Cooley Film Review/Grades

[turtle28]

Cousins: D-, 59%

Kelley: C-. Horrible vision, slow to and through the hole. It's like he predetermines where he's supposed to cut on each run - especially outside zone - instead of being patient and finding the hole. He said on several runs his vision and lack of speed let him down and he left at least 5 yards out there on those runs.

Thompson: A

TWill: A

Scherff: B+

Long: B

Lauvao: C-

Moses: D-

Reed: D

V Davis: D or C, can't remember. He went the wrong way on a zone run and wasn't a great blocker  

Pryor: D-. Goes without saying.

Crowder: C- because of the fumble. Would have been an A if he held onto the punt and if KC didn't airmail him 3 times.

Grant: I didn't hear it, but he was in the good category so I'm thinking B+

 

[Doc Draper]

Cooley is  full of crap kissing butt to keep his job. I'm surprised he didn't give all A's because they tried hard

Here's my grades for the Eagles game and I don't grade on reputation just on performance 

Cousins: F cost us the game on two plays. Is clearly not ready to play with his new receivers and the OL didn't help him either. Play calling typical Grudenesq 

Kelly: D-  13 carries and hit two yards in backfield on 5 of them. No blocking, no running game

Thompson: B- he had one great play and was mauled in pass blocking

TWill: F the most over rated tackle in the league for three years now. Can't run block and now getting beat on pass blocking

Scherff: F I don't want to ever see my guard abused like he was on that pass rush. He is a mauler you want to run behind but you rarely run and you have him next to a big fat softy at RT who is terrible at run blocking and a below average center 

Long: F maybe he's still hurt but he's killing us out there. Next man up

Lauvao: F the worst starting LG in the league and it's not even close. 

Moses: F gave up multiple sacks, run blocked like a wide receiver and he actually tackled Thompson on a play 

Reed: F the invisible glass man

V Davis: F horrible blocker and dumber than dirt because hes always messing up his blocking assignments

Pryor: F ran bad routes, drops, doesn't compete for balls and is afraid of taking the hit

Crowder: F has he even taken a punt return in the preseason. you can't ever fumble a punt or fail to catch other ones

Grant: B. He's been far the least talented but didn't screw up like the others 

 

[turtle28]

9 minutes ago, Doc Draper said:

Cooley is  full of crap kissing butt to keep his job. I'm surprised he didn't give all A's because they tried hard

Here's my grades for the Eagles game and I don't grade on reputation just on performance 

Cousins: F cost us the game on two plays. Is clearly not ready to play with his new receivers and the OL didn't help him either. Play calling typical Grudenesq 

Kelly: D-  13 carries and hit two yards in backfield on 5 of them. No blocking, no running game

Thompson: B- he had one great play and was mauled in pass blocking

TWill: F the most over rated tackle in the league for three years now. Can't run block and now getting beat on pass blocking

Scherff: F I don't want to ever see my guard abused like he was on that pass rush. He is a mauler you want to run behind but you rarely run and you have him next to a big fat softy at RT who is terrible at run blocking and a below average center 

Long: F maybe he's still hurt but he's killing us out there. Next man up

Lauvao: F the worst starting LG in the league and it's not even close. 

Moses: F gave up multiple sacks, run blocked like a wide receiver and he actually tackled Thompson on a play 

Reed: F the invisible glass man

V Davis: F horrible blocker and dumber than dirt because hes always messing up his blocking assignments

Pryor: F ran bad routes, drops, doesn't compete for balls and is afraid of taking the hit

Crowder: F has he even taken a punt return in the preseason. you can't ever fumble a punt or fail to catch other ones

Grant: B. He's been far the least talented but didn't screw up like the others 

 

Cooley actually analyzes the film and has a point system, he doesn't just blindly make grades up.

[Doc Draper]

Turtle- say you work for Coke are you going to say Pepsi is better in public? Taking anything this redskins paid employee says with more than a grain of salt is silly  

Also not sure how old you are but back in the day we were winning the media was much different. You had your schills like Larry Michael and Cooley who get paid directly or indirectly by the redskins but you also  had real sports reporters at the Post who actually sourced and wrote news stories and investigative pieces. Now they basically say word for word what they are given from the team. With the exception of one or two reporters today we have no real sports reporting on the Redskins we have stenographers who regurgitate what they have been given to desperate fans. 

 

[Thaiphoon]

3 hours ago, turtle28 said:

Cousins: D-, 59%

Kelley: C-. Horrible vision, slow to and through the hole. It's like he predetermines where he's supposed to cut on each run - especially outside zone - instead of being patient and finding the hole. He said on several runs his vision and lack of speed let him down and he left at least 5 yards out there on those runs.

Thompson: A

TWill: A

Scherff: B+

Long: B

Lauvao: C-

Moses: D-

Reed: D

V Davis: D or C, can't remember. He went the wrong way on a zone run and wasn't a great blocker  

Pryor: D-. Goes without saying.

Crowder: C- because of the fumble. Would have been an A if he held onto the punt and if KC didn't airmail him 3 times.

Grant: I didn't hear it, but he was in the good category so I'm thinking B

Grant was a B+

[Thaiphoon]

1 hour ago, Doc Draper said:

Turtle- say you work for Coke are you going to say Pepsi is better in public? Taking anything this redskins paid employee says with more than a grain of salt is silly  

Also not sure how old you are but back in the day we were winning the media was much different. You had your schills like Larry Michael and Cooley who get paid directly or indirectly by the redskins but you also  had real sports reporters at the Post who actually sourced and wrote news stories and investigative pieces. Now they basically say word for word what they are given from the team. With the exception of one or two reporters today we have no real sports reporting on the Redskins we have stenographers who regurgitate what they have been given to desperate fans. 

 

Your position would have more validity if he was always sunshine and roses for every player and giving them all A's.

Except he's not giving them all A's. He's actually grading them according to what he thinks they should get (using the type of system the coaches will typically use when reviewing film with players). He's going through each play and grading them on each play and examining who is responsible for what on the play.

Like some plays where Pryor is not running the route deep enough or stemming the route properly. Or the INT where he lit into Cousins for opening his foot and causing the pass to sail (so instead of hitting Crowder at the 6 it sailed to the 1 where it was INT). Or the first sack fumble where Moses completely soiled himself on that stunt and turned to set the edge at 4 yards...which gave the DL the shot on Cousins and prevented him from climbing the pocket. I had thought it was on Cuz. But I also looked at what he said and looked at the play again today and see that Moses soiled the bed on that play.

Are there times where guys like Cooley or BMitch or Doc Walker can't say exactly what they want to say to the extent that they want to say it? Probably. But they aren't blowing smoke every week about the team. They are giving their opinions on the team based upon their knowledge of the game. Witness BMith and Doc ripping into the team.

Oh and BTW, I'm old enough to remember those "real sports reporters" Doc. Many times they had to toe the line in order to continue getting access to players, coaches, etc... So let's not act like there has ever been a sports reporter that gives the 110% unvarnished truth, 110% of the time. Doesn't happen.

[lavar703]

You the man Doc but you're insane if you think Trent Williams is overrated. Nearly everyone who studies the game rates him as a top 3 OT and plenty consider him the cream of the crop. He's stuck next to a disaster of a LG in lauvao who inexplicably has been left as the starter for four years. 

[turtle28]

Defensive grades were a heck of a lot better:

Allen: C+

Hood: B, I think 

McClain: A

mcgee: C

Ioannidis: B

Kerrigan: A, may have been his best game as a pro.

Smith: B, I think

Galette: A I think, showed off his great moves and skills

Brown: A

Foster: B

fuller: A

breeland B

norman: A

Everret: D

Swearinger: C+

 

Thai, I missed a lot of these grades and remember some from the morning. Correct where I'm wrong 

[Dashing202]

Very surprised he grade anyone on the OL a high grade . That was by far the worst offensive protection I've seen as a fan in any era .

 

the D I can agree with .

[turtle28]

4 hours ago, Dashing202 said:

Very surprised he grade anyone on the OL a high grade . That was by far the worst offensive protection I've seen as a fan in any era .

 

the D I can agree with .

Read Thai's post. It's an individual grade and it's on a point system. So imagine you're taking a test and you get 5 points for a right answer, 0 for a negative, then if it's ok but not great it's like a 3, and so onand so on. He adds them up and divides them - this is what the coaches do to - so it's really hard to get even a D, you have to have a lot of negative plays. Getting an F would probably mean you'd have only a handful of positive plays in 70 plays. So, like Kirk's game in 2014 vs the Giants when he threw the 4 or 5 picks might had been an F, definitely a D-.

Take Lauvao for example, everyone remember 5 to 10 of the negative plays he has because the bad ones stand out but the other 60 he was either OK, good or great. That's why he was a C-. 

Outside of a few plays, Scherff and Williams were Great. It was Moses who was horrible. If his ankle was bothering him that much that he hurt in the preseason vs the Ravens or if he aggregated it during the game, they should have put in Nsekhe, it they had, maybe we win the game.

[Slateman]

It's laughable that anyone on the offensive line gets higher than a C after last week. Cooley literally has no idea what he's talking about.

The line was terrible last week. There weren't any holes to run through. Cousins can get a lot of the blame for sacks, but it doesn't matter who your running back is if they're getting hit a yard or two behind the LOS. Absolutely unacceptable that we have this kind of investment in the offensive line and the RB's can't even average 3 yards a carry. Spencer Long  might be our best offensive lineman at this point.

 

[Doc Draper]

I've whupped up on Cooley for his grading but say his defensive grades seem pretty reasonable. Cooley is no rocket scientist- perfect potential coach.

His major flaw in the approach he uses for  grading is too simplistic by assuming every play's performance is equal. This is not roulette- they are not equal. 

 Some plays are more important than others. Mistakes are of higher value than someone who is doing what they are supposed to do( a positive performance play.

For example: An offensive tackle plays 50 plays.  He does what he us supposed to do executing well for 45 plays. That means he did a 90% performance and gets an A, right? Not so fast. On the play 1 of 5 plays he messed up and  his quarterback got hit by the guy he was supposed to block and threw an interception. On play 2 of 5 there is a strip sack and play 3 of 5 there is a sack, on  play 4 of 5 there is a fourth an 1 and he whiffs and stops a drive and play 5 of 5 he misses and his quarterback gets injured. That doesn't seem like a A to me.

But his analysis that I heard him say on the radio that he "works his balls off on doing" is interesting, just not particularly valuable in judging a players impact on a particular game. Plus, Id find better things to "work my balls on" that watching Redskins games over and over even if I was getting paid

 

[Thaiphoon]

22 minutes ago, Doc Draper said:

I've whupped up on Cooley for his grading but say his defensive grades seem pretty reasonable. Cooley is no rocket scientist- perfect potential coach.

His major flaw in the approach he uses for  grading is too simplistic by assuming every play's performance is equal. This is not roulette- they are not equal. 

 Some plays are more important than others. Mistakes are of higher value than someone who is doing what they are supposed to do( a positive performance play.

For example: An offensive tackle plays 50 plays.  He does what he us supposed to do executing well for 45 plays. That means he did a 90% performance and gets an A, right? Not so fast. On the play 1 of 5 plays he messed up and  his quarterback got hit by the guy he was supposed to block and threw an interception. On play 2 of 5 there is a strip sack and play 3 of 5 there is a sack, on  play 4 of 5 there is a fourth an 1 and he whiffs and stops a drive and play 5 of 5 he misses and his quarterback gets injured. That doesn't seem like a A to me.

But his analysis that I heard him say on the radio that he "works his balls off on doing" is interesting, just not particularly valuable in judging a players impact on a particular game. Plus, Id find better things to "work my balls on" that watching Redskins games over and over even if I was getting paid

 

He's already addressed that Doc. For instance he said yesterday that a player  (can't remembet but I think it was Breeland) would've gotten a higher grade had he graded each play equally. He said that some plays are more impactful than others and get graded heavier. Such as the CT catch and run, spin move for TD. Typically he would give him a 5 (best) but he gave him a 6 on that play.

[Dashing202]

14 hours ago, turtle28 said:

Read Thai's post. It's an individual grade and it's on a point system. So imagine you're taking a test and you get 5 points for a right answer, 0 for a negative, then if it's ok but not great it's like a 3, and so onand so on. He adds them up and divides them - this is what the coaches do to - so it's really hard to get even a D, you have to have a lot of negative plays. Getting an F would probably mean you'd have only a handful of positive plays in 70 plays. So, like Kirk's game in 2014 vs the Giants when he threw the 4 or 5 picks might had been an F, definitely a D-.

Take Lauvao for example, everyone remember 5 to 10 of the negative plays he has because the bad ones stand out but the other 60 he was either OK, good or great. That's why he was a C-. 

Outside of a few plays, Scherff and Williams were Great. It was Moses who was horrible. If his ankle was bothering him that much that he hurt in the preseason vs the Ravens or if he aggregated it during the game, they should have put in Nsekhe, it they had, maybe we win the game.

Turtle , how can you protect the OL lol no ... they didn't look great at all nobody did we are lucky Kirk didn't get injured . 

 

Sunday better be better and they better prepare for blitzes .

[turtle28]

8 hours ago, Dashing202 said:

Turtle , how can you protect the OL lol no ... they didn't look great at all nobody did we are lucky Kirk didn't get injured . 

 

Sunday better be better and they better prepare for blitzes .

Why can't you all understand people's explanations. I just don't get it. It happens constantly. People just hear/read what they want to read.

The entire OL didn't play bad, that's why!

its not graded as a unit. It's graded individually. TWill played Great, Scherff played Good, Long played average, Lauvao played below average and Moses played poor - possibly his worst game as a pro except there may have been a worst game since his rookie season.

As Cooley always says, and he's right, if one player on the entire OL or one of the TEs while blocking in the run goes the wrong way or misses a block, has a hold or assignment it ruins the entire play. So each play is its entire entity. Sure, you could just do NO analysis and think back and say well the OL/TEs messed up on like 10-15 plays collectively out of 70 in the game and led to us Losing because of the two fumbles where Kirk was about to throw but the ball go stripped but frankly that lazy!

Cooley said he woke up at 4 am to start studying tape, taking notes and doing a report. He did that for US! The fans!! I'm so tired of people crapping on a man who goes above and beyond what any other beat reporter, radio personality or blogger does to inform the fans.

He has a young child, frankly he doesnt need to do any of this for us but he likes to do it to inform the fans and he gets treated like crap for being honest and telling you the grade he thinks the coaches would give for the players - aka how he was graded by Gibbs & Shanahan - you all just sound really ungreatful when no one else is giving you this information, you should be greatful for it, even if you don't 100% agree. But if you don't agree, why not listen to it and try to understand why he's grading it the way he is.

Its ridiculous!