In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks

Papa Voodoo · 05-09-2014, 11:06 AM

Everyone remembers how much Reggie was coveted and considered a sure thing when we picked him right? This pick isn't a sure thing either. I would be happy to eat crow and be proven wrong, but this was a reach.

exile · 05-09-2014, 11:08 AM

Originally Posted by Papa Voodoo

Everyone remembers how much Reggie was coveted and considered a sure thing when we picked him right? This pick isn't a sure thing either. I would be happy to eat crow and be proven wrong, but this was a reach.

Huge difference. It would have been a reach if Cooks was a RB. But he's a dynamite WR.

burningmetal · 05-09-2014, 03:57 PM

Originally Posted by exile

Huge difference. It would have been a reach if Cooks was a RB. But he's a dynamite WR.

So being considered a dynamite WR is more reliable than being considered a dynamite RB?

Those who are in love with this pick are missing the point by those of us who aren't. It's not that he's a bad player, or that he won't fit in. But it doesn't seem, to me at least, that we needed to trade up in order to get him. But people say "oh he's so fast, he's gonna be the new sproles". Cooks is not a running back, therefore when he's on the field there won't be any mystery as to what he's out there for. Other than the occasional reverse play.

All the can't miss talk means nothing to me. I've heard it before. I do think he'll be a good player, for what it's worth, but this is way too much hype for me.

Danno · 05-09-2014, 04:00 PM

Originally Posted by burningmetal

So being considered a dynamite WR is more reliable than being considered a dynamite RB?

Those who are in love with this pick are missing the point by those of us who aren't. It's not that he's a bad player, or that he won't fit in. But it doesn't seem, to me at least, that we needed to trade up in order to get him. But people say "oh he's so fast, he's gonna be the new sproles". Cooks is not a running back, therefore when he's on the field there won't be any mystery as to what he's out there for. Other than the occasional reverse play.

All the can't miss talk means nothing to me. I've heard it before. I do think he'll be a good player, for what it's worth, but this is way too much hype for me.

Its the day after, of course everyone is excited and we're simply stating what he could be.

Would you rather we, after every pick state "stats show he's likely gonna be a bust, so I just can't get excited"?

Its freaking NFL Christmas, quit pissin on my new toy!

burningmetal · 05-09-2014, 04:27 PM

Originally Posted by Danno

Its the day after, of course everyone is excited and we're simply stating what he could be.

Would you rather we, after every pick state "stats show he's likely gonna be a bust, so I just can't get excited"?

Its freaking NFL Christmas, quit pissin on my new toy!

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.

Mr.Riaton · 05-09-2014, 04:28 PM

Originally Posted by burningmetal

So being considered a dynamite WR is more reliable than being considered a dynamite RB?

Those who are in love with this pick are missing the point by those of us who aren't. It's not that he's a bad player, or that he won't fit in. But it doesn't seem, to me at least, that we needed to trade up in order to get him. But people say "oh he's so fast, he's gonna be the new sproles". Cooks is not a running back, therefore when he's on the field there won't be any mystery as to what he's out there for. Other than the occasional reverse play.

All the can't miss talk means nothing to me. I've heard it before. I do think he'll be a good player, for what it's worth, but this is way too much hype for me.

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.

burningmetal · 05-09-2014, 04:34 PM

Originally Posted by Mr.Riaton

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.

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.

Papa Voodoo · 05-09-2014, 11:40 AM

I understand he is a RB but Bush also caught more passes than Boldin. There was little question about Bush's ability as a play maker, returner or as a RB which is why he went so high, was compared with Mario and we did not entertain any offers to trade down so we could pick him #2. I think everyone would agree that he did not pan out as expected.

Euphoria · 05-09-2014, 11:53 AM

The real beauty of this is you split out Stills and Cooks on either side of the field. Send them on deep routes either of them with no help deep you take the shot.

If safeties do drop to cover help cover the deep routes it frees up Colston and Graham underneath or even PT out of the backfield.

Definitely going to help our short passing game as well as our running game... dare someone to cheat up safeties to much...

SaintLeonard · 05-09-2014, 01:57 PM

I'm just thinking about putting Colston, Stills, Graham, and Cooks on the field at the same time. Oh, and don't forget we have an elite QB throwing them the ball.
Lol, game over for the defense.

05-09-2014, 11:06 AM	#1
Papa Voodoo 1000 Posts + Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 1,634	Re: In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks Everyone remembers how much Reggie was coveted and considered a sure thing when we picked him right? This pick isn't a sure thing either. I would be happy to eat crow and be proven wrong, but this was a reach.

05-09-2014, 11:08 AM	#2
exile Cake or Death? Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 3,608	Re: In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks Originally Posted by Papa Voodoo Everyone remembers how much Reggie was coveted and considered a sure thing when we picked him right? This pick isn't a sure thing either. I would be happy to eat crow and be proven wrong, but this was a reach. Huge difference. It would have been a reach if Cooks was a RB. But he's a dynamite WR.
exile Cake or Death? Join Date: Sep 2009 Posts: 3,608

05-09-2014, 03:57 PM	#3
burningmetal 1000 Posts + Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 3,923 Blog Entries: 3	Re: In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks Originally Posted by exile Huge difference. It would have been a reach if Cooks was a RB. But he's a dynamite WR. So being considered a dynamite WR is more reliable than being considered a dynamite RB? Those who are in love with this pick are missing the point by those of us who aren't. It's not that he's a bad player, or that he won't fit in. But it doesn't seem, to me at least, that we needed to trade up in order to get him. But people say "oh he's so fast, he's gonna be the new sproles". Cooks is not a running back, therefore when he's on the field there won't be any mystery as to what he's out there for. Other than the occasional reverse play. All the can't miss talk means nothing to me. I've heard it before. I do think he'll be a good player, for what it's worth, but this is way too much hype for me.
	If I had a nickel for every time I heard that, the NFL would fine and suspend me.

05-09-2014, 04:00 PM	#4
Danno Truth Addict Join Date: Dec 2003 Location: Spanish Fort, AL (via NO and B/R) Posts: 24,758	Re: In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks Originally Posted by burningmetal So being considered a dynamite WR is more reliable than being considered a dynamite RB? Those who are in love with this pick are missing the point by those of us who aren't. It's not that he's a bad player, or that he won't fit in. But it doesn't seem, to me at least, that we needed to trade up in order to get him. But people say "oh he's so fast, he's gonna be the new sproles". Cooks is not a running back, therefore when he's on the field there won't be any mystery as to what he's out there for. Other than the occasional reverse play. All the can't miss talk means nothing to me. I've heard it before. I do think he'll be a good player, for what it's worth, but this is way too much hype for me. Its the day after, of course everyone is excited and we're simply stating what he could be. Would you rather we, after every pick state "stats show he's likely gonna be a bust, so I just can't get excited"? Its freaking NFL Christmas, quit pissin on my new toy! mleg1972, exile, dizzle88 and 1 others like this.

05-09-2014, 04:27 PM	#5
burningmetal 1000 Posts + Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 3,923 Blog Entries: 3	Re: In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks Originally Posted by Danno Its the day after, of course everyone is excited and we're simply stating what he could be. Would you rather we, after every pick state "stats show he's likely gonna be a bust, so I just can't get excited"? Its freaking NFL Christmas, quit pissin on my new toy! 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. Papa Voodoo likes this.
	If I had a nickel for every time I heard that, the NFL would fine and suspend me.

05-09-2014, 04:28 PM	#6
Mr.Riaton 1000 Posts + Join Date: Mar 2013 Location: Broussard,La. Posts: 1,308	Re: In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks Originally Posted by burningmetal So being considered a dynamite WR is more reliable than being considered a dynamite RB? Those who are in love with this pick are missing the point by those of us who aren't. It's not that he's a bad player, or that he won't fit in. But it doesn't seem, to me at least, that we needed to trade up in order to get him. But people say "oh he's so fast, he's gonna be the new sproles". Cooks is not a running back, therefore when he's on the field there won't be any mystery as to what he's out there for. Other than the occasional reverse play. All the can't miss talk means nothing to me. I've heard it before. I do think he'll be a good player, for what it's worth, but this is way too much hype for me. 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.

05-09-2014, 04:34 PM	#7
burningmetal 1000 Posts + Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 3,923 Blog Entries: 3	Re: In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks Originally Posted by Mr.Riaton 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. 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.
	If I had a nickel for every time I heard that, the NFL would fine and suspend me.

05-09-2014, 11:40 AM	#8
Papa Voodoo 1000 Posts + Join Date: Jun 2007 Posts: 1,634	Re: In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks I understand he is a RB but Bush also caught more passes than Boldin. There was little question about Bush's ability as a play maker, returner or as a RB which is why he went so high, was compared with Mario and we did not entertain any offers to trade down so we could pick him #2. I think everyone would agree that he did not pan out as expected.

05-09-2014, 11:53 AM	#9
Euphoria 5000 POSTS! + Join Date: Mar 2004 Location: Hollywood, CA Posts: 7,601 Blog Entries: 5	Re: In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks The real beauty of this is you split out Stills and Cooks on either side of the field. Send them on deep routes either of them with no help deep you take the shot. If safeties do drop to cover help cover the deep routes it frees up Colston and Graham underneath or even PT out of the backfield. Definitely going to help our short passing game as well as our running game... dare someone to cheat up safeties to much... mleg1972 likes this.

05-09-2014, 01:57 PM	#10
SaintLeonard Bounty hunter Join Date: Dec 2013 Location: Nashville Posts: 490	Re: In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks I'm just thinking about putting Colston, Stills, Graham, and Cooks on the field at the same time. Oh, and don't forget we have an elite QB throwing them the ball. Lol, game over for the defense. mleg1972 and exile like this.

LinkBacks (?) LinkBack to this Thread: https://blackandgold.com/saints/65820-first-round-saints-pick-wide-reciever-brandin-cooks.html
Posted By	For	Type	Date	Hits
In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks	This thread	Refback	05-08-2014 09:59 PM	12