Chris Cooley

[los panda]

Originally Posted by Gtothearry

What type of money/years do you think Davis gets?

i think he deserves something in the aaron hernandez neighborhood.

[SkinsGuru]

i'd like to see a little more of Cooley too . . . the last 2 weeks Paulsen has multiple dropped passes and multiple penalties . . . he has been bad recently!!

[MTK]

Cooley isn't the same player he was 3-4 years ago. Sorry to the Cooley kool-aid drinkers, but he's just not.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Cooley isn't the same player he was 3-4 years ago. Sorry to the Cooley kool-aid drinkers, but he's just not.

Nor is he our only receiving option like he was in the pre-Shanny years.

[FRPLG]

If the argument is that we should give Cooley a shot to see if he is better I can understand that. If the argument is some variation of "Cooley is better than this or that guy" then I think you're nuts because we haven't seen one iota of information to lead any of us to believe that.

[MTK]

Mike is clearly holding Cooley back.

[FRPLG]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Mike is clearly holding Cooley back.

Right

[The Goat]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Mike is clearly holding Cooley back.

I mean, what's obvious is Mike/Kyle have left him out of the passing game. Instead, they work in Paul who drops passes, bobbles after the catch and doesn't get any YAC, etc.

Is there a meaningful difference between the statements?

[MTK]

Originally Posted by The Goat

I mean, what's obvious is Mike/Kyle have left him out of the passing game. Instead, they work in Paul who drops passes, bobbles after the catch and doesn't get any YAC, etc.

Is there a meaningful difference between the statements?

Paul gets what, maybe 1-2 looks a game? Who cares.

They obviously feel more comfortable with Cooley blocking. Or maybe they've had some plays with him involved in the passing game and things just haven't gone his way for whatever reason.

Why does there always have to be some sort of conspiracy with you?

[The Goat]

[QUOTE=Mattyk;974515]Paul gets what, maybe 1-2 looks a game? Who cares.

They obviously feel more comfortable with Cooley blocking. Or maybe they've had some plays with him involved in the passing game and things just haven't gone his way for whatever reason.

Why does there always have to be some sort of conspiracy with you?[/QUOTE]

You didn't have (sarcasm) in there, so I assume you're serious? WTF...I'm not talking conspiracy. What are you talking about? It's not a conspiracy when the coaches decide to leave a player out of the passing game. It could be a mistake, especially when you keep going back to a different player who doesn't execute. I thought that's what we're discussing here, no?

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by The Goat

You didn't have (sarcasm) in there, so I assume you're serious? WTF...I'm not talking conspiracy. What are you talking about? It's not a conspiracy when the coaches decide to leave a player out of the passing game. It could be a mistake, especially when you keep going back to a different player who doesn't execute. I thought that's what we're discussing here, no?

How is targeting Niles Paul FOUR times in the last five games going to a player that doesn't execute. Please explain.

[MTK]

[quote=The Goat;974530]

Originally Posted by Mattyk

Paul gets what, maybe 1-2 looks a game? Who cares.

They obviously feel more comfortable with Cooley blocking. Or maybe they've had some plays with him involved in the passing game and things just haven't gone his way for whatever reason.

Why does there always have to be some sort of conspiracy with you?[/QUOTE]

You didn't have (sarcasm) in there, so I assume you're serious? WTF...I'm not talking conspiracy. What are you talking about? It's not a conspiracy when the coaches decide to leave a player out of the passing game. It could be a mistake, especially when you keep going back to a different player who doesn't execute. I thought that's what we're discussing here, no?

You obviously think CC should be more involved, at least more than Paul. You can't seem to fathom why Paul is more involved than Cooley. It's a Mike thing with coaches/players. Sounds like conspiracy talk to me, especially with your track record around here.

[Ruhskins]

Originally Posted by The Goat

I mean, what's obvious is Mike/Kyle have left him out of the passing game. Instead, they work in Paul who drops passes, bobbles after the catch and doesn't get any YAC, etc.

Is there a meaningful difference between the statements?

Paul has only been targeted four times in the past 5 games, how is that taking passes away from anyone? Please explained in a coherent way with facts. Thanks.

(Keep in mind that I don't like Paul)

[The Goat]

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

Paul has only been targeted four times in the past 5 games, how is that taking passes away from anyone? Please explained in a coherent way with facts. Thanks.

(Keep in mind that I don't like Paul)

Can I just read your post back hehe? He's been targeted four times. One was a gimme TD on blown coverage. That leaves three that I presume were drops or catches that didn't go for any yardage. Do you have more on this, Sherlock?

[JoeRedskin]

Originally Posted by Ruhskins

Paul has only been targeted four times in the past 5 games, how is that taking passes away from anyone? Please explained in a coherent way with facts. Thanks.

(Keep in mind that I don't like Paul)

By putting Paul in the game as a viable scripted receiving option, Kyle is removing Cooley's ability to be a final slower checkdown for RGIII which is occuring because b/c Griffin doesn't have time to go through all his progressions which, in turn, is occurring b/c Mike Shanahan signed Garcon rather than Winston & Gaffney which would have allowed RGIII time to go through all his progressions and hit the checkdown man who normally would have been Gaffney except, since Gaffney is slow as molasses, he would have been covered forcing RGIII to throw the ball to the unscripted wide-open TE Cooley on every other play.

It's a mofo'ing plot ... Mike AND Kyle are holding Cooley back.