footballhenry Posted September 29, 2005 Share Posted September 29, 2005 Now I think we all agree that there are enough Ramsey v. Brunell threads floating around, but I wanted to try to offer something a bit different via focusing on one of our premiere players, imho. Chris Cooley has 'serious' potential to be a staple in our offense, especially redzone offense. However, it seems that there is a lack of chemistry between Brunell and Cooley, whereas we all know Ramsey has major chemistry with Cooley. Maybe I am mistaken but do you think Brunell will hamper Cooley's production any? Of course a good QB should find the open receiver, and if Cooley is open then he should get the ball but chemistry can go a long way on the field. It just seems to be Brunell lacks chemistry with Cooley (all last season and so far this season). Hopefully the bye week has allowed things to gel better but I just dont see Cooley integrated or used as much when Brunell is QB. I wonder why that is, whereas when Ramsey is QB I see Cooley make play after play in games and in crucial situations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChampSkinsFanatic Posted September 29, 2005 Share Posted September 29, 2005 I like Cooley and I noticed the same thing. But if Brunell is finding a deeper open Santana Moss then I'm all for it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HailYeah Posted September 29, 2005 Share Posted September 29, 2005 I think going in to this season teams were very conscious of Cooley's presence as he was basically our only target last year. They've been covering him pretty well, although he has had a couple nice plays and a touchdown that was called back. I think now teams will have to give a lot more attention to Moss which should open up some opportunities for Cooley. Brunell will find him, don't worry. Besides I'd rather have great chemistry between Brunell and Moss than Ramsey and Cooley....for obvious reasons (see:Dallas) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
202Chaz Posted September 29, 2005 Share Posted September 29, 2005 I agree plus we're about to play our 3rd game so we really cant judge him yet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinzRool Posted September 29, 2005 Share Posted September 29, 2005 From what I saw in the first two games is Gibbs has kept Cooley in to block more. Chicago and Dallas have very aggressive defenses so the Skins were trying to get the extra protection. Part of the reason Brunell didn't get him the ball much last year was the fact that Cooley wasn't playing as much earlier in the season as he was still learning the offense. I feel in the upcoming weeks we'll hear his name mentioned quite a bit more. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Walking Deadman Posted September 29, 2005 Share Posted September 29, 2005 Now I think we all agree that there are enough Ramsey v. Brunell threads floating around, but I wanted to try to offer something a bit different via focusing on one of our premiere players, imho. Chris Cooley has 'serious' potential to be a staple in our offense, especially redzone offense. However, it seems that there is a lack of chemistry between Brunell and Cooley, whereas we all know Ramsey has major chemistry with Cooley. Maybe I am mistaken but do you think Brunell will hamper Cooley's production any? Of course a good QB should find the open receiver, and if Cooley is open then he should get the ball but chemistry can go a long way on the field. It just seems to be Brunell lacks chemistry with Cooley (all last season and so far this season). Hopefully the bye week has allowed things to gel better but I just dont see Cooley integrated or used as much when Brunell is QB. I wonder why that is, whereas when Ramsey is QB I see Cooley make play after play in games and in crucial situations. Wrong...wrong...wrong: Cooley got some good production with Brunell in 2004 and in the preseason. Cooley got the only TD vs the Ravens (Brunell at the helm) last year as one example. Cooley should have scored a TD vs the Bears in week 1, but Cooley and Brunell under ran the route/threw too short and Cooley got tackled at the 1. Dallas has a smaller quicker LB corp. and most likely were able to cover Cooley's speed-- thus, freeing up Robert Royal who was getting open and making catches. Now with teams realizing that Brunell can hit Moss deep, this opens more shallow routes for Cooley, Royal, Sellers, Thrash and our RBs. I already thought Cooley will have a big day vs the Seahawks because of the Hawks concerns of Portis and Moss. Just my :2cents: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bpoch Posted September 29, 2005 Share Posted September 29, 2005 From what I saw in the first two games is Gibbs has kept Cooley in to block more. Chicago and Dallas have very aggressive defenses so the Skins were trying to get the extra protection. Part of the reason Brunell didn't get him the ball much last year was the fact that Cooley wasn't playing as much earlier in the season as he was still learning the offense. I feel in the upcoming weeks we'll hear his name mentioned quite a bit more. I think you're right on. Cooley seemed to be in the backfield blocking the entire Dallas game. I know Gibbs loves Max protect, but it's a shame to waste Cooley's hands blocking when he should be catching 1st downs. If the passing game can get downfield, it should free up Cooley. He really needs to be included in the game plan. The kid just makes things happen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tulane Skins Fan Posted September 29, 2005 Share Posted September 29, 2005 It seems like every receiver's production gets worse with Brunell in there. Chill guys, i'm just joking around Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Underwater Ally Posted September 29, 2005 Share Posted September 29, 2005 I don't think this is really an issue. Cooley and Ramsey do have good chemistry, but I think he'll be one of the prime targets for Brunell, and is a player that can compliment Brunell's strengths. I'm much more concerned about Brunell being able to take advantage of our recievers and get them into the game. Patton was doing some good things with Ramsey, and has been invisible since Brunell came in. If the TDs to Moss were just a fluke and not something we will see regularly, then I am worried about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonard Washington Posted September 29, 2005 Share Posted September 29, 2005 i had a feeling all the good things gibbs was saying about designing the offense around him during the offseason was the kiss of death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry Posted September 29, 2005 Share Posted September 29, 2005 If Moss continues to gain 28 yards a catch I'm not going to worry too much about Cooley's production. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Goaldeje Posted September 29, 2005 Share Posted September 29, 2005 I think going in to this season teams were very conscious of Cooley's presence as he was basically our only target last year. They've been covering him pretty well, although he has had a couple nice plays and a touchdown that was called back. I think now teams will have to give a lot more attention to Moss which should open up some opportunities for Cooley. Brunell will find him, don't worry. Besides I'd rather have great chemistry between Brunell and Moss than Ramsey and Cooley....for obvious reasons (see:Dallas) Exactly. Look at the 2004 as the year of the TE. Teams have been gameplanning all summer for the TE position (or H-Back in our case); compound that with the fact that Cooley was clearly target numero uno last year, and Defenses have schemed to take him away. The pendulum will swing back in a couple of weeks. Moss will be double covered before too long, opening up both Patten and Cooley. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zguy28 Posted September 29, 2005 Share Posted September 29, 2005 I have been a little worried about Cooley myself. I just think Brunnell needs a few games with the starters to realize what weapons he has. He's got it with Moss, the rest will fall in his line of sight soon. Plus it doesn't help that the Dirtbags are letting him get sacked on pass plays or that he hasn't got a chance to setup play action really yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheDane Posted September 29, 2005 Share Posted September 29, 2005 According to NFL.com, against Chicago, Ramsey threw four times to Cooley (2 complete, 1 incomplete, 1 called back for penalty) while Brunell threw three times (1 incomplete, 2 complete). One of Brunell's completions happened to be the 23 yarder. Against Dallas, Brunell threw four times to Cooley (2 complete, 2 incomplete). Regardless, Cooley is on pace for 40 catches and 432 yards. Those would both be improvements over last year's production. But like Henry said, I don't give a damn if we're winning and Santana is tearing up the turf- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pennyizer Posted September 29, 2005 Share Posted September 29, 2005 I think you're right on. Cooley seemed to be in the backfield blocking the entire Dallas game.I know Gibbs loves Max protect, but it's a shame to waste Cooley's hands blocking when he should be catching 1st downs. If the passing game can get downfield, it should free up Cooley. He really needs to be included in the game plan. The kid just makes things happen. My fantasy draft pick of Cooley is not looking as smart as I thought it was so far. Cooley was almost exclusively blocking agains't Dallas. Royal seems to be getting the routes and Cooley is blocking?! I can only guess this is because Royal is a worthless pass blocker. Cooley should have had 2 touchdowns agains't Chicago though. The Taylor pass inter. and the bad pass from Brunell. It's ok though, my backup tightend score me 15 fantasy points last week. Just tough to cheer for him or start him because it's.....Jason Witten Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeB Posted September 29, 2005 Share Posted September 29, 2005 My fantasy draft pick of Cooley is not looking as smart as I thought it was so far. Cooley was almost exclusively blocking agains't Dallas. Royal seems to be getting the routes and Cooley is blocking?! I can only guess this is because Royal is a worthless pass blocker.Cooley should have had 2 touchdowns agains't Chicago though. The Taylor pass inter. and the bad pass from Brunell. It's ok though, my backup tightend score me 15 fantasy points last week. Just though to cheer for him or start him because it's.....Jason Witten Yeah... I thought I was smart picking him up too. I had to let him go already. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
incrediblemojo Posted September 29, 2005 Share Posted September 29, 2005 I believe Cooley has been limited by Gibb's decision to use him more in the Don Warren H-Back role as a blocker. Gibbs will unleash him at some point in the season running seam routes when they don't expect it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsNeverDie Posted September 30, 2005 Share Posted September 30, 2005 Brunell has the chemistry with Royal so far it would seem. I hope he and Cooley connect a lot more down the road. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoCalMike Posted September 30, 2005 Share Posted September 30, 2005 A big portion of Cooley's production was based on RED ZONE SITUATIONS. And the Skins haven't had many trips to the redzone this season thus far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moz Wanted Posted September 30, 2005 Share Posted September 30, 2005 brunell and gardner had a good chemistry Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lil Kenzo Posted September 30, 2005 Share Posted September 30, 2005 I agree with NoCalMike. Cooley is meant more for red zone situations and the skins really have not had those type of situations. He had them against Chicago where one touchdown was called back and the other ball was thrown short. In Dallas, I don't think he skins' were in the red zone at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RVAbrendan Posted September 30, 2005 Share Posted September 30, 2005 I have Cooley and Putzier as tight ends in my league. Total of five points combined. Cooley will get the ball though. Give it a little time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.