The Rookie Crush and Underdog thread

[superozman]

Davis for me.  He's speedy and tall.  PHYSICALLY SPEAKING ONLY, 6'2 3/4, 4.44 speed?  Julio was 6'3" 4.39.

 

If we can have the coaches work on his raw ability, and he plays with that chip on his shoulder that he seems to have after his criticisms, I'll take a "poor man's" Julio any day.

[beachboy757]

Rookie Crushes: Jon Allen and Perrine

Underdog crushes: Nico Marley and Fish Smithson (Small guys but very physical)

[Skinsinparadise]

4 hours ago, Riggo-toni said:

Not a rookie anymore, but I'm pulling for UDFA Lanier to win the starting job and get 8 or 9 sacks.

 

Yeah to me Lanier and potentially Phil Taylor are the key wild cards to having the defense make a big leap.  If both happen or heck if its even one of the two, it should go a long way. 

7 minutes ago, beachboy757 said:

Rookie Crushes: Jon Allen and Perrine

Underdog crushes: Nico Marley and Fish Smithson (Small guys but very physical)

 

Smithson might be the only pure free safety type on the roster if he makes it.  He should be an interesting watch.

[TSO]

3 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

I follow the point.  But as to Cooley he's just giving his take based on film review.  I just happened to notice that the guys he's especially toughest on -- he tends to be right about.  He killed Reyes after they signed him.   He killed Bruton after watching him in camp some.  He was tough on Fuller -- that one remains to be seen.  He was easier on for example Sprinkle a 5th rounder than he was on Nicholson.   He didn't kill Nicholson but he summed him up as a special teamer and not ready to start in the NFL. 

 

Do you notice the trend here, though?

 

Every single guy you mentioned him being "especially toughest" on were either mid to late round draft picks and/or cheap FA pickups. 

 

Well, duh, that's why they're available there in the draft or for cheap in FA. They have weaknesses and questions that are easily seen so that's why they get devalued.

 

He'd better be right most of the time when being "especially tough" on those type of guys, whether it's a few or all of them. It'd be extremely embarrassing if he had a bad track record when it comes to that, so I simply don't care to hear about how accurate he's been in that regard. I'm sorry, I know I sound completely dismissive of your point (which, believe me, I totally get and isn't necessarily wrong), but it's the way I've looked at it for a long time now. 

 

 I listened to his reviews myself this time around so I know what I'm hearing... like you said, both he and Sheehan admitted they came off as overly negative and he even switched up talking about the bad first and then ending with the good last to change that perception.

 

I'm personally not really interested, or impressed, when someone goes through those issues or tells me why they won't pan out. What's impressive to me is if they can find that gem. If they can see something in someone no one else, or very few, do and project it properly to the pros.

 

You can find enough flaws about the vast majority of prospects to make it sound like it's impossible for them to be successful in the pros. That's not to say you shouldn't acknowledge them or recognize said flaws, or that it's a totally useless endeavor... just that it's the easiest part of scouting. Criticizing is easy, and it's why every single draft has guys going in the late rounds or even undrafted whom, years later, people would draft in the first every single time were a re-draft to take place. 

 

Now, if you told me Cooley has a great track record when he's in LOVE with a guy no one else values highly (or just generally mid to low rounders, undrafted guys, and cheap FAs), then you've got me intrigued and I'd be all about wanting to know about this awesome "track record". Heck, I'd want the team to hire him as a scout or even GM! 

 

Who has he been in love with among those types in terms of tape, contrary to what most think, and how good has his track record been on that? Or, to be fair since you said "especially tough", who has he been "especially favorable" to among those types? 

 

That's what matters to me. Anything else will always generate a "meh" response from me.  

[Skinsinparadise]

4 minutes ago, thesubmittedone said:

 

Do you notice the trend here, though?

 

Every single guy you mentioned him being "especially toughest" on were either mid to late round draft picks and/or cheap FA pickups. 

 

Well, duh, that's why they're available there in the draft or for cheap in FA. They have weaknesses and questions that are easily seen so that's why they get devalued.

 

He'd better be right most of the time when being "especially tough" on those type of guys, whether it's a few or all of them. It'd be extremely embarrassing if he had a bad track record when it comes to that, so I simply don't care to hear about how accurate he's been in that regard. I'm sorry, I know I sound completely dismissive of your point, but it's the way I've looked at it for a long time now. 

 

 

I agree with the thought that low cost free agents and lower round picks are more likely to fail.  But Cooley doesn't fall completely on a linear line to that point.   

 

Lets go FA:   Zach Brown, Swearinger, McGee, McClain free agent contracts were all around the same 4-5 million range a year.  McGee actually got paid more than Swearinger.    Cooley thinks Swearinger is a stud (that he will play well above his pay grade).  Zach Brown borderline stud.  McClain to him is just OK.  And the way he talks about McGee, he seems to allude to him being a likely bust or a below average player.

 

Draft:  I have to go back and listen to his other film breakdowns again.  But my first impression on listening to them was he seems tougher on Nicholson, the 4th round pick versus the 5th-7th rounders. 

 

Moving to Pryor.  Before the Redskins signed him, he thought he was the top FA WR and better than A. Jeffrey.  Jeffrey is getting almost double the money Pryor is getting. 

 

My main point really was much simpler than all of this.  I've noticed Cooley can be wrong about his player assessments.  I recall for example he was a big Duke Ihenacho guy and he ended up wrong.  I've just noticed where he's been just about bulls eye correct is when he's been especially harsh on a player.  And for Nicholson to me, he came off harsher than the other guys.   But his description of him at the same time alluded to him being a stud special teams player because of his athleticism and that he's good at tackling when the play is in front of him.   Perhaps his description of him as a player reminded me too much of B. Rambo -- he more or less depicted him as a guy who is easily confused and doesn't see the field well.  So it didn't give me a warm and fuzzy feeling.  On the other hand, I heard Tony Pauline recently on 980 talk up Nicholson.  So I need to get to watching him myself soon and forming my own impression.  I'll get to it. 

 

 

[TSO]

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Lets go FA:   Zach Brown, Swearinger, McGee, McClain free agent contracts were all around the same 4-5 million range a year.  McGee actually got paid more than Swearinger.    Cooley thinks Swearinger is a stud (that he will play well above his pay grade).  Zach Brown borderline stud.  McClain to him is just OK.  And the way he talks about McGee, he seems to allude to him being a likely bust or a below average player.

 

Draft:  I have to go back and listen to his other film breakdowns again.  But my first impression on listening to them was he seems tougher on Nicholson, the 4th round pick versus the 5th-7th rounders. 

 

Moving to Pryor.  Before the Redskins signed him, he thought he was the top FA WR and better than A. Jeffrey.  Jeffrey is getting almost double the money Pryor is getting. 

 

I don't think I'm explaining well enough. I never said or implied it was linear. I even said: 

 

1 hour ago, thesubmittedone said:

He'd better be right most of the time when being "especially tough" on those type of guys, whether it's a few or all of them.

 

Just because he's tougher on one over the other and gets that right is still unimpressive to me. I'm not interested in hearing about that because it's not projecting anything of real value, unless he's talking the others up enough to where he's accurately stating how their skill sets will project successfully. 

 

It'd only be impressive if he singled out the ones whom he knew would translate their game successfully to the pros over the others. Listening to it myself, he hasn't done that. Gave pros/cons which echo what most have said already on a given player, and was tougher on some more than others. The only guy he truly loved was Allen. Wow, impressive.  

 

So look at your list. The draft you don't have much on, and that says a lot to me because you don't usually miss when it comes to the media. You've got excellent memory, but there wasn't a guy you could remember that he really loved and stood out to him in the later rounds. 

 

As for the FA list, that's extremely weak because both Swearinger and Brown had great years last season. They were also pretty much consensus top rated FA players, so I'm not sure I'd call them "cheap", though technically one can argue they are. I guess that's a fault with the way I worded my criteria, but when I say "cheap" I don't just mean "whom we got on a great deal", I mean guys who are unheralded or devalued within the league. Also, they play at positions that generally don't get paid big money in FA so it's relative in terms of "cheap". Can't just apply the 4-5 million number like that. 

 

I just never thought of Swearinger or Brown as "cheap" acquisitions, though we got them on great deals. Same goes for Pryor. 

 

McClain and McGee weren't top players last year like the above two were, so it's easy to give them C grades. That's what he's looking at. Essentially, he's not saying a single thing we don't know, lol. He's not projecting a single thing that's new or revelatory. 

 

Again, color me unimpressed with that list. 

 

Tell me who among those guys he loved that were unheralded or not consensus top players that ended up panning out for us? 

 

Like, did he call Kyshoen Jarrett? How about Rob Kelley? You mention Ihenacho and that proves my point... it's hard to project those types and who will end up truly successful among them, so unsurprisingly he got that one wrong. That's when I personally care about ones track record. That's when I'm intrigued. 

 

Outside of that, again, meh. Linear or not. Extra tough on or not. I'm sorry, brother, it just doesn't matter to me. 

 

This is coming across too much like I don't care for Cooley or enjoy his work. That's completely untrue, I do. I think he's the best Redskins radio personality there is right now. I apply the same thing with ES as I mentioned in the draft thread. Don't care about our "track record" when it comes to those types and whom we've been extra hard on. It's simply unimpressive and it doesn't take a talented "scouting eye" to get that right more often than not. 

[Riggo'sRangers]

33 minutes ago, thesubmittedone said:

 

I think he's the best Redskins radio personality there is right now.....

 

That is the catch, and you are absolutely correct; Cooley is a "Personality" now.  HTTR

[MusicCitySkin]

I have a lot of faith in Ryan Anderson, but I also want to comment that Sprinkle looks like a damned offensive lineman out there catching balls.

[Skinsinparadise]

2 hours ago, thesubmittedone said:

 

I don't think I'm explaining well enough. I never said or implied it was linear. I even said: 

 

 

Just because he's tougher on one over the other and gets that right is still unimpressive to me. I'm not interested in hearing about that because it's not projecting anything of real value, unless he's talking the others up enough to where he's accurately stating how their skill sets will project successfully. 

 

It'd only be impressive if he singled out the ones whom he knew would translate their game successfully to the pros over the others. Listening to it myself, he hasn't done that. Gave pros/cons which echo what most have said already on a given player, and was tougher on some more than others. The only guy he truly loved was Allen. Wow, impressive.  

 

So look at your list. The draft you don't have much on, and that says a lot to me because you don't usually miss when it comes to the media. You've got excellent memory, but there wasn't a guy you could remember that he really loved and stood out to him in the later rounds. 

 

As for the FA list, that's extremely weak because both Swearinger and Brown had great years last season. They were also pretty much consensus top rated FA players, so I'm not sure I'd call them "cheap", though technically one can argue they are. I guess that's a fault with the way I worded my criteria, but when I say "cheap" I don't just mean "whom we got on a great deal", I mean guys who are unheralded or devalued within the league. Also, they play at positions that generally don't get paid big money in FA so it's relative in terms of "cheap". Can't just apply the 4-5 million number like that. 

 

 

OK, I think I might be expanding the conversation too much and in process losing the forrest for the trees and thereby diluting my own argument.   My point was Cooley gets things wrong but I've yet to notice him get a guy he really had major doubts on wrong -- so I take him more seriously on that specific front.  That's all.  Whether Cooley's predictions are impressive or not as to these specifics -- isn't what I really cared to get into.  Maybe the predictions are easy.  And I slightly disagree with that especially when delving into specifics -- case in point he was on Reyes and Bruton having no business being starters before they became starters and the coaches started them anyway.   But still even if it was all easy, my point wasn't to extol Cooley's predictive powers but to state when he lands hard against a player, I can't recall him being wrong.  And I can recall this going back some including even killing RG3 before it became in vogue.   Now he can be wrong on this one.  My whole point was Cooley seemed a bit harsher on Nicholson I thought than some of the others.  

 

As for the rest of the discussion as to whether Cooley's predictive powers on this front are impressive. It gets a bit off track of my original point but I've engaged in the point so my fault.   And I get you like Cooley so its all about the examples at hand versus challenging him overall.   My overriding point is what I said in the paragraph above.  And that point holds for me regardless of whether Cooley's predictions are impressive versus obvious.   Some of your points on certain specifics I agree with and some I don't.  

 

 I disagree that Swearinger would be an obvious top rated FA at least in the context of how Cooley sees him.  Cooley sees him as a pure stud.  That wasn't the consensus on Swearinger.  If people saw him that way, he'd likely have been more hotly pursued and gotten bigger money like his safety teammate Tony Jefferson did in FA (who got more than double per season than what Swearinger did).    Swearinger has been released previously.  Some wondered if he was a one year wonder and purely the product of the Cards system -- where a great D line made him look good - some don't see him as a good cover guy.  Cooley thinks he's the full goods, he can cover, pure stud.  

 

As for the 2015 draft, I don't recall Cooley doing film study on the picks but I might have missed it.  As for the 2016 draft, he loved Cravens, Doctson -- and he thought Fuller was a bad pick.  And frankly I don't recall much else aside from Ioannidis grew on him.  He liked Kelley I recall last summer but don't recall when that started.  

 

I get you like Cooley and you aren't going after him but talking about playing the odds -- high picks = likely good players, low picks = likely not as good.  I agree with that overall point.  And this next point I am going to make isn't directed at you.  Part of the fun for me to listen to Cooley is he is willing to go against the grain.  Even though Keim and others made it clear leading up to the draft, that the Redskins really liked Charles Harris.  Cooley didn't like him and said he thought he belonged in the 2nd round.   When he didn't like the Fuller pick after the draft he had the guts to throw it right at Bruce Allen when he was interviewing him.  

 

Even on Ryan Anderson he goes against the grain some -- its not hard to tell he likes but far from loves him.  For example, he thinks his run stopping ability is overhyped -- he said on film offensive lineman can control him once they get their hands on him, he talks about how he can get steamrolled on plays, fast running backs run right by him -- and he thinks his ex teammate Tim Williams is the better player who the Ravens got later in the draft.   

 

As Cooley liked to joked with Sheehan -- film study that's how I lose friends!   But back to my original point -- Cooley is far from perfect but when I find him really globalize a player as being deficient in macro terms it gets my attention because more than anything else he does -- he's been uncanny accurate when he goes negative.   Having said that draft picks are works in progress -- naturally, more so than established players.  So even if he's on the money at a given time about a draft pick it doesn't mean it holds -- as mentioned he didn't love Ioannidis initially but he grew on him.

[Wyndorf25]

Count me firmly as a Perine guy. I love Fat Rob, but this guy reminds me of a mini-beastmode but with a humble, lovable team-first attitude. Due to the need at a true NT, I am truly hoping Pimkins can offer something. I think Sprinkle will be a fine replacement for Vernon when he either leaves/retires.

[zoony]

Allen and Anderson for me.  I think Allen is capable of making plays as a rookie, and I think Anderson plays a lot better than his measureables

[Califan007 The Constipated]

10 hours ago, Riggo-toni said:

Not a rookie anymore, but I'm pulling for UDFA Lanier to win the starting job and get 8 or 9 sacks.

 

8 "or" 9?....If given a choice I'd prefer he get 9 lol

[Koolblue13]

11 hours ago, CTskin said:

Aside from Allen, just about every other pick has a decent argument for/against their NFL potential.

I'm very confident in Morneau and Perine, so I guess Anderson is the one I'm most intrigued by.

 

Leader, heart of a lion, high motor, poor athleticism. You can be pretty studly at the collegiate level with those traits, but it doesn't always translate at the next level. I don't know if he has the ability to be a sack machine, but if he can set the edge like he did at Bama, I'll welcome that gladly. I'm not giving up on Trent and Preston yet, but mannnn I'd like one of these 2nd round DE/OLB draft picks to be a home run. 3rd time's a charm with Anderson?

Yeah man, exactly what I'm thinking. He has played Kerrigans position as long as he has. Not sure if he backs him up, or what. Seems like he could be the bully in the middle we've missed for forever. Probably the pick I'm most excited about, but I doubt he does jack **** this year. 

 

Hes not replacing Kerrigan and if Galette is healthy,  he's gonna own the other side. Murphy is much better than people give credit and if Smith improves, he's ahead of him too. He's basically in competition with Bates who is okay as the 5th OLB. 

 

Strange that the favorite pick of mine doesn't really have an impactful place.

7 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Yeah to me Lanier and potentially Phil Taylor are the key wild cards to having the defense make a big leap.  If both happen or heck if its even one of the two, it should go a long way. 

 

Smithson might be the only pure free safety type on the roster if he makes it.  He should be an interesting watch.

I wonder how many DL we'll carry onto the 53. Figure 2Mcs, Iaoniddis, Lanier, Hood, Allen are locks. So, do we take Phil and bet on his knees? Mbu too? 8/9?got me.

 

Fish I'm really hoping for.

[TSO]

4 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

OK, I think I might be expanding the conversation too much and in process losing the forrest for the trees and thereby diluting my own argument.   My point was Cooley gets things wrong but I've yet to notice him get a guy he really had major doubts on wrong -- so I take him more seriously on that specific front.  That's all.  Whether Cooley's predictions are impressive or not as to these specifics -- isn't what I really cared to get into.  Maybe the predictions are easy.  And I slightly disagree with that especially when delving into specifics -- case in point he was on Reyes and Bruton having no business being starters before they became starters and the coaches started them anyway.   But still even if it was all easy, my point wasn't to extol Cooley's predictive powers but to state when he lands hard against a player, I can't recall him being wrong.  And I can recall this going back some including even killing RG3 before it became in vogue.   Now he can be wrong on this one.  My whole point was Cooley seemed a bit harsher on Nicholson I thought than some of the others.  

 

I don't know, this is definitely getting away from us. I'll let you have the last word after this because we're just going in circles here. 

 

I'm going to try my best to keep this short and, believe me, it's hard because I want to address every point you made. 

 

It boils down to this.

 

I, unlike you, don't take it more seriously when Cooley is extra tough on someone. It simply doesn't mean anything to me because he seems to only do this with guys who are mid to low round picks, undrafted, or bottom tier FAs. If he picked other guys among those types instead of the ones he did, he'd still end up always right or close to it. 

 

And, man, I wish I said "bottom tier FAs" instead of "cheap FAs" at first because that's what I really meant. I absolutely DO NOT consider Swearinger nor Brown in that category. I don't think anyone does. 

 

Now, I asked for one thing that would impress me about Cooley and you have yet to provide it.

 

You have yet to give me a single example of Cooley hitting on a relatively unknown gem or telling us all why one of the aforementioned types is going to be a stud. Anything else and you're only making my points for me.

 

What mid to late rounder, undrafted guy, or bottom tier FA has he stood on the table for and called as likely to be a surprise stud? A diamond in the rough? And then had it pan out? 

 

I'd like to actually be impressed. So I'm waiting.  

 

I'd even be impressed, albeit not as much, if you told me about guys we paid a lot to or high draft picks that he labeled as likely busts beforehand. Like, did he say Paea or Culliver were bad signings that wouldn't work out?

 

For instance, I like the Ryan Anderson versus Tim Williams deal you mentioned more than anything else you've brought up. I only remember him saying, when talking about the negatives on Anderson, that Williams was faster off the snap. I don't remember him saying he liked Williams more than Anderson overall unless it was some other time besides the film breakdown. Are you sure about that? 

 

If you are, let's see if he's right about that. I'll say that's slightly more impressive even though he's far from the only one to think that and isn't really saying anything revelatory there, either. 

 

*edit* yes, I failed at "keeping it short" like usual... but I swear I deleted a ton of stuff, too. It could've been a lot worse.  

[Wyvern]

To TSO:  It's early on, but Cooley was quite positive about Austin Reiter, 7th rounder -- who later winds up with the Browns.

 

And Reiter just managed to crack into the Browns starting center role, when he got injured.  However, he did show  NFL-level talent in his performance, before he went out with that freakish ACL injury. 

 

I'll grant that Reiter doesn't have much of a full body of NFL work -- but Cooley was threw him a lot of praise while Austin was playing for the Skins in the 2016 preseason --gave him high grades too.  And Reiter actually made the Skins 53 shortly, before the Skins unwisely tried to stash him back on their  practice squad, to make room for yet more depth at the defensive backfield (as I recall).  He never made the Skins PS; Cleveland snatched him up.

[Dark Acre]

6 hours ago, MusicCitySkin said:

I have a lot of faith in Ryan Anderson, but I also want to comment that Sprinkle looks like a damned offensive lineman out there catching balls.

Soooo, are you saying he can't catch?

[TSO]

25 minutes ago, Wyvern said:

To TSO:  It's early on, but Cooley was quite positive about Austin Reiter, 7th rounder -- who later winds up with the Browns.

 

Well there's that. That's what I'm looking for and find more impressive than anything else.  

 

That being said, was he high on him immediately after the draft or only after seeing his play in the 2016 preseason? He was drafted in 2015... so that'd make it less impressive considering most of us saw the same thing at that point. 

[Wyvern]

Good catch TSO, I don't recall much said about Reiter in 2015.  I think Austin was still being coached up and bulked up for assignment.  His training camp was about being to be able to learn the Skins-O; likely he'd devdlop habits, muscle memory and also the perspective was what was suspected for the The Skins coaching ad he headed tothe Skins PS squad.  

 

So in 2015, Reiter was more of an after-thought.  At center, Skins already still had Lichtensteiger and LeRibeus. And they were still trying to figure out who of those two was going to replace Montgomery and also backup the LG role.  I suspect the Skins backs benched Reiter's reps with the Skins offensse as they worked what the starting Skins O-line  was going to look like.  I got the sense that they felt Reiter could wait a while before being nominated as the Starting C 

[TSO]

11 minutes ago, Wyvern said:

I suspect Reiter's reply to the Skins outreach have been back-benched as they worked what the Skins O-line  was going to look like, as well has handling the EMS issue.

 

I have no idea what this last part of your post means but based on the rest of your post I think I totally agree.  

[Wyvern]

Sometimes it takes a little time to fix all the edits of what the auto-spell check does to my posts.  ... And it's late too!

[DC Lumber Co.]

Mid round guy I'm pulling for is Montae Nicholson. Easily the most hated-on pick in our draft class. Just about everyone called it a reach save for one analyst I found that went against the grain with a 3rd round grade and a  scouting report that sounded a lot different from everyone elses. Biggest thing I think people are overlooking with him is just how RARE his height/weight/speed is at the position. Dude is a freak in that regard, and I'm rooting for the kid to prove everyone wrong. If he puts it all together, I could see him being a faster Dashon Goldson (I'm sure no one expected him to pan out as a 6th rounder for the 49ers either.)

 

Late round guy on offense for me is Robert Davis. Similar to Nicholson, he is raw with elite measurables and I could see him being a steal after a couple years of development.

 

Late round defensive mancrush goes to Josh Holsey. I think he surprises and competes for the slot corner job early. Love the reports of his competitiveness and swagger on the field. Main concern with him are his knees holding up.

 

UDFA mancrush is big boy Ondre Pipkins and the Cinderella story has to go to Nico Marley. I'd love to see Nico force a roster spot as a special teams demon.

 

BUT, the guys I'm pulling for most of all are 3 holdovers that stand to make a bigger impact than any of the rookies listed above. Junior Galette and Phil Taylor bouncing back to pre-injury form and Anthony Lanier proving the hype is real.

 

How amazing would it be if the free agent DL end up being backup/rotation players only? McGee and McClain backing up Lanier and Allen sounds incredible. Add in Phil Taylor at NT while grooming Pipkins on the PS is the dream scenario I hope plays out.

 

So excited to watch it all unfold in training camp and preseason. 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

7 hours ago, thesubmittedone said:

 

You have yet to give me a single example of Cooley hitting on a relatively unknown gem or telling us all why one of the aforementioned types is going to be a stud. Anything else and you're only making my points for me.

 

What mid to late rounder, undrafted guy, or bottom tier FA has he stood on the table for and called as likely to be a surprise stud? A diamond in the rough? And then had it pan out? 

 

I'd like to actually be impressed. So I'm waiting.  

 

I'd even be impressed, albeit not as much, if you told me about guys we paid a lot to or high draft picks that he labeled as likely busts beforehand. Like, did he say Paea or Culliver were bad signings that wouldn't work out?

 

For instance, I like the Ryan Anderson versus Tim Williams deal you mentioned more than anything else you've brought up. I only remember him saying, when talking about the negatives on Anderson, that Williams was faster off the snap. I don't remember him saying he liked Williams more than Anderson overall unless it was some other time besides the film breakdown. Are you sure about that? 

 

If you are, let's see if he's right about that. I'll say that's slightly more impressive even though he's far from the only one to think that and isn't really saying anything revelatory there, either. 

 

*edit* yes, I failed at "keeping it short" like usual... but I swear I deleted a ton of stuff, too. It could've been a lot worse.  

 

OK my response here is centered about Cooley's predictions not being the most obvious -- again with the caveat that its not my main point. Obvious or not obvious, I take his macro hits on players seriously as I explained. 

 

I feel like I am Cooley's salesman.  And let me couch this all by saying you got me if Cooley is right.  And on some of this stuff, I personally don't agree with him.  But he can indeed go against the grain and on occasion tout lessor pedigree players.  As for Tim Williams versus Anderson he didn't delve that much into it on the Anderson review -- it was in separate segments.  He is clear as day as for thinking Williams is the better player.  He actually thinks Williams is the most explosive edge rusher in the draft.  And he doesn't find Anderson really explosive.  He thinks Williams is actually good against the run unlike what some of the critics say.  In another segment, Sheehan goes be interesting to see if the Redskins regret passing on Williams.  Before the draft Cooley was clamoring for Williams and when they didn't take him and took his teammate Anderson instead he alluded to it had to be character not play. 

 

With Cooley its not easy to get him enthusiastic.  My two probably big man crushes on players from this draft -- Anderson and Perine -- Cooley likes both guys but listening to his film reviews he doesn't share that same level of enthusiasm about them.  Perine he compares to Robert Kelley.  His description of him gives me the impression that he thinks he's a decent player but nothing special.    Jay Gruden goes on enthusiastically about how he wanted two D lineman for depth so sounded enthusiastic about both the signing of McGee and McClain.  And Cooley is meh about both of them. And thinks Baker is better than either of them.  The Redskins among others in the draft apparently loved Charles Harris, Cooley thinks the dude is "meh".  Some think Malik McDowell was the most talented D lineman in the draft -- Cooley was mostly unimpressed with him.   Charley Casserly raved about McKinley in the draft as one of the top pass rushers, Cooley didn't think so.  

 

And its part of the reason why Cooley gushing gets my attention because he doesn't gush much.  So when Cooley goes on and on about a guy like DJ Swearinger it catches my attention -- especially when he touts his coverage ability (whereas most see him as more of a run-stopping type).  I've noticed it takes a lot to get Cooley going.  And Swearinger wasn't an A tier Eric Berry type in FA or like his teammate Tony Jefferson -- it didn't fall in the category of me for who doesn't think Swearinger is a stud.  I saw him as B tier type as for his rep.  And that would fit the money he ultimately got paid.  And I get your point that its still not that big of a leap since Swearinger isn't a no name.  My point here isn't in response to that but centered on when Cooley is that enthusiastic its attention grabbing for me.

 

As for against the grain stuff with current players.  Cooley was a big Austin Reiter guy in last year's camp.  He thought he was the best pure center on the roster and advised on air that they shouldn't put him on the practice squad because he would be plucked away.  They did and it happened.  The Browns made him their starter but then he got injured so we didn't see how the movie ended, yet.  Currently, he likes Ioannidis as a solution at nose.  That's going somewhat outside the box -- considering he's a bit undersized and didn't really play the position much if at all from what I recall in college.  I think he's wrong, though.  But will see. 

 

He was relatively enthusiastic early about Kirk.  He thinks Trent Murphy is a better pass rusher than Kerrigan.  That reminds me he did like Murphy when they drafted him.  Not sure if he's right or wrong on that one in retrospect. He was big on Moses being an elite RT early on before anyone was talking about it. He touted Ty Nsekhe early on.  As for liking players who aren't high pedigree types -- he liked RJF and likes Blackmon.  Jay Gruden talked up the previous off season D. Hall might becoming one of the better free safeties in the league -- Cooley didn't think he was a good free safety (after watching camp) then or seems to think that going forward.   He challenges PFF ratings a lot.  

 

I get your point was more about does he tout diamonds in the rough and my answer to that is on occasion but not often -- but running with a different thought in that same family -- he definitely is willing to go against the grain.

 

 

[Audible_Red40]

I'm all about the Fish.  I'm in this guys corner for sure!

[Alexa]

I'm going with Davis and Holsey. I think both make the team.

[skinny21]

10 hours ago, Koolblue13 said:

Yeah man, exactly what I'm thinking. He has played Kerrigans position as long as he has. Not sure if he backs him up, or what. Seems like he could be the bully in the middle we've missed for forever. Probably the pick I'm most excited about, but I doubt he does jack **** this year. 

 

Hes not replacing Kerrigan and if Galette is healthy,  he's gonna own the other side. Murphy is much better than people give credit and if Smith improves, he's ahead of him too. He's basically in competition with Bates who is okay as the 5th OLB. 

 

Strange that the favorite pick of mine doesn't really have an impactful place.

I wonder how many DL we'll carry onto the 53. Figure 2Mcs, Iaoniddis, Lanier, Hood, Allen are locks. So, do we take Phil and bet on his knees? Mbu too? 8/9?got me.

 

Fish I'm really hoping for.

If I remember correctly, they rotated Kerrigan out at times.  

 

They carried 6 dline last year.  I could certainly see keeping a 7th, but beyond that...

I have Allen, McClain and Lanier as the locks, McGee as very likely to retain, and Hood/Ioannidas as 'they're probably safe".  Hopefully we carry one of the true NTs, though I doubt we'd carry a backup as Hood/McGee/Ioannidas could fill that role and likely beat out other candidates.  

 

I think my ideal would be that Taylor and one of the other NTs look so good that they cut Hood (or McGee if he isn't working out). If the backup nose can be a part of the DT rotation in our nickel package, then even better.