Page 1 of 1

Cooley Article

Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2007 10:40 am
by Chris Luva Luva
Chris Cooley is aware that the Redskins have started negotiations with his agent on a long-term contract extension. The fourth-year tight end is scheduled to become a free agent after the 2007 season.

In interviews with reporters, Cooley prefers to stay focused on football. He appears uncomfortable talking about his pending free agent status.

Meantime, Cooley wrapped up off-season work during the Redskins' mini-camp in mid-June. Training camp starts in late July, but Cooley continues to be a regular presence at Redskins Park, working out in the weight room and staying in shape.


The rest is at the link below....
http://www.redskins.com/news/newsDetail.jsp?id=26880


This is an amazing stat!!!!

Cooley is coming off a season in which he caught 57 passes for 734 yards and six touchdowns. He had his best season in 2005 when he when he caught a career-high 71 passes for 774 yards and seven touchdowns.


Cooley is going to hit 1000 yards this season.

Re: Cooley Article

Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2007 11:54 am
by Mursilis
Chris Luva Luva wrote:Cooley is going to hit 1000 yards this season.


Cooley's great and all, but 1000 yd seasons from tight ends are rare (NONE did it last year, for example). It would probably require
1) an absolute explosion in the passing game, or
2) the WRs to really have an off-year, forcing JC to look for Cooley more.

I would love to see 1, but 2 would be a problem.

Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2007 11:59 am
by Chris Luva Luva
I see it happening, I see this man breaking out hopefully. He's going to see an increase in passes thrown his way this year and add in one or two big plays and he's at 1000... =) Or at least very close.

Re: Cooley Article

Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2007 12:27 pm
by Cappster
Mursilis wrote:
Chris Luva Luva wrote:Cooley is going to hit 1000 yards this season.


Cooley's great and all, but 1000 yd seasons from tight ends are rare (NONE did it last year, for example). It would probably require
1) an absolute explosion in the passing game, or
2) the WRs to really have an off-year, forcing JC to look for Cooley more.

I would love to see 1, but 2 would be a problem.


If I remember correctly, Cooley was JC's favorite target last year. Every good QB knows how to use his TE when you have a TE like Cooley. I think it could happen with much of the attention on Moss, Betts, Portis and (hopefully) Lloyd/Randle el. Take a look at what Saunders offense did for Tony Gonzalez. I believe Cooley can be that type of player for us.

Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2007 12:47 pm
by BnGhog
Id say
yds TDs
Cooley 1000 9
Moss 1500 13
Lloyd 650 7
El 500 8 Inc. 350 Return yards 3 punt return TD 1 pass TD to Moss
Portis 1400 15
Betts 950 5

Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2007 12:48 pm
by Punu
Chris Luva Luva wrote:I see it happening, I see this man breaking out hopefully. He's going to see an increase in passes thrown his way this year and add in one or two big plays and he's at 1000... =) Or at least very close.


I'm with you bro. I think he can hit 1000 with Jason back there. It's going to be an exciting season.

Re: Cooley Article

Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2007 12:49 pm
by Mursilis
Cappster wrote:
Mursilis wrote:
Chris Luva Luva wrote:Cooley is going to hit 1000 yards this season.


Cooley's great and all, but 1000 yd seasons from tight ends are rare (NONE did it last year, for example). It would probably require
1) an absolute explosion in the passing game, or
2) the WRs to really have an off-year, forcing JC to look for Cooley more.

I would love to see 1, but 2 would be a problem.


If I remember correctly, Cooley was JC's favorite target last year. Every good QB knows how to use his TE when you have a TE like Cooley. I think it could happen with much of the attention on Moss, Betts, Portis and (hopefully) Lloyd/Randle el. Take a look at what Saunders offense did for Tony Gonzalez. I believe Cooley can be that type of player for us.


Gonzalez is also great, but even he's only had 2 1000+ yard seasons in a great 10-season career. At best, TE's are only going to be 2nd or 3rd options, so even if they're really good, they're not going to get tons of yards. I'm not saying Cooley isn't a great player, because he is, but I'm also factoring in a few other things:
1) We're not going to go pass-whacky this coming season; I suspect the pass/run ratio will be about even, or favor the run, as you'd expect from a Gibbs team.
2) I really hope to see Moss come back fully healthy, and Lloyd and ARE step up, such that JC isn't forced to go to his safety valve receiver (Cooley) often.

I mostly see Cooley keeping defenses honest, forcing them to keep an eye on him when he's out there, and preventing the doubling of the WRs in most situations. Of course, if Cooley does get 1000+ yards, I won't complain about it! :lol: It's all about the W's.

Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2007 1:20 pm
by Irn-Bru
I'm mostly hoping that one of our other WR's can hit 1,000 this year.

I wouldn't complain if Cooley made it, though. He is such a weapon. I love it when he starts rumbling down the field, covers the ball with both hands, and refuses to go down until 2-3 guys are trying their hardest to trip him up.

Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2007 1:43 pm
by Countertrey
Irn-Bru wrote:I'm mostly hoping that one of our other WR's can hit 1,000 this year.

I wouldn't complain if Cooley made it, though. He is such a weapon. I love it when he starts rumbling down the field, covers the ball with both hands, and refuses to go down until 2-3 guys are trying their hardest to trip him up.


When he gets going like that, it's like watching Csonka or Riggo in their primes.

Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2007 8:04 pm
by HailSkins2007
Countertrey wrote:
Irn-Bru wrote:I'm mostly hoping that one of our other WR's can hit 1,000 this year.

I wouldn't complain if Cooley made it, though. He is such a weapon. I love it when he starts rumbling down the field, covers the ball with both hands, and refuses to go down until 2-3 guys are trying their hardest to trip him up.


When he gets going like that, it's like watching Csonka or Riggo in their primes.


I completely agree, He looks just like Riggo, but bigger when he is breakn away. I dont know if he will go over 1000 but he should have a ton of TD's .
I still think hes a top 5 TE but could be higher. Hes SO underrated .

COOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOLEY

Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2007 10:44 pm
by tribeofjudah
COOLEY.....COOLEY.....COOLEY.......!!!

Posted: Wed Jun 27, 2007 11:57 pm
by Gibbs4Life
Yeah and we'll probably have to pay him like a top 3 TE to get this deal done.

Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2007 9:42 am
by LOSTHOG
Gibbs4Life wrote:Yeah and we'll probably have to pay him like a top 3 TE to get this deal done.


I don't think so. Cooley understands that he isn't a prototypical TE. He knows that he belongs on a Joe Gibbs team. If it was a full Gibbs offense Cooley would easily get 1000yds as a H-back, but with Saunders usually putting him on the end of the line more it will be harder. I say we will get the deal done early and his contract will be cap friendly because he is a true team player, and he knows that this system is the absolute best fit.

Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2007 10:41 am
by HanburgerHelper
Guys, the stats are not that important (e.g., 1000 yards). It's how dependable Cooley is in the clutch when we need a first down or a big play. Or, when he stays into block, can he keep a blitzing LB or a speed rusher off the QB? I wouldn't compare him to Gonzalez just yet, but he's a damn good TE. Not sure what Dwight Clark's stats were like in 1981, but who could argue with how important he was to Montana's development?

The important thing here is, and I think everyone can agree on this, is that Cooley IS a core Redskins kind of guy. There is no downside to this guy and he puts out on the field, that is, he's willing to do whatever it takes to help this team. No one is better in the locker room for keeping things loose.

WE HAVE TO GET HIM SIGNED and the sooner the better. Pay the man. Don't make the same Bailey blunder we did a few years ago. (I too agree that he reminds you a bit of Riggins, appearance wise.)

Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2007 1:10 pm
by Mursilis
HanburgerHelper wrote:Guys, the stats are not that important (e.g., 1000 yards). It's how dependable Cooley is in the clutch when we need a first down or a big play. Or, when he stays into block, can he keep a blitzing LB or a speed rusher off the QB? I wouldn't compare him to Gonzalez just yet, but he's a damn good TE. Not sure what Dwight Clark's stats were like in 1981, but who could argue with how important he was to Montana's development?

The important thing here is, and I think everyone can agree on this, is that Cooley IS a core Redskins kind of guy. There is no downside to this guy and he puts out on the field, that is, he's willing to do whatever it takes to help this team. No one is better in the locker room for keeping things loose.

WE HAVE TO GET HIM SIGNED and the sooner the better. Pay the man. Don't make the same Bailey blunder we did a few years ago. (I too agree that he reminds you a bit of Riggins, appearance wise.)


=D>

Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2007 1:52 pm
by Fios
HanburgerHelper wrote:Guys, the stats are not that important (e.g., 1000 yards). It's how dependable Cooley is in the clutch when we need a first down or a big play. Or, when he stays into block, can he keep a blitzing LB or a speed rusher off the QB? I wouldn't compare him to Gonzalez just yet, but he's a damn good TE. Not sure what Dwight Clark's stats were like in 1981, but who could argue with how important he was to Montana's development?

The important thing here is, and I think everyone can agree on this, is that Cooley IS a core Redskins kind of guy. There is no downside to this guy and he puts out on the field, that is, he's willing to do whatever it takes to help this team. No one is better in the locker room for keeping things loose.

WE HAVE TO GET HIM SIGNED and the sooner the better. Pay the man. Don't make the same Bailey blunder we did a few years ago. (I too agree that he reminds you a bit of Riggins, appearance wise.)


Save for the Bailey blunder (he wanted out) I agree with that sentiment

Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2007 2:30 pm
by skinsfan#33
HanburgerHelper wrote:I wouldn't compare him to Gonzalez just yet, but he's a damn good TE. )


Why Not:
Cooleys first three year averages are as follows:
55 catches, 607 yrds/year, and 6.33 TDs

Tony G's:
56 catches, 613 yrds/year, and 5 TDs

Sounds preety close to me!

Antonio Gates' numbers are more impressive:
63 catches, 818 yrds/year, and 8.33 TDs

Cooley simply is underrated!

Posted: Thu Jun 28, 2007 4:54 pm
by PulpExposure
HanburgerHelper wrote:Guys, the stats are not that important (e.g., 1000 yards). It's how dependable Cooley is in the clutch when we need a first down or a big play. Or, when he stays into block, can he keep a blitzing LB or a speed rusher off the QB? I wouldn't compare him to Gonzalez just yet, but he's a damn good TE. Not sure what Dwight Clark's stats were like in 1981, but who could argue with how important he was to Montana's development?

The important thing here is, and I think everyone can agree on this, is that Cooley IS a core Redskins kind of guy. There is no downside to this guy and he puts out on the field, that is, he's willing to do whatever it takes to help this team. No one is better in the locker room for keeping things loose.

WE HAVE TO GET HIM SIGNED and the sooner the better. Pay the man.


Agreed with all this. Another one to look at is Jay Novacek...he never hit 1000 yards but he was one of the most critical parts of Aikman's passing offense. Having someone reliable to check down to just makes that QB's life so much easier.

Add to that: Cooley can actually do some damage in the open field...

Posted: Fri Jun 29, 2007 1:28 pm
by LOSTHOG
Cooley could be more underrated than Shockey is overrated. :P

Posted: Fri Jun 29, 2007 1:41 pm
by BnGhog
LOSTHOG wrote:Cooley could be more underrated than Shockey is overrated. :P



:lol: :lol: :lol:
ROTFALMAO ROTFALMAO ROTFALMAO
=D> =D> =D>

Posted: Fri Jun 29, 2007 7:37 pm
by SeanTaylorJr.
You can have a great year without having 1000 yds receiving. Id rather him not have a grand, that would mean something is wrong with our receivers. It would be far better to have a completely balanced passing game, with a strong ground game. Those offenses are the hardest to stop... so i'll say cooley gets around 800 yds and 7-9 tds. Go skins!

Posted: Sat Jun 30, 2007 11:29 pm
by Smithian
If both Chris Cooley and Santana Moss both go over 1,000, then it means we have two RBs in ICU and more than likely have gone back to the Mark Brunell-dink-and-dunk-like-an-overly-conservative-west-coast-offense.

Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2007 11:20 am
by everydayAskinsday
I dont see Cooley cracking 1,000 .. I could however see him getting doube digit touchdowns

Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2007 4:38 pm
by DaSkins24
The Skins dont need Cooley to get 1000 yards recieving. Gates and Tony G. get 1000 because their teams have no threats at WR.

Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2007 5:02 pm
by welch
HanburgerHelper has it exactly right. The only statistic that matters is won/loss. Otherwise, stats are misleading. This is not "fantasy football".

Cooley looks pretty good. He can't beat a db one-on-one, from what I can see, but he is devastating and sneaky when he slips out a beat or two after the play starts and the defense spreads out to cover the WRs. (But is that his job? Is he a WR? Art Monk sometimes ran from H-back when the Redskins went to the Posse formation, but Terry Orr couldn't do it...Clint Didier could, but he was rare)

Cooley has a great sense of how to glide into free space...and he runs with a wallop after he has the ball.

A fine Redskin. No doubt.