Signed by Cowboys Cooper agreed to terms

[Stash]

The Browns as an organization doesn't seem to know what is doing over half the time. Hard to get a full evaluation of individual players because of their problems as a whole.

I don't think it is a wasted signing. He may not "figure" it out and become all world while in Dallas, but he is a low risk signing anyway. Most guys signed to the bottom of the roster are in the same boat at this time of year.

For Cooper, a chance to resurrect a disappointing career to this point. Playing among the best offensive line in the league. If he can't 'get it' playing with these guys, he never will.

For the Cowboys, a no-risk, minimal cost look at a player they really liked in the 2013 draft. The #7 overall pick, and a player whose abilities shown in college should fit perfectly in the Cowboys' blocking scheme. And a roster spot (Leary) that in all likelihood will be opening up soon.

Low-risk, high reward.

 

[Stash]

No.

Everyone has nerves.

Some people have a lot of nerve!

 

[_sturt_]

From the Dog Pound Daily blogger site (linked above), fwiw:

...Nonetheless, when Bailey was suspended for a DUI, Cooper got his chance to play. His time on the field was not spectacular in any way. He was not terrible. He was got great. He was a run-of-the-mill player. For the Browns, this means he was the best possible scenario for an offensive line that was falling apart, struggling in the run and failing to protect the passer. At a minimum, Cooper showed he was a viable backup option in the NFL...​

Then there's also this from another blogger site (http://www.dawgsbynature.com/2016/12/27/14096302/browns-decide-to-waive-og-jonathan-cooper):

...Cooper started the past three games at right guard. During his first week at the position, Pro Football Focus graded him as the top guard in the NFL. Over his past two starts, his positive moments as a run blocker continued, but he had some issues in pass protection...​

I'm sure someone else in this thread has already noted, it's hard to imagine that the practice squad guy we just released was a better option than Cooper.

 

[Stash]

From the Dog Pound Daily blogger site (linked above), fwiw:

...Nonetheless, when Bailey was suspended for a DUI, Cooper got his chance to play. His time on the field was not spectacular in any way. He was not terrible. He was got great. He was a run-of-the-mill player. For the Browns, this means he was the best possible scenario for an offensive line that was falling apart, struggling in the run and failing to protect the passer. At a minimum, Cooper showed he was a viable backup option in the NFL...​

Then there's also this from another blogger site (http://www.dawgsbynature.com/2016/12/27/14096302/browns-decide-to-waive-og-jonathan-cooper):

...Cooper started the past three games at right guard. During his first week at the position, Pro Football Focus graded him as the top guard in the NFL. Over his past two starts, his positive moments as a run blocker continued, but he had some issues in pass protection...​

I'm sure someone else in this thread has already noted, it's hard to imagine that the practice squad guy we just released was a better option than Cooper.

Amazing to me that opinions vary to such a degree. Pro Football Focus had him rated as the top guard in the league for week 14, and yet the Browns blogger said he was "run of the mill"?

It seems obvious that somebody is really wrong.

 

[_sturt_]

Dunno.... I can understand that a given player can have a really good day (and/or his opposition having a no-good-very-bad day), but otherwise be run of the mill.

 

[Stash]

Dunno.... I can understand that a given player can have a really good day (and/or his opposition having a no-good-very-bad day), but otherwise be run of the mill.

I don't see it out of 3 starts in Cleveland. If you're the 'best in the league' 1 out of the 3 opportunities you get, that's far from "run of the mill". I question the blogger's assessment more than I do the player.

 

[Beast_from_East]

So its a playoff rental contract............not a bad move, we get a couple of weeks to kick the tires, see him in the film room, see him on the practice field, ect...

He will be an UFA in march and if he leaves, then we are in line for a comp pick. So this is a win-win in my opinion, we either resign him and continue to bolster the oline or we let him walk if he sucks and we get a draft pick in return.

Really don't see any downside to this move.

 

[thisiscowboyscountry]

What happened to him to be drafted 7th overall in 2013 and already be on the street seems like a crazy fall for someone this talented injuries or not.

 

[Beast_from_East]

What happened to him to be drafted 7th overall in 2013 and already be on the street seems like a crazy fall for someone this talented injuries or not.

Mostly injuries...............he broke his leg his rookie year and never really made an impact in Arizona so he was traded to the Pats where he then injured his ankle if I remember correctly and the Pats just cut him since he couldn't play. The Browns then claimed him off waivers and he looked pretty decent for them, so no idea why they just released him.

Anyways, it seems the problem is he keeps getting injured and can never stay on the field. So we signed him to a playoff contract to basically get a free look at the guy and if he leaves in free agency in march, we should get a comp pick.

 

[thisiscowboyscountry]

Why does Leary have to leave? Why does everybody just accept that? He's a pro bowl caliber starter in his 20's. Why are we letting this guy just walk? I don't understand it.

Its just too much money to spend on the oline. He could very well get 8 to 10 million a year. You cant spend 40 million a year on the oline. Would you rather Leary over Martin?

 

[haleyrules]

It would be awesome if this guy somehow recovers to his previous form and solidifies our line. The rest of the league would hate us.

lol. The rest of the league already hates us!!

 

[_sturt_]

I don't see it out of 3 starts in Cleveland. If you're the 'best in the league' 1 out of the 3 opportunities you get, that's far from "run of the mill". I question the blogger's assessment more than I do the player.

I might question the blogger's assessment if we weren't talking about a player who a 1-win team just decided was even less than run of the mill, ie, not even worth keeping... now c'mon. I like the signing, but let's have some sober thinking here plz. The Cowboys are now his 4th team in 4 seasons. Nice that he has one game to point to, b/c clearly there hasn't been a lot of other positives to point to.

 

[Stash]

I might question the blogger's assessment if we weren't talking about a player who a 1-win team just decided was even less than run of the mill, ie, not even worth keeping... now c'mon.

And what was the last smart personnel decision that the same "1-win team" has made? That's my point. Getting released by the incompetent Browns in no way hurts my own opinion of the player. I have no respect for that organization or anyone currently involved with it. They released Taylor Gabriel a few months back too, only to see him excel for Matt Ryan and the Falcons.

I like the signing, but let's have some sober thinking here plz. The Cowboys are now his 4th team in 4 seasons. Nice that he has one game to point to, b/c clearly there hasn't been a lot of other positives to point to.

No, there haven't. But if he was capable of putting a performance like that together, in only his first start there, I have some hopes that he still cares about playing and still has the skills to do it. That's all I'm saying.

 

[_sturt_]

I have some hopes that he still cares about playing and still has the skills to do it. That's all I'm saying.

Well, no, truth be known, based on what's been written, that's actually all I'm saying. I like the signing. There's reason for optimism. But not the degree of optimism you seem to be conveying. Again, one game is one game, and based on the rest of the evidence, there's reason to suspect that one game was a one-off.... the guy on the other side that he routinely was taking on may have been sick or injured or his wife might've left him the week before, for all you/we know.

 

[snapper]

From the Dog Pound Daily blogger site (linked above), fwiw:

...Nonetheless, when Bailey was suspended for a DUI, Cooper got his chance to play. His time on the field was not spectacular in any way. He was not terrible. He was got great. He was a run-of-the-mill player. For the Browns, this means he was the best possible scenario for an offensive line that was falling apart, struggling in the run and failing to protect the passer. At a minimum, Cooper showed he was a viable backup option in the NFL...​

Then there's also this from another blogger site (http://www.dawgsbynature.com/2016/12/27/14096302/browns-decide-to-waive-og-jonathan-cooper):

...Cooper started the past three games at right guard. During his first week at the position, Pro Football Focus graded him as the top guard in the NFL. Over his past two starts, his positive moments as a run blocker continued, but he had some issues in pass protection...​

I'm sure someone else in this thread has already noted, it's hard to imagine that the practice squad guy we just released was a better option than Cooper.

I'm sure he has a higher upside than Seymour; he may have looked like Richard but might have played like Jane.

 

[Stash]

Well, no, truth be known, based on what's been written, that's actually all I'm saying. I like the signing. There's reason for optimism. But not the degree of optimism you seem to be conveying.

Seriously? Do you really want to be that guy? The one ignorant enough to tell everyone what they think is the proper amount of optimism to have? Or how they're allowed to feel or be concerned about something? I really don't think you do. Nobody likes that guy.

Again, one game is one game, and based on the rest of the evidence, there's reason to suspect that one game was a one-off.... the guy on the other side that he routinely was taking on may have been sick or injured or his wife might've left him the week before, for all you/we know.

Or maybe he actually just played well? Maybe he's not a complete and total bust? Maybe the Cowboys have something here? Maybe Cleveland made yet another mistake? Each of those is every bit as realistic - if not more so - than the reasons you're trying to give to tear down a quality performance.

At one point in time, this guy had the skills and on-field ability to be considered the best guard in college football and a consensus 1st round draft pick. At age 26, those skills haven't declined yet.

Will he put it together? Who knows. But he looked amazing in college, has been a starter in Arizona. Was in the starting lineup in New England prior to injury, and started games in Cleveland. Given his Pro career trajectory, there's cause for concern, and given his college career and recent flashes, there's also reason for optimism.

 

[Dorsett33]

I think he's just talking about right now as far as the foot goes, not long term.

Possibly, but an OLineman having foot problems sometimes can be long term. Let's hope not. But, if healthy, I agree that Right Tackle could be a good fit with an allstar OLine at every position.

 

[Nightman]

Its just too much money to spend on the oline. He could very well get 8 to 10 million a year. You cant spend 40 million a year on the oline. Would you rather Leary over Martin?

I would rather pay Leary than Free........Leary may take less to stay especially since his knee situation is explosive......if DAL can get him for 5m a year for 3 years they have the room

That may mean they have to use Collins at RT or trade him to someone for a RT..... I also think CGreen can handle the job with a guy like Cleary as backup......if Cooper works out thats even better

 

[Risen Star]

 

[_sturt_]

Seriously? Do you really want to be that guy? The one ignorant enough to tell everyone what they think is the proper amount of optimism to have? Or how they're allowed to feel or be concerned about something? I really don't think you do. Nobody likes that guy.

Pardon me, but you used "that guy," and I think you must have meant "one of those guys."

And I don't apologize for telling "everyone what I think" is the "proper amount of optimism"... key word being think. That's different from "everyone what definitively is." by the way. Right? There's an important difference. You, me, everyone can say what we think, and that should be alright... right?

Then, you step over the line in making the accusation that I indicated what you should be "allowed" to feel. You can't find that in anything I said because it's just not there. I have boundaries in how I interact with posters on internet boards, and that's one of them. I may state my opinion in a strong way using as much substance as I can find to support my point... but that (again) is different than asserting myself as god of the board that others must bow down to... as-if.

Just want to be clear on those things. Hope we're all good going forward. You aren't ignorant, and neither am I, at least where our reasoning concerns this discussion.