DGREENHULK Posted May 8, 2009 Share Posted May 8, 2009 Fred Davis should be the REDZONE weapon we are missing..how they going to cover both Cooley and Davis inside the 20? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
usapatriot Posted May 8, 2009 Share Posted May 8, 2009 Davis was just a wasted draft pick. He may be a star but not for the Skins. Cooley is still young and we just gave him a new contract. I don't know why we drafted him. It would take a whole lot to unseat the Pro-Bowler in Cooley. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conn Posted May 8, 2009 Share Posted May 8, 2009 Davis was just a wasted draft pick. He may be a star but not for the Skins. Cooley is still young and we just gave him a new contract. I don't know why we drafted him. It would take a whole lot to unseat the Pro-Bowler in Cooley. No one has to be unseated, its called having good depth at a position for ONCE, which our team has only ever heard about, and being able to utilize your personnel. For example, two TE sets, especially in the red zone, or lining him up in the slot....he's capable of a lot if he pans out. And that's looking good right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Going Commando Posted May 8, 2009 Share Posted May 8, 2009 I would bench ARE ... move Santana to the slot and use DThomas and FDavis as the X and Y receivers with Cooley playing H and RAgnone blocking. But what do I know? Do we even have a guy named Ragnone on our team? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shilsu Posted May 8, 2009 Share Posted May 8, 2009 I guess you don't remember the Patriots teams from 2002-2006 or the Cowboys with Fassano and Witten. I'm just curious, what was so special about the Patriots TE's from 2002-2006? 2002 - Christian Fauria - 253 Yds, 7 TD 2003 - Daniel Graham and Christian Fauria - 694 Yds, 6 TD 2004 - Daniel Graham and Christian Fauria - 559 Yds, 9 TD 2005 - Daniel Graham and Ben Watson - 676 Yds, 7 TD 2006 - Daniel Graham and Ben Watson - 878 Yds, 5 TD Meanwhile, Fasano didn't accomplish ANYTHING in a Cowboys uniform. Not sure how those two teams are examples of why Fred Davis was a good pick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shilsu Posted May 8, 2009 Share Posted May 8, 2009 No one has to be unseated, its called having good depth at a position for ONCE, which our team has only ever heard about, and being able to utilize your personnel. For example, two TE sets, especially in the red zone, or lining him up in the slot....he's capable of a lot if he pans out. And that's looking good right now. That's the problem right there... How much depth do we need at the TE and RB positions that we constantly spend picks there while neglecting the lines. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldskool Posted May 8, 2009 Share Posted May 8, 2009 I'm just curious, what was so special about the Patriots TE's from 2002-2006?2002 - Christian Fauria - 253 Yds, 7 TD 2003 - Daniel Graham and Christian Fauria - 694 Yds, 6 TD 2004 - Daniel Graham and Christian Fauria - 559 Yds, 9 TD 2005 - Daniel Graham and Ben Watson - 676 Yds, 7 TD 2006 - Daniel Graham and Ben Watson - 878 Yds, 5 TD Meanwhile, Fasano didn't accomplish ANYTHING in a Cowboys uniform. Not sure how those two teams are examples of why Fred Davis was a good pick. Fassano didn't do much as a Cowboy but he drew double teams when he and Witten were on the field together. As for the Patriots, they were running a spread/WCO hybrid under Weis during that time and were throwing the ball to all of their WR's, RB's and TE's. That's what the WCO does when it's running as it should; multiple receiving options touch the ball so that the defense cannot focus on a "#1 receiver". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shilsu Posted May 8, 2009 Share Posted May 8, 2009 Fassano didn't do much as a Cowboy but he drew double teams when he and Witten were on the field together.As for the Patriots, they were running a spread/WCO hybrid under Weis during that time and were throwing the ball to all of their WR's, RB's and TE's. That's what the WCO does when it's running as it should; multiple receiving options touch the ball so that the defense cannot focus on a "#1 receiver". Either way, they didn't make the huge impact that ttr77 (or myself) are expecting from a second round pick used on a TE despite the fact that we had glaring holes all over the team. Also, that's a lot of speculation about Fasano drawing double teams. That's like me claiming the reason Santana Moss got 1500 yards in 2005 was because Taylor Jacobs was drawing double teams. Don't you think it would make more logical sense that Fasano should have produced more because it was more likely Witten that was drawing double teams? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conn Posted May 8, 2009 Share Posted May 8, 2009 That's the problem right there... How much depth do we need at the TE and RB positions that we constantly spend picks there while neglecting the lines. Well, there you are getting into the BPA vs. Need debate, where I really haven't decided where I stand yet. I agree that we should have been addressing the lines, but if Davis was the highest rated player on their board, Vinny will take him every time, for good or worse. We'll just have to hope that he is effective in the redzone, and that the pick pays off somehow... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shilsu Posted May 8, 2009 Share Posted May 8, 2009 Well, there you are getting into the BPA vs. Need debate, where I really haven't decided where I stand yet. I agree that we should have been addressing the lines, but if Davis was the highest rated player on their board, Vinny will take him every time, for good or worse. We'll just have to hope that he is effective in the redzone, and that the pick pays off somehow... Personally I believe in expected return... It just seems improbable that Fred Davis, who is slated to be a backup for his entire rookie contract due to Chris Cooley's extension, would contribute more than some of the other players that were still on the board. Anything can happen, though. Maybe Chris Cooley will suddenly become a crybaby that wants to be traded and people will claim that Vinny Cerrato was a genius for drafting Fred Davis. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vicious Posted May 8, 2009 Share Posted May 8, 2009 If Fred Davis is effective it doesn't matter that we have Cooley. We will see plenty of both and less WR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conn Posted May 8, 2009 Share Posted May 8, 2009 Personally I believe in expected return... It just seems improbable that Fred Davis, who is slated to be a backup for his entire rookie contract due to Chris Cooley's extension, would contribute more than some of the other players that were still on the board.Anything can happen, though. Maybe Chris Cooley will suddenly become a crybaby that wants to be traded and people will claim that Vinny Cerrato was a genius for drafting Fred Davis. Or we'll get him on the field anyways, as athletic as he is he can play slot, and he can do the whole 2 TE sets that Zorn is high on, apparently. That would be very effective in the redzone, I think. We've got him, might as well find ways for him to contribute. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shilsu Posted May 8, 2009 Share Posted May 8, 2009 By the way, I have a signature bet going that Fred Davis will not surpass 300 yards and 3 TD. Anyone in here want to partake? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
James Moss Posted May 8, 2009 Share Posted May 8, 2009 Cooley produced in his first year and with Davis, I was very surprised that he did not. He should have a decent year or else something just ain't right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
flock53 Posted May 8, 2009 Share Posted May 8, 2009 I like your thoughts about this but we always heard how damn good Taylor Jacobs was in practice and we see how that worked out. Unless Cooley gets hurt (knocks on wood) I dont see him getting in the line up a ton over our pro bowl tight end. The potential seems to be there but year after year of expecting big things out of players I hear having great practices I just kind of have given up on expecting things before the season starts. I have started to take a wait and see approach these days after being burned year after year. If the coaches were smart, they would flex Cooley out and have Davis in near the line as the TE in some packages. Our best weapons in order are Cooley and Moss. W/ no real 3rd, Davis could be better then ARE, and w/ little to show from Thomas and Kelley, Davis COULD be the best 3rd option right now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Travdaskin Posted May 8, 2009 Share Posted May 8, 2009 By the way, I have a signature bet going that Fred Davis will not surpass 300 yards and 3 TD. Anyone in here want to partake? NO THANK YOU, I think he will get 200 and 2 TD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldskool Posted May 8, 2009 Share Posted May 8, 2009 Either way, they didn't make the huge impact that ttr77 (or myself) are expecting from a second round pick used on a TE despite the fact that we had glaring holes all over the team. What exactly is the criteria that has been set for production from a 2nd round selection anyhow? And what big impact do you expect from rookies? It seems you are expecting something that on the average does not take place until their 2nd year and beyond. As for taking Davis, this horse has been beaten to a pulp, but it follows the FO (and most fans desire) to take the BPA at the time of the pick, which Davis obviously was in the eyes of the FO. Also, that's a lot of speculation about Fasano drawing double teams. That's like me claiming the reason Santana Moss got 1500 yards in 2005 was because Taylor Jacobs was drawing double teams. Don't you think it would make more logical sense that Fasano should have produced more because it was more likely Witten that was drawing double teams? You are looking at this wrong. When Dallas had both Witten and Fasano on the field, it was either a distraction for one of them to get open or to take men out of the box in order to run the ball better. And it doesn't matter who was drawing what off of whom, when you have multiple receivers that can be TE's, it opens up your mid range passing attack as well as the running game. You may not like the fact that Davis was drafted by the Skins, but their is no denying that Zorn wanted him and has plans to work him in either in a 2 TE system or as a Split End. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tarantula Posted May 8, 2009 Share Posted May 8, 2009 Not really certain why someone would bring up Taylor Jacobs, he wasn't nearly as promising in college as Davis. Davis' ceiling is that of Gates, Jacobs' ceiling was where he is now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
turbodiesel#44 Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 I wonder if any OL available at the Davis pick are starting somewhere? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldskool Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 I wonder if any OL available at the Davis pick are starting somewhere? IIRC there wasnt a single O-lineman taken in the 2nd round last year. Sorry, 2 guards were taken, no tackles or centers. Rachal starts for the 9ers and I'm not sure about Pollak, but he's with Indy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shilsu Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 What exactly is the criteria that has been set for production from a 2nd round selection anyhow? And what big impact do you expect from rookies? It seems you are expecting something that on the average does not take place until their 2nd year and beyond.As for taking Davis, this horse has been beaten to a pulp, but it follows the FO (and most fans desire) to take the BPA at the time of the pick, which Davis obviously was in the eyes of the FO. The criteria is that he makes a bigger impact (or is expected to make a bigger impact) than the other players we chose to pass up. Common sense dictates that a backup TE for his entire rookie contract is not expected to make as much of an impact as a player at another position group that is expected to compete for starting time. You are looking at this wrong. When Dallas had both Witten and Fasano on the field, it was either a distraction for one of them to get open or to take men out of the box in order to run the ball better. And it doesn't matter who was drawing what off of whom, when you have multiple receivers that can be TE's, it opens up your mid range passing attack as well as the running game. What I'm saying is that Fasano had hardly anything to do with Witten's success, which is why Witten continues to succeed with or without Fasano. If you want to say it was TO who freed up Witten, that makes more sense, but to say that it's because of Fasano... A person who combines for hardly 300 receiving yards in his entire Cowboy career... Something doesn't make sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shilsu Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 IIRC there wasnt a single O-lineman taken in the 2nd round last year. Mike Pollak. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldskool Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 Mike Pollak. You forgot about Chilio Rachal as well. Ive edited my response as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oldskool Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 The criteria is that he makes a bigger impact (or is expected to make a bigger impact) than the other players we chose to pass up. Common sense dictates that a backup TE for his entire rookie contract is not expected to make as much of an impact as a player at another position group that is expected to compete for starting time. And again, I go back to the fact that like it or not, this FO picks the best player available both lengthwise and height-wise on their draft board and does not choose specifically due to needs. I personally do not agree with it, but Davis was the best player on their board. What I'm saying is that Fasano had hardly anything to do with Witten's success, which is why Witten continues to succeed with or without Fasano. If you want to say it was TO who freed up Witten, that makes more sense, but to say that it's because of Fasano... A person who combines for hardly 300 receiving yards in his entire Cowboy career... Something doesn't make sense. Im sure Owens coming aboard has had nothing to do with Witten's success either. Owens wasn't used as a short range dump off receiver when Fasano there and without Fasano last year, they abandoned much of their running game the 2nd half of the year as well. We will see this year when Witten is the only true mid range receiving threat on that team. I don't believe that you see the need for large bodied receivers in the WCO over the fact that you wanted the team to address the O-line. A O-line class that was bad last year in the 2nd round. At the time we weren't too worried about Guards, as both Thomas and Kendall were going to start no matter what. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Outlaw Torn Posted May 9, 2009 Share Posted May 9, 2009 I think davis could cause some major mismatches if placed in the slot with cooley on the line. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.