Re: In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks
 

I'm not pissing on your new toy Danno. I would like to share your excitement. I am trying to shift my mood toward optimism, as I think he has potential. But this is not about people's excitement.

It's more about being tired of being told that Payton and Loomis are geniuses after every pick by certain people, when I and others think that just maybe it wasn't the best idea. I felt like we either could have gotten a better player or maybe Cooks, himself, would have still been there at 27 if they wanted him so bad. losing a 3rd rounder might not sound like a big deal to some, but I think we could have used that pick to maybe trade up late into the 2nd round for another pick there. I like the depth of this draft more than most and would've liked a little more quantity. But again, Cooks is here, and I'm now one of his fans.

Re: In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks
 

We traded up to get him because of a few teams ahead of us were possibly interested in drafting him. I dont understand why its such a big deal that we traded up to get him. If we gave up multiple pics or next years 1st I could understand.All we gave up is a third. Who in the third round is so important that would have been worth possibly losing a dynamic playmaking wr that was needed. Cooks takes the place of two players that were important in our passing game...Lance and Darren. Darren might have been a rb,but we all know he contributed way more in our passing game. Yes, this draft is deep in wr depth,but who outside of the first is a better prospect than Cooks? Landry,maybe? What if he's not there when we pick? Then what? I want more than just an average wr prospect.

Re: In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks
 

See above for my response to losing a third rounder. As for Wideouts, yes, I do think Landry was a better all around prospect, though obviously not near as fast. But I never really wanted a receiver. I've said that I could live with it, but when I said that I didn't think we would trade up for one.

As for Sproles, yes, he contributed in our passing game, but also in the running game. He was a hard guy to plan for. When he couldn't run last year, you saw how predictable our offense got. It's not the same thing with Cooks, as he is a WR. But that's my point. He's a WR, not a RB, and he cannot replace what Sproles used to be. If we want to believe he's the next Wes Welker, that's one thing, but he is not the same dynamic as Sproles had been.

Re: In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks
 

The 3rd rnd. comment was just my opinion in general. I understand your point about Sproles being dynamic,but to be honest,I dont think we're gonna suffer to bad with him absent in the backfeild. Our offense being predictable was more on Sean than Sproles not being on the field.IMHO.

Re: In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks
 

I agree that we aren't going to miss Sproles much, and that's because he wasn't the same player last year. But we tried to force it with him and that made us predictable. That part IS Sean's fault. So my point is to those who are trying to compare Cooks to the good version of Sproles. It's just a different type of player, altogether in my opinion.

Re: In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks
 

C'mon man, you cant tell me that Cooks doesn't resemble Sproles as far as quick shifty-ness and speed. I think Cooks is a combination of Moore and Sproles talent and skill set.

Re: In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks
 

I think that he is Steve Smith's alter ego. The nice side.

Re: In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks
 

1. You "felt you could have gotten Cooks @27 "based on what?

Obviously Loomis/Payton had a reason to jump and secure him. I'm going to have to side with the two men responsible for bringing us a Super Bowl and do this for a living.

2. Your "tired of being told that Loomis and Payton are geniuses". That goes against wanting quantity over quality.

Wanting quantity over quality tells me you believe he is a genius and can make a silk purse out of 2 sows ears.

Or you just felt it should go one way and it didn't so your down on the pick?

Re: In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks
 

Knowing the source tells me it didn't make you that angry.

Closet VI lover.

Re: In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks
 

Another thing,why is it ok to trade our third to move back up in the second,but not for a higher position in the first? It would take more than just a third to move back up in the second...unless you would be ok with trading our second and third for a second...

Re: In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks
 

Word to yo mutha

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk

Re: In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks
 

What you just said is exactly what I'm arguing against. Just because he's small, fast and shifty does not make him comparable to Sproles. He plays a different position and can't fill that type of role. He's going to be used like Dante Stallworth was (which brings back nightmares). They'll move him around and what not, but he's not going to line up in the backfield. So he's not a duel threat in that way.

Re: In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks
 

You never cease to make amaze me at your lack of comprehension to everything I have to say. I didn't say "I felt we could have gotten cooks at 27". I said I felt we could have gotten a better player OR even gotten Cooks at 27. That means if we were going to trade up, I think there were better players available, but if they wanted cooks they could have waited. It's obvious however, that the Saints weren't willing to take that risk. I don't value Cooks the way they do, make sense? You trust the guys who brought us a Super Bowl, yet these are the same one's who drafted Meachem in the first round. How did that work out? I'm not saying Cooks will be a bust, but I am saying that just because we've won a superbowl doesn't mean our front office doesn't make mistakes, and because of that I don't feel the need to just automatically trust whatever they do because you think I should.

And in another thing you failed to read and comprehend properly: I didn't say anything about "quantity OVER quality". I said I would have liked a little more quantity. Period. I'm all for trading up for a need. Cooks is a nice player but doesn't fill that much of a need. We don't have many glaring needs. So given that luxury I would have personally rathered to sit back at 27 and either keep that 3rd rounder or maybe trade into the second with it. Why? Because when you get out of the second round the talent starts to fade, obviously. It would just depend on who's still available.

That doesn't mean that they'll hit a home run with both, or either of those picks. It simply provides more opportunities to find someone who WILL be good. I don't think that's a hard concept to understand. I just think you hate it when I disagree with the Saints. It's just my opinion, pal. It's not like either of us can change anything.

Re: In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks
 

I'm aware that it might take more than just the third to move up. Late in the second round like that you might find a team that's willing to move back a little for maybe a third and 4th or 5th rounder. I'm ok with that. It's the frontline depth I'm interested in. I don't care much about the later rounds, though there have been exceptions. And those exceptions are why I also wouldn't have minded keeping the 3rd rounder and not trading up in the first place. This is based on my belief that WR was not a big enough need to trade up for. There were others. But I would have preferred a corner. I guess we'll see how jean-baptiste does now.