Free Agency News

fivetwos said:
Yes he did.

You have to be really, really, really good at football to be considered a not so great NFL player.
Click to expand...
Oh no absolutely he’s a great kid who is the 1%. Free education and playing in the league.

I simply meant a great NFL player. Bad wording on my part
 
Carson said:
Oh no absolutely he’s a great kid who is the 1%. Free education and playing in the league.

I simply meant a great NFL player. Bad wording on my part
Click to expand...
Well Im not the semantics police lol….but around here when it’s “this one sucks, that one sucks” etc I often think of how really damn good a football player a guy like, say, Rico Dowdle is, as one small example… just not at the highest of high levels.

It amazes me how many factors are actually involved above and beyond natural talent, and much like a team on its way to a title, you have to be both good and lucky, and find that right path.
 
jnday said:
The problem with Cooks is his production seems to be replaceable, or at least it seems to be replaceable for all of the former teams that he has been a part of. With his level of production, you would think that teams would hold on to him once he was on their roster.
Click to expand...
Not sure replaceable is the right word. It's a little like us deciding to trade Cooper. We had spend a No. 1 draft pick on a receiver (Lamb), who is heading toward a big deal, and we had a choice to keep paying Cooper or pay less for Gallup, a younger receiver we viewed as a more than capable No. 2 despite his injury.

We were paying Cooper No. 1 money, but he didn't play like a No. 1 receiver the year before we traded him. So we traded him for relatively little to get out from under his contract. We took a gamble that Cooper was replaceable, but it didn't work out that way.

I don't think the teams that have traded Cooks have ended up better off productionwise, but they had reasons that they decided they might be better off without him than with him. For example, I've read that New Orleans traded him because it wanted to beef up its defense. The team had the No. 1 offense and one of the worst defenses, so Loomis thought the offense would be OK, but having a first to use on defense was needed.
 
jnday said:
The problem with Cooks is his production seems to be replaceable, or at least it seems to be replaceable for all of the former teams that he has been a part of. With his level of production, you would think that teams would hold on to him once he was on their roster.
Click to expand...
Got to look at the details man.
New Orleans got a first RD pick & some change in their to New England & had Michael Thomas in the wings
New England got a first RD pick & some change in their trade to Los Angles & didn't have any WR match his production the next year
Los Angles got a second round pick after Cooks worst year
Houston is a hot mess and also Traded away Hopkins
 
jnday said:
The problem with Cooks is his production seems to be replaceable, or at least it seems to be replaceable for all of the former teams that he has been a part of. With his level of production, you would think that teams would hold on to him once he was on their roster.
Click to expand...
in Cooks only season with the Patriots he had 1082 yards.

In the five seasons since there's been one Patriot be able to hit that just once. Julian Edleman in 2019. That's including every position not just receiver.

You think that is them replacing his production?

For funsies, Cooks had 1173 yards his last season in New Orleans and in the six seasons since, only Michael Thomas has been able to hit that mark for them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Members online

... and 56 more.
Total: 2,175 (members: 156, guests: 2,019)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
464,827
Messages
13,834,185
Members
23,782
Latest member
Cowboyfan4ver
Back
Top