Even 'Skins are hopeful in pre-season...

[silverbear]

why I say Witten is going to go wild is because our new OC Jason Garrett is implementing alot of plays that has the TEs attack the deep middle of the field, it's making our backup TE Anthony Fasano look really good this preseason, just imagine what it will do to Witten

Even Tony Curtis, a scrub if there ever was one, has had a big preseason at TE for the Boys, catching 5 passes for 74 yards thus far...

In their first two preseason games, the Boys have completed 11 passes to their TEs, for 133 yards... that would project to 88 catches, for 1060 yards plus, for a 16 game season... that's with Jason Witten on the bench, most of that time (he had 1 of those 11 receptions)...

Yup, Jason Garrett is making the TE a centerpiece of his offensive philosophy... this should lead to Jason putting up some pretty good numbers (barring injury, of course)...

For contrast, the Skins have also completed 11 passes to their TEs this preseason, for 157 yards... that's with Cooley catching 5 of those passes...

Like I said, to me the real advantage for the Boys at TE lies in their superior quality among the backups... the Boys would not be screwed as badly by losing Witten as the Skins would be by losing Cooley, Fasano could step into the lead role at TE and give the team 50-60 catches...

 

[silverbear]

Homerism? Surely you jest! You only need to ask so-and-so Cowboy fan or visit the Skins' board and search under the so-and-so handle. Then, you'll see quite plainly that skinsfunguy exudes objectivity. It's his hallmark.

[/sarcasm]


Sorry. I figured I would post this canned response before he got the chance. If I had to read that line again, I think I would scream.
:laugh2:

Skinsfunguy isn't as bad as most Skins homers, particularly those that haunt the ES board, but he still has his moments...

 

[skinsfunguy]

Close, but no cigar... first off, while I give Cooley the edge as a blocker, it's only a small edge (Witten's blocking is rather underrated)... and Witten is the superior receiver:

Cooley, the last 3 seasons: 165 receptions, 1822 yards...

Witten, the last 3 seasons: 217 receptions, 2491 yards...

This despite the Cowboys having a wider array of weapons in the passing game than the Skins have had during that time, IOW more players getting their share of the catches than the Skins have had...

Now, I'm not saying Cooley isn't a good weapon in the passing game, he is... but he's not on the level of Witten as a receiver, not yet anyway...

But the real tipping point at TE, IMO, lies in the Cowboys' superior depth... Anthony Fasano is better than any TE not named Cooley on the Skins' roster, and he has raised the level of his play this preseason, compared to last season... combine this with the renewed emphasis on the TE that we've seen in Jason Garrett's offensive schemes this preseason, and I feel confident that our TEs are gonna have their best season in quite a while...

Come on silverbear are you really using the last three seasons? Three seasons ago was Wittens best year and Cooleys ROOKIE year.

 

[skinsfunguy]

LOL... way to play fast and loose with the stats... how 'bout you compare the last THREE seasons?? I mean, I completely understand why you left out the 04 stats, Cooley had 37 catches for 314 yards, Witten had 50 more catches and over three times as many yards (87 for 980)... both played in all 16 games that year, so why did you leave those numbers out??

As for the 6 more TDs, that's easy to explain-- the Cowboys have more weapons to go to down in the red zone than the Skins do... first, they had Keyshawn Johnson and his fade routes, then they had TO and his size...

Barber had 16 TDs last season, all of them in the red zone; TO had 13 TDs, many of them in the red zone... meanwhile, Cooley's 6 TDs led the Skins...

I left it out because it was his rookie year. Wittens rookie year was very comparable to Cooleys, just like their entire careers so far.

Cooleys Rookie Year: 37 receptions, 314 yards, 6 touchdowns

Wittens Rookie Year: 35 receptions, 347 yards, 1 touchdown.

In fact the only REAL difference I see between the two is Cooleys edge in blocking and touchdowns hence why i gave him the SLIGHT advantage.

Chris Cooley in THREE years...19 touchdowns

Jason Witten in FOUR years...14 touchdowns

 

[skinsfunguy]

Even Tony Curtis, a scrub if there ever was one, has had a big preseason at TE for the Boys, catching 5 passes for 74 yards thus far...

In their first two preseason games, the Boys have completed 11 passes to their TEs, for 133 yards... that would project to 88 catches, for 1060 yards plus, for a 16 game season... that's with Jason Witten on the bench, most of that time (he had 1 of those 11 receptions)...

Yup, Jason Garrett is making the TE a centerpiece of his offensive philosophy... this should lead to Jason putting up some pretty good numbers (barring injury, of course)...

For contrast, the Skins have also completed 11 passes to their TEs this preseason, for 157 yards... that's with Cooley catching 5 of those passes...

Like I said, to me the real advantage for the Boys at TE lies in their superior quality among the backups... the Boys would not be screwed as badly by losing Witten as the Skins would be by losing Cooley, Fasano could step into the lead role at TE and give the team 50-60 catches...

I'll give you that, if Cooley goes down we are in a world of trouble as there is noone on our roster that has even half the talent Cooley does.

 

[silverbear]

Come on silverbear are you really using the last three seasons? Three seasons ago was Wittens best year and Cooleys ROOKIE year.

So, in order to make your comparison, you want to conveniently leave out Witten's best year??

That alone proves you have to "cook the books" to make your case that Cooley is as good a receiver as Witten is...

Both players played all 16 games in 2004, why wouldn't you count that year??

 

[skinsfunguy]

So, in order to make your comparison, you want to conveniently leave out Witten's best year??

That alone proves you have to "cook the books" to make your case that Cooley is as good a receiver as Witten is...

Both players played all 16 games in 2004, why wouldn't you count that year??

How is that cooking the books? Ive showed you how comparable their rookie years are. Cooley was a rookie third round pick coming to a new team with a new coach.

Cooley started 9 games to Wittens 15(Witten started 7 in his rookie year)

You can't fault Cooley for being in the league one less year then Witten. Like I said, at this point their careers are very similar and the only reason I give Cooley a slight edge is because of blocking and td's.

 

[silverbear]

Chris Cooley in THREE years...19 touchdowns

Jason Witten in FOUR years...14 touchdowns

That argument has already been rebutted, do find another that might actually work for you... Cooley doesn't have near the other players getting the ball down in the red zone that Witten has, so of course he's gonna have more opportunities to score...

Barber had 16 TDs, Owens had 13 TDs... for the Skins, only Clinton Portis had more TDs than Cooley's 6, he had 7... this obviously cuts way into Jason's scoring opportunities, when compared to Chris' opportunities...

 

[silverbear]

I'll give you that, if Cooley goes down we are in a world of trouble as there is noone on our roster that has even half the talent Cooley does.

And for my part, I'll give you credit for being one of the more semi-realistic Skins fans I've argued with... you have your blind spots, but you're not ES delusional...

 

[skinsfunguy]

And for my part, I'll give you credit for being one of the more semi-realistic Skins fans I've argued with... you have your blind spots, but you're not ES delusional...

Thank you Silverbear that means alot coming from you Dont think for one second though that I dont thin YOU also have your blind spots, but hey we are fans of each others bitter rivals so thats to be expected right?

As far as cooking the books I still feel as though I was not wrong in leaving out Cooleys rookie year. Yes, that was Wittens best year but I saw no other way to make a solid comparison with the samples given. If you can come up with a better way then im all ears.

 

[silverbear]

How is that cooking the books? Ive showed you how comparable their rookie years are. Cooley was a rookie third round pick coming to a new team with a new coach.

So basically, you want to ignore Witten's best season and Cooley's worst, just because Jason came into the league a year earlier...

Yeah, that's cooking the books... that's manipulating the stats, grading Cooley on a curve, however you want to look at it...

Cooley started 9 games to Wittens 15(Witten started 7 in his rookie year)

And both played all 16 games... that's your bottom line, right there...

But hey, it occurs to me that I can find a middle ground, that even you'll have to agree is reasonable-- let's look at the average number of catches per game for both players over their careers to date:

Cooley has 165 catches in 48 games for the Skins, an average of 3.44 per game...

Witten has 252 catches in 63 games for the Boys, an average of 4.0 per game...

Jason also has the higher yards per catch average for his career, 11.3 to Chris' 11.0...

Back to you...

 

[silverbear]

Cooley started 9 games to Wittens 15(Witten started 7 in his rookie year)

You don't reckon that might be because Jason broke his freakin' jaw his rookie year, do you?? And he still didn't miss a game, he got his jaw wired and went back out on the field...

Let's see Cooley play football with his jaw wired shut some time...

 

[silverbear]

Thank you Silverbear that means alot coming from you Dont think for one second though that I dont thin YOU also have your blind spots, but hey we are fans of each others bitter rivals so thats to be expected right?

As far as cooking the books I still feel as though I was not wrong in leaving out Cooleys rookie year. Yes, that was Wittens best year but I saw no other way to make a solid comparison with the samples given. If you can come up with a better way then im all ears.

Just did... but I'm headed for bed real quick, if you respond I might not get back to your for some hours... I kinda shorted myself on sleep yesterday, arguing with you godless heathens, errrr, Skins fans...

 

[skinsfunguy]

So basically, you want to ignore Witten's best season and Cooley's worst, just because Jason came into the league a year earlier...

Yeah, that's cooking the books... that's manipulating the stats, grading Cooley on a curve, however you want to look at it...



And both played all 16 games... that's your bottom line, right there...

But hey, it occurs to me that I can find a middle ground, that even you'll have to agree is reasonable-- let's look at the average number of catches per game for both players over their careers to date:

Cooley has 165 catches in 48 games for the Skins, an average of 3.44 per game...

Witten has 252 catches in 63 games for the Boys, an average of 4.0 per game...

Jason also has the higher yards per catch average for his career, 11.3 to Chris' 11.0...

Back to you...

That is reasonable and looking at those stats, they are VERY comparable. So Witten averages a little more then half a catch more per game and less then half a yard per catch. I don't see much of a difference.

As I have stated the difference I do see in the two players is blocking and touchdowns(you do have a point about redzone threats, especially the fact that you have had big WR targets) None the less it can't completely be ignored that Cooley has 6 more TD's in 15 less games.

This argument could go on forever. I don't think fans of either team can be called a homer for arguing that their man is better when it comes to these two guys. I say we go with Bob Sacamento and call this one a push.

 

[silverbear]

That is reasonable and looking at those stats, they are VERY comparable. So Witten averages a little more then half a catch more per game and less then half a yard per catch. I don't see much of a difference.

That works out to 9 more catches for each 16 games played, and right at 110 more yards... that's not a HUGE difference, but it is a fairly significant one... especially when, as I've said all along, the Cowboys have more legitimate weapons in their passing games than the Skins do, more players demanding their share of opportunities...

Once again, I give you props for acknowledging when your adversary raises a legitimate point... that makes you more fun to argue with...

 

[skinsfunguy]

That works out to 9 more catches for each 16 games played, and right at 110 more yards... that's not a HUGE difference, but it is a fairly significant one... especially when, as I've said all along, the Cowboys have more legitimate weapons in their passing games than the Skins do, more players demanding their share of opportunities...

Once again, I give you props for acknowledging when your adversary raises a legitimate point... that makes you more fun to argue with...

Haha well thank you sir, now get some sleep, I'm sure we have plenty more to argure about.

 

[zrinkill]

That is reasonable and looking at those stats, they are VERY comparable. So Witten averages a little more then half a catch more per game and less then half a yard per catch. I don't see much of a difference.

That sounds like the argument we were using with Samuels vs Adams

How can you say with a straight face that Samuels is much better than Adams ..... Yet state that Witten and Cooley are the same (and you give Cooley a slight edge) :laugh2:

sorry buddy but that is homerism in the extreme.

 

[skinsfunguy]

That sounds like the argument we were using with Samuels vs Adams

How can you say with a straight face that Samuels is much better than Adams ..... Yet state that Witten and Cooley are the same (and you give Cooley a slight edge) :laugh2:

sorry buddy but that is homerism in the extreme.

Homerism to the extreme? Please

You stating that Witten is a "much better reciever" is more homerisitic then what I said. In fact what I said wasn't being a homer at all. Man, I have SO much more respect for Bob Sacamento, BigDFan5, and silverbear then you. You refuse to have a mature and logical argument with anyone that does not share your views. You also refuse to give credit where credit is due. You my friend are the homer. However, keep making ignorant comments with laughing emoticons in every single post you make to a Skins fan trying to have a rational discussion. It makes you look really intelligent.

As to my reasoning, as I have stated before, it is because of blocking. Cooley is a better blocker then Witten, period. Being a tight end is not all about catching the ball.


As far as catching the ball, so far Cooley has not matched Wittens season three years ago, but...that was three years ago. What have you done for me lately? Right?

The last two years their recieving stats have been very similar, and in my opinion a SLIGHT edge going to Cooley in that department as well(similiar catches and yards; however, cooley has 6 more TD's)

This is why I feel Cooley and Witten is a push or a slight advantage to Cooley. However, as I said, neither side can really be considered a homer for feeling their TE is better, that is how close it is.

 

[zrinkill]

He is nowhere near the caliber of Chris Samuels.

You stating that Witten is a "much better reciever" is more homerisitic then what I said. In fact what I said wasn't being a homer at all.

Yea not at all

And personally I could care less how you feel about me .... you started the personal remarks ..... so live with it. I know it all started when you did not know how many games you guys won and I made fun of you.



Witten > Cooley
Adams = Samuels

 

[skinsfunguy]

Yea not at all

And personally I could care less how you feel about me .... you started the personal remarks ..... so live with it. I know it all started when you did not know how many games you guys won and I made fun of you.



Witten > Cooley
Adams = Samuels

Ugh...you already admitted Samuels is at least a little better then Adams so I'm not sure how or why you are now saying they are equal. Now, how about telling me why you feel Witten is better then Cooley. You know, with actual facts and such.