questions.

Especially when you consider that Cooley will be a free agent in 2008, and Taylor will be in 2010 (or 2009 if he hits enough escalators to void the last year). Either way, neither will bump up against each other in a choice for a franchise tag.

But I guess in dream world where I'm forced to choose, I'd rather keep Chris Cooley.

This debate is stupid.[/quote]

What's stupid about it? And who said it was a debate?

Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor?
 

[quote=Schneed10;309180]
This debate is stupid.[/quote]

:iamwithst

But I guess I'll throw my vote toward Cooley. Taylor hasn't shown me that he is the dominant force everyone promised he'd be. Cooley, on the other hand, has consistently exceeded expectations.

Oh, and I wouldn't want my Cooley jersey to become out of date.

Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor?
 

I wouldn't franchise either guy. I would sign Cooley to a long term deal. He deserves it. Taylor? I don't know about him. Is it me, or does it seem like he just doesn't want to be here??

Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor?
 

[quote=12thMan;309184]What's stupid about it? And who said it was a debate?[/quote]

It's stupid because there is no foreseeable circumstance in real life in which Taylor and Cooley would be competing for the franchise tag.

It's a debate because some people are choosing Taylor, others are choosing Cooley, and arguing the merits of either choice.

Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor?
 

The Skins should attempt to resign both. Resigning Cooley will probably be easier than Taylor. Taylor has a difficult agent and seems to be upset with some of the moves the Redskins have made. He may hold out for a big contract. Therefore he would be a good candidate for the franchise tag. I would hate to see him go, but the team cannot allow a single player to hold them hostage. If he wants to play hardball, let him go.

Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor?
 

I would franchise the guy that it would be cheaper to franchise. So probably Taylor. I am only guessing that it is more expensive to franchise a TE than a S. If the reverse is true then I reverse my opinion. Sign the more expensive guy and franchise the other. That minimizes your cap hit.

Ultimately though this is a worthless discussion as Schneed has pointed out.

Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor?
 

[quote=Schneed10;309189]It's stupid because there is no foreseeable circumstance in real life in which Taylor and Cooley would be competing for the franchise tag.

It's a debate because some people are choosing Taylor, others are choosing Cooley, and arguing the merits of either choice.[/quote]

Of course there is no foreseeble circumstance in real life, I think I was pretty clear in stating that.

This really wasn't about franchising, per se, but rather which player fellow Warpathers feel is more valuable to the team.

Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor?
 

[QUOTE=Schneed10;309189]It's stupid because there is no foreseeable circumstance in real life in which Taylor and Cooley would be competing for the franchise tag.

It's a debate because some people are choosing Taylor, others are choosing Cooley, and arguing the merits of either choice.[/QUOTE]

I'd say it is silly because the question implictly asks "who is the more valuable player?" within the context of the franchise tag. Which is unrealistic.

First off it is 100% subjective to debate the merits and value of two distinctly different players They play different positions and contribute in totally different ways. Hell they don't even play on the same unit with the same purpose. I know I find such discussions tedious and really pointless unless faced with a realistic or on-going situation. Which we do not have here.

These types of arguments tend to go "Well I think this" and "Well you're wrong and I think this". Then "Well we'll just disagree". Then it is over because in the end there will be no one who is "right" because the situation doesn't really exist. If it did then in the end somone would have come down on the "right" side of the argument. "Right" meaning the side that actually happened.

So in this case you're having a discussion/debate that can never be absolutely resolved. That is maddening to me.

Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor?
 

F*** it! Cut em all, lets start from scratch, since we are going to be so horrible anyway! In fact the team shouldnt even take the field without either of those two guys. We will just play the preseason for the next decade, earning the first pick every year. Wake me up when we're the new Patriots.

Last time I checked we root for the Washington Redskins, not Sean Taylor or Chris Cooley. Long after they are gone we will still support the Skins. So if by some off the wall circumstance we don't get either of them resigned, so what! We still have a team, we want them to compete, and we want them to do well. Stop Crying!

Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor?
 

[quote=12thMan;309193]This really wasn't about franchising, per se, but rather which player fellow Warpathers feel is more valuable to the team.[/quote]

OK, then that's a better question.

On the franchising question, I said I'd franchise Cooley, mainly because he's a good teammate. Both Taylor and Cooley are incredibly valuable to the team, but Taylor kind of does his own thing while Cooley seems more about being a Redskin.

But if you're asking who does more to help our team win football games? I'll go with Sean Taylor by the hair of his chinny chin chin. His range in the backfield is exactly what will allow GW to unleash blitzes. Taylor's range allows GW to move the strong safety (Landry) up into the box more often, meaning he can blitz LBs from all over the place and still have Landry in position to play the run.

Then again, Saunders uses Cooley down the middle of the field to threaten the safeties and hold them in the center of the field, which can help free Moss and the other WRs on the outside for one on one coverage with the CBs. Cooley also has a knack for getting open when you really need to move the chains, like on a crucial 3rd and 7 or something. He has a way of finding the holes in the zone and settling down. He's a good outlet for Campbell.

They're both very valuable, but I'll say Taylor's a bit more valuable because without his range, I don't think GW has the confidence in the corners to blitz quite that much.

Sorry for crapping on your question 12th, I got hung up on the franchising thing.

Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor?
 

taylor hopefully it wont come to that

Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor?
 

[quote=Schneed10;309189]It's stupid because there is no foreseeable circumstance in real life in which Taylor and Cooley would be competing for the franchise tag.

It's a debate because some people are choosing Taylor, others are choosing Cooley, and arguing the merits of either choice.[/quote]

I tend to agree. There's really not much point in discussing who to keep because there's simply no ounce in reality here. But for the sake of discussion we've certainly had worse threads. There's nothing wrong with hyotheticals as long as people at the same time understand the reality of the situation.

Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor?
 

Well, I like my crappy thread.

Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor?
 

[quote=12thMan;309217]Well, I like my crappy thread.[/quote]


and that's all that matters

Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor?
 

Tag Cooley:

1) Taylor is a safety and if Landry was to pan out Taylor would be less of a precious commodity (besides we are going to need a conservative safety at some point)

2) If Taylor who is already kinda uppity gets the tag, he could end up sitting out games...and eventually sign with another team

3) Cooley is more likely to rework a deal during that tagged season than Taylor

4) Cooley is just as much of a fan fav as Taylor and IMO the tie goes to the Offensive player

5) Campbell uses Cooley as his safety net which is important to extended success of the football team

6) In the unlikely event that we were going to trade the tagged player b/c of his feelings or cap #'s or whatever, Cooley has more trade value b/c he is undoubtedly top 3 in the league at his position...

Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor?
 

[quote=Rajmahal33;309236]Tag Cooley:

1) Taylor is a safety and if Landry was to pan out Taylor would be less of a precious commodity (besides we are going to need a conservative safety at some point)

2) If Taylor who is already kinda uppity gets the tag, he could end up sitting out games...and eventually sign with another team

3) Cooley is more likely to rework a deal during that tagged season than Taylor

4) Cooley is just as much of a fan fav as Taylor and IMO the tie goes to the Offensive player

5) Campbell uses Cooley as his safety net which is important to extended success of the football team

6) In the unlikely event that we were going to trade the tagged player b/c of his feelings or cap #'s or whatever, Cooley has more trade value b/c he is undoubtedly top 3 in the league at his position...[/quote]

landry wasnt to pan out taylor g will scheme requires two good safteies one to cover one to blitz that's why we got taylor taylor is our best defensive player

Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor?
 

Well, if I had to pick one right now, I'd probaboly pick Cooley. Taylor is easily my favorite player, and in terms of overall play, he's the better player at his position as opposed to Cooley. However, looking at where we've drafted, who we have currently on the team who can step in and replace roles, you have to go Cooley. He's been awsome for us since he got here, and I'd hate to lose that type of a target inside the redzone.

Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor?
 

Franchise Tag usually means one thing "distraction" something the Redskins are no stranger too.

Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor?
 

shouldn't even get to that point. they shouldn't even reach free agency. they need to work the deals out before the last year of the contract. in Taylors case, they better get it done before the season. Probably about the same time Landry gets his. Landry's contract is going to be more than Sean's and in no way would he come to camp, in my mind that is. He will definately hold out if his deal is less than Landry. Pro Bowler, top 5 in the league and a rookie making more....that is not good.

Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor?
 

Very Simply. Cooley!

Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor?
 

I think that we should wait untill this upcoming season is over. Based upon their preformances last year, neither is worth a franchise, but they both have the potential to be a franchise player, the question is will either of them fill out their potential, and if so which one?

Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor?
 

I hope it doesn't come to franchising, so I'll just say that I think that Cooley is more important than Taylor. Cooley's potential isn't as great as Taylor's, but Cooley's production is better at this point. Moreover, with a young QB under center, I think Cooley's value is pretty high right now.

Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor?
 

Taylor is locked in for a few more years but Cooley should be a priority in getting signed like now. Now is the best time to do it. His value should be affordable and we can get him into a cap friendly contract. Once we are into the start of the season its too late, he's going to test the market and if he has a good year no way we sign him. The SKINs track record in resigning their own marquee FAs is bad. Ladell Betts has been their only success. Everyone else left: Smoot (although he's back and cheaper), Pierce, Clark, Dockery

Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor?
 

I wouldn't look for a deal to get done with Cooley before the season. First we need to sign the draft picks, and then there's the possibility of signing a DE. Then you have to leave some leftover cap for moves during the season. I think if a deal were to get done, it would come during the season.

Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor?
 

Without question, the draft picks are first priority, Cooley should be second, and Taylor should be next. It would be nice to see the skins just up his contract to the what he should have received had he held out of camp as a good will gesture until they can have real contract talks with him, but he should be happy enough to realize he has a huge payday coming if he just plays hard for a couple of more years.

Re: Franchise Tag: Cooley or Taylor?
 

[quote=GoSkins!;309398]Without question, the draft picks are first priority, Cooley should be second, and Taylor should be next. It would be nice to see the skins just up his contract to the what he should have received had he held out of camp as a good will gesture until they can have real contract talks with him, but he should be happy enough to realize he has a huge payday coming if he just plays hard for a couple of more years.[/quote]


You got at least the draft picks and Cooley thing right. Thinking knucklehead has the smarts to comprehend he has a big pay day....he's probably busy chasin some other knucklehead down on his ATV in Miami?

Go learn how to play GOLF and stop wastin your time....BAGBOY