New Orleans Saints Forums - blackandgold.com
Page 9 of 10 12345678 9 10
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

New Orleans Saints Forums - blackandgold.com (https://blackandgold.com/community/)
-   Saints (https://blackandgold.com/saints/)
-   -   Featured Discussion In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks (https://blackandgold.com/saints/65820-first-round-saints-pick-wide-reciever-brandin-cooks.html)

burningmetal 05-09-2014 04:27 PM
Re: In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Danno (Post 591786)
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!:p
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
Re: In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by burningmetal (Post 591785)
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
Re: In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.Riaton (Post 591791)
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.

Mr.Riaton 05-09-2014 05:00 PM
Re: In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by burningmetal (Post 591798)
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.
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.

burningmetal 05-09-2014 05:04 PM
Re: In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.Riaton (Post 591805)
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.
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.

Mr.Riaton 05-09-2014 05:13 PM
Re: In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by burningmetal (Post 591806)
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.
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.

exile 05-09-2014 05:19 PM
Re: In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr.Riaton (Post 591808)
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.

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

TheOak 05-09-2014 05:34 PM
Re: In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by burningmetal (Post 591790)
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.

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?

TheOak 05-09-2014 05:36 PM
Re: In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by saintfan (Post 591710)
Good post...and then you went and vannila-iced it. This made me angry...

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I337 using Tapatalk

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

Closet VI lover.

Mr.Riaton 05-09-2014 05:42 PM
Re: In the First Round, Saints Pick Wide Reciever Brandin Cooks
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by burningmetal (Post 591790)
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.
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...


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:31 AM.
Page 9 of 10 12345678 9 10
Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page


Copyright 1997 - 2020 - BlackandGold.com