Official Post Game Discussion- Skins/Broncos

Talk about the Washington Redskins here. Do you bleed burgundy and gold?
Hog
User avatar
Posts: 566
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 8:11 pm
Location: Arlington, VA

Postby dlc » Mon Nov 16, 2009 1:27 pm

VetSkinsFan wrote:Well put, IB.

I can't say I haven't danced with the very notion that you're pointing out here, but I just can't bring myself to do it. I can't help that every Sunday from when I wake up until 12:59p, the minute before kickoff, I hope that this is the week the Redskins turn it around!

And damn it, for the moment, they have. And I'm glad that I had high hopes for them and they pulled it out. Yes, I was upset when we spotted Denver 14 pts, but just like last year vs the Eagles, we prevailed.

HTTR


I like the mentality of playing through mistakes. One criticism I had of Gibbs 2.0 which still lingers is that eliminating mistakes (TOs, penalties) was the key to victory. Although it is a valid goal, it was put at a higher priority than playing to win.

You need to take risks. The reason why JC and the rest of the team seem to play better when we're behind is because they are too scared of screwing up that they have forgotten to perform. The 14 pts off of huge mistakes gave the players and the coaches an excuse to take risks and do what they thought would succeed (benching Rogers, fake punt, targetting Kelly and Thomas, etc.)

~~~~~~
Posts: 10208
Joined: Thu Apr 08, 2004 8:59 am
Location: Canada

Postby Redskin in Canada » Mon Nov 16, 2009 2:20 pm

Irn-Bru wrote:If Danny and Vinny are such idiots that an 8-8 year would make them think we were only one step away, then a 3-13 season isn't going to help us any more.

Amen.

But I wish to clarify:

1) They are idiots.

and

2) They will try to "sell it" to the fans asif the team was competitive. They are good at that with a new coach and even maybe a nother puppet at the FO.

My reaction:

If the fans want more of the same, supporting the owner and its mediocrity with merchandise and other purchases, it is their prerogative.

I will keep on supporting my Team on the field, I will not purchase a thing and I will keep providing RELENTLESS criticism and ridicule of the owner and his FO. THIS is my way to protest. :wink:
Daniel Snyder has defined incompetence, failure and greed to true Washington Redskins fans over the last decade. Stay away from football operations !!!

08 Champ
Posts: 13044
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 9:23 pm
Location: on the bandwagon

Postby SkinsJock » Mon Nov 16, 2009 2:45 pm

I am really sorry that I missed the game as I understand that there were some good things that happened, this is great BUT nothing changes - this franchise needs to have a change of culture or we will just continue to see a mediocre product on the field - we need a change at the top and hopefully the new people will see some good things here with these players in the next 7 games that can mean that we are not far away from being a competitive franchise again soon - we are not a very good team at all - we just won one game, and we need to play better as a team consistently :D

HAIL
Minds are like parachutes, they only work when they are open

Robert has to make a huge effort to show he's got what it takes to be a future great QB - we need the real RG3 not the hyped version

Hail to the Redskins

One Step Away
Posts: 7652
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 8:31 am
Location: NoVA

Postby VetSkinsFan » Mon Nov 16, 2009 6:16 pm

Okay, dlc, point by point, my friend.

dlc wrote:You managed to completely ignore the fact that I said that it's not definitely a smart move to get rid of him, but depending on what's offered it might be.


I thought I addressed it, but here we go. I don't think it's smart to trade our best receiver, PERIOD. We're not getting a lopsided deal for him, and he's the constant in our receiving corps.

dlc wrote:And you also ignored the fact that I said he was a very good receiver but TEs need to block as well as catch. I haven't heard anyone say that Cooley was a good blocker. Maybe average at best. An objective view of pass protection and run-blocking yesterday might also consider that the TEs did their job blocking as well.

Rarely are 'good' TEs highlighted for their blocking. Look at any list. Gates, Gonzalez, Sharpe, Winslow (Chargers), Newsome. These were pass catching TEs, and they were fierce. Their first bullet in the HoF is not "great blocker."

dlc wrote:Lastly, when does a TE ever be the franchise player you build around? QB, OT, DB, MLB, or RB perhaps. I don't think TEs make the top 5 of important positions. If we get a draft pick or a trade for that yields a solid or above average one of the positions, I'd take it in a heartbeat. Too bad we have Danny and Vinny behind determining that.

So now because it's never been done, it can't be done? Look, I may have exaggerated a bit on the franchise player, but IMO he's as close to one as we have currently. We have up and coming in Orakpo possibly, but atm, it's Cooley.

dlc wrote:Cooley is a good player, but I think he's overrated to be called franchise or great. To think you're going to get something of value without giving up something of value is naive. Cooley, along with Moss, are probably our only options that would tempt organizations with a good pick or even a good prospect or two. Those who take smart risks are the ones who win.

...and that's my point. Why trade what little consistancy you have for the unknown? Cooley secures the TE position and gives you a potential 1k yard receiver. I think giving a young QB and a rebuilding line that kind of continuity is underrated.

dlc wrote:The Skins have been doing it the wrong way this decade. We give up the no-names opting for the overrated big names. Buy high sell low.

I agree with this in a general sense, but I don't agree giving up your best receiver and best offensive player. Only the Browns and the Broncos accomplish moves like that, and I'm nto too confident in either one of these teams presently.


Did I address your points this time, little buddy?

HTTR
...any given Sunday....

RIP #21 Sean Taylor. You will be loved and adored by Redskins fans forever!!!!!

GSPODS:
The National Anthem sucks.
What a useless piece of propagandist rhetoric that is.

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 566
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2004 8:11 pm
Location: Arlington, VA

Postby dlc » Mon Nov 16, 2009 7:20 pm

VetSkinsFan wrote:Okay, dlc, point by point, my friend.

dlc wrote:You managed to completely ignore the fact that I said that it's not definitely a smart move to get rid of him, but depending on what's offered it might be.


I thought I addressed it, but here we go. I don't think it's smart to trade our best receiver, PERIOD. We're not getting a lopsided deal for him, and he's the constant in our receiving corps.

dlc wrote:And you also ignored the fact that I said he was a very good receiver but TEs need to block as well as catch. I haven't heard anyone say that Cooley was a good blocker. Maybe average at best. An objective view of pass protection and run-blocking yesterday might also consider that the TEs did their job blocking as well.

Rarely are 'good' TEs highlighted for their blocking. Look at any list. Gates, Gonzalez, Sharpe, Winslow (Chargers), Newsome. These were pass catching TEs, and they were fierce. Their first bullet in the HoF is not "great blocker."

dlc wrote:Lastly, when does a TE ever be the franchise player you build around? QB, OT, DB, MLB, or RB perhaps. I don't think TEs make the top 5 of important positions. If we get a draft pick or a trade for that yields a solid or above average one of the positions, I'd take it in a heartbeat. Too bad we have Danny and Vinny behind determining that.

So now because it's never been done, it can't be done? Look, I may have exaggerated a bit on the franchise player, but IMO he's as close to one as we have currently. We have up and coming in Orakpo possibly, but atm, it's Cooley.

dlc wrote:Cooley is a good player, but I think he's overrated to be called franchise or great. To think you're going to get something of value without giving up something of value is naive. Cooley, along with Moss, are probably our only options that would tempt organizations with a good pick or even a good prospect or two. Those who take smart risks are the ones who win.

...and that's my point. Why trade what little consistancy you have for the unknown? Cooley secures the TE position and gives you a potential 1k yard receiver. I think giving a young QB and a rebuilding line that kind of continuity is underrated.

dlc wrote:The Skins have been doing it the wrong way this decade. We give up the no-names opting for the overrated big names. Buy high sell low.

I agree with this in a general sense, but I don't agree giving up your best receiver and best offensive player. Only the Browns and the Broncos accomplish moves like that, and I'm nto too confident in either one of these teams presently.


Did I address your points this time, little buddy?

HTTR


There's no point for him to be a TE if he can't block well. Of course star TEs aren't as "known" for their blocking, but don't doubt that players and coaches don't consider it highly for that position and that those guys mentioned can't block well. The whole point of a TE is that you don't know if he's staying in and supporting the run/pass-block or if he's going out for a route.

If you think it doesn't matter:
"We used him almost as a tight end a lot, and not only did he do it willingly, he was a great blocker for us." -Gibbs on Monk

And because it hasn't been done, we should be the first to build a team around a TE? Repeat that to yourself again and tell me if you would repeat that in front of Bethard or Casserly. Feel free to specifically reference Cooley in that scenario. I'm all for open-mindedness but this is a stretch.

"Best player"? Perhaps...not even definitely, on the offense, but we're talking about a side that struggles to score 20 points. His stats only reveal the problems on that side of the ball, not how great he is. The years where we were winning were because of the run. TEs traditionally only play a big role in an offense when they are future HoFers or if the offense sucks. I lean towards the latter. The title "safety valve" often attributed to a TE is simply because they are the easiest guy to target.

To be clear with my criticisms, I do think he's "good" not "great". You've just assumed that he's great because of what? Pro Bowls? Well 1) my reference to popularity and 2) the Redskin voting campaigns probably have a lot to do with that. Did you notice that you had to preface him as a "potential" 1k yard receiver? The fact is he isn't one. And as many drops as Santana has had, he still is more of a threat, draws safety help and produces more than Cooley.

The argument that Cooley is irreplaceable for winning is what's crazy (as proven yesterday), not the opposite.

A downgrade in TE to Davis and Yoder (not bad) to upgrade whatever of the number of holes we have elsewhere is a smart move...if it could happen. Once again, I don't think Danny or Vinny are capable of pulling it off, but I think better FOs could.

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 1895
Joined: Sun Dec 26, 2004 9:42 pm

Postby fredp45 » Mon Nov 16, 2009 8:22 pm

dlc -- thanks for fighting my fight here. I agree with all of your points and it's exactly why I'd recommend trading Cooley. I love Cooley, he's one of my favorite players on the Skins. However, in 2010 he'll be 29...do I truly believe the Skins have the personnel to compete deep into the playoffs next year? I don't. I've rooted for them for nearly 30 years...and one thing I've learned -- this game is about line play, not TE play. A good line makes a lot of things work. We need to improve our Oline, not to be dramatic but we might need 5 new Olinemen. I'm not sold on Jones or Dockery or Rabach, maybe 1 or 2 of them survive for one more year. We could use another CB, we could use a strong side LB, Fletcher seems to be slowing down, is Blades the guy at MLB? I think Portis is done and overpaid, so we could use a quicker running back to compliment Betts and Rock. I'd love to see Landry play SS - he'll be a stud there. He certainly isn't picking up FS very well, so we could use a FS. With Griffin being on the other side of 30, is Golston a starting caliber DT? If not, we need someone to play next to Haynesworth.

VetSkinsFan -- boneheaded to you, not to me. We have a good, maybe NOT great replacement in Davis, and having a Pro Bowl TE on this team is a luxary we can't afford with our other issues. BTW, what's this "little buddy" crap? You don't agree with someone so you try to pull the tough guy over a message board?

~~
User avatar
Posts: 8446
Joined: Fri Mar 26, 2004 2:12 pm
Location: Northern Virginia

Postby REDEEMEDSKIN » Mon Nov 16, 2009 9:05 pm

Gametime33 wrote:BMitch spell check dude.

They didn't loose or play to loose.


Pot, meet kettle. :lol:
Back and better than ever!

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 1659
Joined: Mon May 22, 2006 4:20 pm
Location: Sterling, Virginia

Postby SKINFAN » Tue Nov 17, 2009 9:19 am

REDEEMEDSKIN wrote:
Gametime33 wrote:BMitch spell check dude.

They didn't loose or play to loose.


Pot, meet kettle. :lol:



LMAO


I'm so happy we broke the 17pt barrier!
#21 (36) This IS and will always be the High watermark where all new DB's are measured.


Proverbs 27:17

One Step Away
Posts: 7652
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 8:31 am
Location: NoVA

Postby VetSkinsFan » Tue Nov 17, 2009 10:47 am

dlc wrote:There's no point for him to be a TE if he can't block well. Of course star TEs aren't as "known" for their blocking, but don't doubt that players and coaches don't consider it highly for that position and that those guys mentioned can't block well. The whole point of a TE is that you don't know if he's staying in and supporting the run/pass-block or if he's going out for a route.


A TE isn't supposed to be able to block like an offensive tackle. This isn't the 80s and prior. This is a pass happy league and unless you have an AP or LT, you're going ot rely on the pass game more than the run game to succeed more times than not. Go ahead and name the successful dynasties with run first offenses. I bet there are more pass happy (and defense) makes the differences. And a TE with good hands will be more beneficial than an extra tackle in the game. That's called JUMBO packages.


dlc wrote:If you think it doesn't matter:
"We used him almost as a tight end a lot, and not only did he do it willingly, he was a great blocker for us." -Gibbs on Monk


Yup, and he blocked well. That's ONE guy, and I don't think that Monk wasn't a unique character.

dlc wrote:And because it hasn't been done, we should be the first to build a team around a TE? Repeat that to yourself again and tell me if you would repeat that in front of Bethard or Casserly. Feel free to specifically reference Cooley in that scenario. I'm all for open-mindedness but this is a stretch.

Yes, yes yes, 20 years ago, the entire game was different. Let's live in the now. In TODAY'S NFL, the passing game trumps predominately. Yes, I would suggest that you keep your best player on offense, a constant, and rebuild what you need around him, KNOWING THAT YOU DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT THE TE POSITION.

dlc wrote:"Best player"? Perhaps...not even definitely, on the offense, but we're talking about a side that struggles to score 20 points. His stats only reveal the problems on that side of the ball, not how great he is. The years where we were winning were because of the run. TEs traditionally only play a big role in an offense when they are future HoFers or if the offense sucks. I lean towards the latter. The title "safety valve" often attributed to a TE is simply because they are the easiest guy to target.

The stats don't lie buddy, and I already quoted 'em. Whether Cooley's been the safety valve or the threat, he's performed. I can probably count on one hand how many times I've yelled at the TV about Cooley not catching a pass he should have easily caught. Moss? riiiggghhht. Cooley's a playmaker and he's consistant. And he's tough. I recall a season where he played thru the pain of a dislocated shoulder almost all 16 weeks. TOUGH and reliable.

dlc wrote:To be clear with my criticisms, I do think he's "good" not "great". You've just assumed that he's great because of what? Pro Bowls? Well 1) my reference to popularity and 2) the Redskin voting campaigns probably have a lot to do with that. Did you notice that you had to preface him as a "potential" 1k yard receiver? The fact is he isn't one. And as many drops as Santana has had, he still is more of a threat, draws safety help and produces more than Cooley.
My reference to the stats are pretty concrete, but you appear not to want to acknowledge them. I guess the plain freakin fact that he led the Redskins in receptions the past three seasons has nothing to do with it, eh? Notice I didn't reference popularity or Pro Bowls...but I guess NFL stats are objective as well?

dlc wrote:The argument that Cooley is irreplaceable for winning is what's crazy (as proven yesterday), not the opposite.

Yeah, b/c in statistical data, a sample size of 1 proves EVERYTHING!!!! I gotchya ](*,) I'm happy we won. I don't think that can be attributed to the lack of Cooley's presence though.

dlc wrote:A downgrade in TE to Davis and Yoder (not bad) to upgrade whatever of the number of holes we have elsewhere is a smart move...if it could happen. Once again, I don't think Danny or Vinny are capable of pulling it off, but I think better FOs could.

With the level of rebuilding necessary, I don't believe we should take away the one consistancy we have in the passing game. The next closest is El in the slot, and he's no where near close to Cooley's consistancy.

I understand about blowing a team up and starting over, but I don't believe we have to cut all ties. I believe that we should cut our losses (Rogers for instance) and build with what strengths we have. You don't see the Pats trading Welker and you don't see the Colts trading Wayne. The reason Harrison got cut, btw, was b/c he was injured the majority of the year, not b/c he was prime trade material. Keep the contexts straight.
...any given Sunday....

RIP #21 Sean Taylor. You will be loved and adored by Redskins fans forever!!!!!

GSPODS:
The National Anthem sucks.
What a useless piece of propagandist rhetoric that is.

^^^^^^^
Posts: 9009
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2004 4:52 pm

Postby frankcal20 » Tue Nov 17, 2009 12:04 pm

This argument is getting really old. No way anyone trades Chris Cooley. He is a probowl TE who is a team player, great in the locker room and a fan favorite. We have stupid ownership but he knows where his money comes from and CC helps bring people in the stands, sells jerseys, etc. He's not getting rid of Cooley.

Diesel
Posts: 5511
Joined: Mon Dec 15, 2003 7:03 pm
Location: Dover DE

Postby DEHog » Tue Nov 17, 2009 12:13 pm

frankcal20 wrote:This argument is getting really old. No way anyone trades Chris Cooley. He is a probowl TE who is a team player, great in the locker room and a fan favorite. We have stupid ownership but he knows where his money comes from and CC helps bring people in the stands, sells jerseys, etc. He's not getting rid of Cooley.


The first or second one??
"Sean Taylor is hands down the best athlete I've ever coached it's not even close" Gregg Williams 2005 Mini-Camp

^^^^^^^
Posts: 9009
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2004 4:52 pm

Postby frankcal20 » Tue Nov 17, 2009 12:25 pm

There are two? It all reads like "Blah, blah, blah....foolishness"

One Step Away
Posts: 7652
Joined: Thu Jul 19, 2007 8:31 am
Location: NoVA

Postby VetSkinsFan » Tue Nov 17, 2009 1:34 pm

fredp45 wrote:dlc -- thanks for fighting my fight here. I agree with all of your points and it's exactly why I'd recommend trading Cooley. I love Cooley, he's one of my favorite players on the Skins. However, in 2010 he'll be 29...do I truly believe the Skins have the personnel to compete deep into the playoffs next year? I don't. I've rooted for them for nearly 30 years...and one thing I've learned -- this game is about line play, not TE play. A good line makes a lot of things work. We need to improve our Oline, not to be dramatic but we might need 5 new Olinemen. I'm not sold on Jones or Dockery or Rabach, maybe 1 or 2 of them survive for one more year. We could use another CB, we could use a strong side LB, Fletcher seems to be slowing down, is Blades the guy at MLB? I think Portis is done and overpaid, so we could use a quicker running back to compliment Betts and Rock. I'd love to see Landry play SS - he'll be a stud there. He certainly isn't picking up FS very well, so we could use a FS. With Griffin being on the other side of 30, is Golston a starting caliber DT? If not, we need someone to play next to Haynesworth.

VetSkinsFan -- boneheaded to you, not to me. We have a good, maybe NOT great replacement in Davis, and having a Pro Bowl TE on this team is a luxary we can't afford with our other issues. BTW, what's this "little buddy" crap? You don't agree with someone so you try to pull the tough guy over a message board?
:roll:

Don't be jealous, you can be my little buddy too. I've gained some weight since I left the Army, so I'm sure there are a few more little buddies out there as I get older.
...any given Sunday....

RIP #21 Sean Taylor. You will be loved and adored by Redskins fans forever!!!!!

GSPODS:
The National Anthem sucks.
What a useless piece of propagandist rhetoric that is.

Pushing Paper
Posts: 4590
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2005 2:01 pm

Postby PulpExposure » Tue Nov 17, 2009 2:44 pm

We can't trade Cooley for the simple fact of what it would do to our salary cap.

^^^^^^^
Posts: 9009
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2004 4:52 pm

Postby frankcal20 » Tue Nov 17, 2009 2:45 pm

...and he's our best offensive player...

but that statement applies to most of our guys on offense.

Return to Hog Wash - Washington Redskins Football