Cooley

Talk about the Washington Redskins here. Do you bleed burgundy and gold?
Hog
User avatar
Posts: 4609
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2008 6:31 pm
Location: D.C.

Postby Red_One43 » Fri Aug 03, 2012 9:48 pm

TE Chris Cooley lined up at fullback during one play on which the Redskins practiced third-and-1 situations. Cooley took the handoff and got a first down. We saw that last year in the Monday night game against Dallas, too.

Cooley’s versatility as a fullback is a significant asset in his push to make the team. If the Redskins keep one fullback, Darrel Young, Cooley could be the backup, just as Mike Sellers was last year. It gives Cooley an edge over all the other tight ends.


This is why I think we keep 4 TEs. Cooley is kind of in the role of Sellers for last year - the versatile guy. Don't know if he can keep his salary in this role.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/red ... report-83/

DarthMonk
Posts: 4475
Joined: Wed Nov 16, 2005 4:58 pm

Postby DarthMonk » Sat Aug 04, 2012 9:17 am

Red_One43 wrote:
TE Chris Cooley lined up at fullback during one play on which the Redskins practiced third-and-1 situations. Cooley took the handoff and got a first down. We saw that last year in the Monday night game against Dallas, too.

Cooley’s versatility as a fullback is a significant asset in his push to make the team. If the Redskins keep one fullback, Darrel Young, Cooley could be the backup, just as Mike Sellers was last year. It gives Cooley an edge over all the other tight ends.


This is why I think we keep 4 TEs. Cooley is kind of in the role of Sellers for last year - the versatile guy. Don't know if he can keep his salary in this role.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/red ... report-83/


^This is easy to forget.

I'm sure Gibbs drafted CC as a classic H-back. It's also a way to run a 3 or 4-TE set that actually has 4 or 3 pretty fast pass catchers that would have to be defended by a base defense.

DarthMonk
Hog Bowl III, V Champion (2011, 2013)

Hognostication Champion (2011, 2013)


Scalp 'em, Swamp 'em,
We will take 'em big score!
Read 'em, Weep 'em Touchdown,
We want heap more!

the 'mudge
Posts: 14683
Joined: Fri Jan 09, 2004 10:15 pm
Location: Curmudgeon Corner, Maine

Postby Countertrey » Sat Aug 04, 2012 12:44 pm

It's important for folks who worry about going into the season with only 1 FB... Cooley is a pretty darned good backup...
"That's a clown question, bro"
- - - - - - - - - - Bryce Harper, DC Statesman
"But Oz never did give nothing to the Tin Man
That he didn't, didn't already have"
- - - - - - - - - - Dewey Bunnell, America

CKRGiii
Posts: 4677
Joined: Thu Jul 29, 2010 2:56 pm
Location: 505 New Mexico repn

Postby cowboykillerzRGiii » Sat Aug 04, 2012 12:55 pm

4 te? I see Morris making the team over Logan Paulson..
#21 forever in our hearts
...and yet ANOTHER record setting performance by "RG3 the third"!!!!
“I wanted to just… put his lights out ….because, you know, …Dallas sucks…” - Dexter Manley

#33
Posts: 4084
Joined: Sat Jul 24, 2004 8:44 am

Postby skinsfan#33 » Sat Aug 04, 2012 2:01 pm

Red_One43 wrote:
TE Chris Cooley lined up at fullback during one play on which the Redskins practiced third-and-1 situations. Cooley took the handoff and got a first down. We saw that last year in the Monday night game against Dallas, too.

Cooley’s versatility as a fullback is a significant asset in his push to make the team. If the Redskins keep one fullback, Darrel Young, Cooley could be the backup, just as Mike Sellers was last year. It gives Cooley an edge over all the other tight ends.


This is why I think we keep 4 TEs. Cooley is kind of in the role of Sellers for last year - the versatile guy. Don't know if he can keep his salary in this role.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/red ... report-83/

Sellers was never a 60-70 catch guy, but Chris will be (AT WORST) a 60 catch guy if he plays all 16 games. He will have more catches than Paulsen, Paul, Armstrang, Banks, Austiin, and Robinson combined.

There is no eveidence that he will be anything other than a 60-80 catch guy. Everyone is ASSuming that he will have a significantly reduced role... he won't! He will prove, like he always has, that he is better than Davis and all but a few TEs in the NFL.
"Dovie'andi se tovya sagain"
(It is time to roll the dice) Tai'shar Manetheren

"Duty is heavier than a Mountain, Death is lighter than a feather" Tai'shar Malkier

RIP James Oliver Rigney, Jr. 1948-2007

ATX
Posts: 3385
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 10:59 am
Location: NOVA

Postby ATX_Skins » Sat Aug 04, 2012 3:56 pm

skinsfan#33 wrote:
Red_One43 wrote:
TE Chris Cooley lined up at fullback during one play on which the Redskins practiced third-and-1 situations. Cooley took the handoff and got a first down. We saw that last year in the Monday night game against Dallas, too.

Cooley’s versatility as a fullback is a significant asset in his push to make the team. If the Redskins keep one fullback, Darrel Young, Cooley could be the backup, just as Mike Sellers was last year. It gives Cooley an edge over all the other tight ends.


This is why I think we keep 4 TEs. Cooley is kind of in the role of Sellers for last year - the versatile guy. Don't know if he can keep his salary in this role.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/red ... report-83/

Sellers was never a 60-70 catch guy, but Chris will be (AT WORST) a 60 catch guy if he plays all 16 games. He will have more catches than Paulsen, Paul, Armstrang, Banks, Austiin, and Robinson combined.

There is no eveidence that he will be anything other than a 60-80 catch guy. Everyone is ASSuming that he will have a significantly reduced role... he won't! He will prove, like he always has, that he is better than Davis and all but a few TEs in the NFL.



-drinking

Get serious...
Support the troops, especially our snipers.

08 Champ
Posts: 13497
Joined: Tue Feb 24, 2004 9:23 pm
Location: on the bandwagon

Postby SkinsJock » Sat Aug 04, 2012 4:10 pm

skinsfan#33 wrote: Sellers was never a 60-70 catch guy, but Chris will be (AT WORST) a 60 catch guy if he plays all 16 games. He will have more catches than Paulsen, Paul, Armstrong, Banks, Austiin, and Robinson combined.

There is no evidence that he will be anything other than a 60-80 catch guy. Everyone is ASSuming that he will have a significantly reduced role... he won't! He will prove, like he always has, that he is better than Davis and all but a few TEs in the NFL.


:shock: are you serious ... or a close relative

I'm a Cooley fan and I hope that he's able to show that he can still help the offense

AND

that he'll take less money

but ... :wink:
When you're dead you don't know you're dead, it's only difficult for others.
It's kind of the same as when you're stupid!

memo to Dan Snyder: Let the football people just do their jobs - you need to manage your own mess

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 4609
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2008 6:31 pm
Location: D.C.

Postby Red_One43 » Sat Aug 04, 2012 6:11 pm

skinsfan#33 wrote:
Red_One43 wrote:
TE Chris Cooley lined up at fullback during one play on which the Redskins practiced third-and-1 situations. Cooley took the handoff and got a first down. We saw that last year in the Monday night game against Dallas, too.

Cooley’s versatility as a fullback is a significant asset in his push to make the team. If the Redskins keep one fullback, Darrel Young, Cooley could be the backup, just as Mike Sellers was last year. It gives Cooley an edge over all the other tight ends.


This is why I think we keep 4 TEs. Cooley is kind of in the role of Sellers for last year - the versatile guy. Don't know if he can keep his salary in this role.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/blog/red ... report-83/

Sellers was never a 60-70 catch guy, but Chris will be (AT WORST) a 60 catch guy if he plays all 16 games. He will have more catches than Paulsen, Paul, Armstrang, Banks, Austiin, and Robinson combined.

There is no eveidence that he will be anything other than a 60-80 catch guy. Everyone is ASSuming that he will have a significantly reduced role... he won't! He will prove, like he always has, that he is better than Davis and all but a few TEs in the NFL.


No Evidence?
Allow me to introduce Exhibits::

1. Fred Davis
2. Pierre Garcon
3. Santana Moss
4. Leonard Hankerson
5. Niles Paul
6. Josh Morgan

Now, I am not saying that all of these guys will catch more footballs than Cooley. I am saying that there are no where near enough footballs to go around for Cooley to get 60 balls.

Exhibit 7: This isn't Gronk and Hernanez! Even with a healthy Davis and Cooley, the Skins have never successfully run the two TE set that everyone has talked about since they became teammates. The Two TE set will be Davis and Paul. That TE Tandem fits the Shanny O.

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 4609
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2008 6:31 pm
Location: D.C.

Postby Red_One43 » Sat Aug 04, 2012 7:46 pm

cowboykillerzRED wrote:4 te? I see Morris making the team over Logan Paulson..


To me, Morris has the ability to create the biggest surprise roster decision for Shanny.

I see Cooley as the back up fullback, but with a strong showing by Alfred Morris, is Cooley in trouble or Hightower, as a running back?

Paulsen? Most reports I read, saw Paulsen is the best blocking TE on the roster. I don't think that Paulsen is effected by Morris. Paulsen has yet to play fullback and Morris has yet to play TE.

**********
User avatar
Posts: 16744
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2004 1:45 pm
Location: If I knew ... it would explain a lot but I've seen Homerville on a map, that wasn't helpful at all

Postby 1niksder » Sat Aug 04, 2012 9:11 pm

IMO The only way Paulsen makes the team is if Cooley doesn't. If Cooley doesn't make the team I don't see Morris not making it. With Hightower still limited I see him missing out regardless of Cooley, Paulsen or Morris

Dorson Boyce may play a roll in the FB mix but I doubt it.
..__..
{o,o}
|)__)
-"-"-

When you reach the end of your rope, tie a knot in it and hold on....

If the world didn't suck we'd all fall off

JSPB22
User avatar
Posts: 16193
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2004 9:03 am
Location: Location, LOCATION!

Postby Deadskins » Sun Aug 05, 2012 6:02 am

Red_One43 wrote:I am saying that there are no where near enough footballs to go around for Cooley to get 60 balls.

That's absurd. There's easily enough for Cooley to get 60 with the WRs getting theirs. The only player who might limit Cooley's catches is Fred Davis. IF Cooley can't get in the game, he can't catch the ball.
Andre Carter wrote:Damn man, you know your football.


Hog Bowl IV Champion (2012)

Hail to the Redskins!

---
User avatar
Posts: 18570
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 12:55 pm
Location: AJT

Postby Chris Luva Luva » Sun Aug 05, 2012 7:33 am

I wouldn't be shocked to see Cooley with more receptions than Davis.

However, Davis will have more yards, YAC and possibly TD's. But don't count out Cooley in the redzone, a big body that can shield the ball is a great thing.
Fios - Arbiter of All Positive Knowledge

Kaz - "Was kinda obvious since we all know you're not a moron"

Hog
User avatar
Posts: 4609
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2008 6:31 pm
Location: D.C.

Postby Red_One43 » Sun Aug 05, 2012 8:17 am

Deadskins wrote:
Red_One43 wrote:I am saying that there are no where near enough footballs to go around for Cooley to get 60 balls.

That's absurd. There's easily enough for Cooley to get 60 with the WRs getting theirs. The only player who might limit Cooley's catches is Fred Davis. IF Cooley can't get in the game, he can't catch the ball.


Oh, don't forget the backs getting theirs. Helu had, if not 50 catches, close to it.

So tell me how easily it is for a second string TE who is reportedly slower this year is going to get his 60.

Footballs to receivers, TEs, backs - Garcon? Davis? Moss? Morgan? Hank? How many footballs for the rest of them?

How may times to you think RGIII is going to crank it up next year?
Will Shanny finally emphasize the run which is his MO?
How effective will the offense control the ball? Are we with the Patriots in offensive plays/

Why did Shanny emphasize getting receiver in FA?
Why did Shanny switch Paul to TE?
Shanny is gearing up for Shanny ball this year.

Now, add all those balls up and the emphasis on the offense this year and tell how a second string TE/FB is going to get 60 catches.
Tel your rationale.

Here's the stats for the Redskins for the last two season to see how the has been distributed the last couple of years.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/stats/_/name/wsh/year/2010
http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/stats/_/nam ... n-redskins

JSPB22
User avatar
Posts: 16193
Joined: Fri Jul 02, 2004 9:03 am
Location: Location, LOCATION!

Postby Deadskins » Sun Aug 05, 2012 8:40 am

Red_One43 wrote:
Deadskins wrote:
Red_One43 wrote:I am saying that there are no where near enough footballs to go around for Cooley to get 60 balls.

That's absurd. There's easily enough for Cooley to get 60 with the WRs getting theirs. The only player who might limit Cooley's catches is Fred Davis. IF Cooley can't get in the game, he can't catch the ball.


Oh, don't forget the backs getting theirs. Helu had, if not 50 catches, close to it.

So tell me how easily it is for a second string TE who is reportedly slower this year is going to get his 60.

Footballs to receivers, TEs, backs - Garcon? Davis? Moss? Morgan? Hank? How many footballs for the rest of them?

How may times to you think RGIII is going to crank it up next year?
Will Shanny finally emphasize the run which is his MO?
How effective will the offense control the ball? Are we with the Patriots in offensive plays/

Why did Shanny emphasize getting receiver in FA?
Why did Shanny switch Paul to TE?
Shanny is gearing up for Shanny ball this year.

Now, add all those balls up and the emphasis on the offense this year and tell how a second string TE/FB is going to get 60 catches.
Tel your rationale.

Here's the stats for the Redskins for the last two season to see how the has been distributed the last couple of years.

http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/stats/_/name/wsh/year/2010
http://espn.go.com/nfl/team/stats/_/nam ... n-redskins

Don't forget Cooley also lines up as a fullback, and like I said, it really depends on Fred Davis more than the WRs as to how many touches Cooley gets. That and how many two TE sets we run.
Andre Carter wrote:Damn man, you know your football.


Hog Bowl IV Champion (2012)

Hail to the Redskins!

^^^^^^^
Posts: 9017
Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2004 4:52 pm

Postby frankcal20 » Sun Aug 05, 2012 8:57 am

I thought it was reported he looks faster this year than the last couple due to his loss of weight and conditioning.

Return to Hog Wash - Washington Redskins Football