Brandin Cooks to Rams for a 1st: blockbuster

  • To unlock all of features of Rams On Demand please take a brief moment to register. Registering is not only quick and easy, it also allows you access to additional features such as live chat, private messaging, and a host of other apps exclusive to Rams On Demand.
A.J. Hicks said:
Jrry with the string of highlight real touchdowns.

Mcvay being excited.

Cooks stating that he doesn't need to be the one with all the attention he just wants to help the team.

What is going on with this Rams team!?
Click to expand...

DvqlYOE.gif
 
  • 3Like
Reactions: RamsFlash80, nighttrain and ramfan46
XXXIVwin said:
Can’t imagine that Cooks’s agent would settle for a deal less than Sammy. Why would he?

Sammy’s numbers in 4 years: 192 Rec for 3052 Yds and 25 TD.

Cooks numbers in 4 years: 280 rec for 3943 yds and 27 TD.

Mike Evans numbers in 4 years: 309 rec for 4579 yds and 32 TD.

So, Cooks’ numbers are higher than Sammy’s but lower than Evans. I’d expect the contracts to be the same way.

Sammy got 3 years at 48M, or 16M per year.

Evans got 5 years at 82.5M, or 16.5 per year (with an average of 18M per year in the first 3 years).

So, I imagine Cooks will be slotted somewhere between Sammy and Evans.

I do hope it gets done, because, yeah, giving up a 2nd for Sammy and a 1st for Cooks without signing either long-term would be, uh, no bueno.

Contract for Cooks— git ‘er done!
Click to expand...


Evans has Cooks beat on production, but when you look at the Targets Cooks has Evans beat on efficiency.


Cooks numbers in 4 years: 280 rec for 3943 yds and 27 TD.

Mike Evans numbers in 4 years: 309 rec for 4579 yds and 32 TD.

But...
Cooks: 429 targets
Evans 579 targets

Cooks with 579 targets Compares like this:


Cooks 376 Rec for 5326 yards for 36 TD
Evans 309 Rec for 4579 yds for 32 TD.
 
  • 7Like
Reactions: RamsFlash80, LACHAMP46, DaveFan'51 and 4 others
Mojo Ram said:
Huge.
Click to expand...

Also add that he is coming off a Super Bowl loss. This guys character is way better as well. Not to say Sammy isn’t a good guy.

The truth though is Sammy had a issue that he commented on social media about not getting the ball. McVay swept it under the bus real quick , but Sammy would quit on routes & hardly ever came back for the ball , after the route & the play broke down. Just by him working hard might have opened space up for Goff to make a throw ?
 
  • Like
Reactions: MachS and Karate61
  • 3Like
Reactions: DaveFan'51, Limey and Karate61
XXXIVwin said:
Can’t imagine that Cooks’s agent would settle for a deal less than Sammy. Why would he?

Sammy’s numbers in 4 years: 192 Rec for 3052 Yds and 25 TD.

Cooks numbers in 4 years: 280 rec for 3943 yds and 27 TD.

Mike Evans numbers in 4 years: 309 rec for 4579 yds and 32 TD.

So, Cooks’ numbers are higher than Sammy’s but lower than Evans. I’d expect the contracts to be the same way.

Sammy got 3 years at 48M, or 16M per year.

Evans got 5 years at 82.5M, or 16.5 per year (with an average of 18M per year in the first 3 years).

So, I imagine Cooks will be slotted somewhere between Sammy and Evans.

I do hope it gets done, because, yeah, giving up a 2nd for Sammy and a 1st for Cooks without signing either long-term would be, uh, no bueno.

Contract for Cooks— git ‘er done!
Click to expand...
And Mike Evans, as great as he is, also put his numbers on 579 targets with a 53.3% catch rate while Cooks amassed his numbers on 150 less targets, 429, thanks to his 65.2% catch rate. Much more efficient, and considering he’s mostly a deep threat, his numbers are mind boggling.
16 mill per might be insulting...
 
  • Like
Reactions: RamsFlash80 and OldSchool
TexasRam said:
Evans has Cooks beat on production, but when you look at the Targets Cooks has Evans beat on efficiency.


Cooks numbers in 4 years: 280 rec for 3943 yds and 27 TD.

Mike Evans numbers in 4 years: 309 rec for 4579 yds and 32 TD.

But...
Cooks: 429 targets
Evans 579 targets

Cooks with 579 targets Compares like this:


Cooks 376 Rec for 5326 yards for 36 TD
Evans 309 Rec for 4579 yds for 32 TD.
Click to expand...
Whoops, didn’t read the whole thread before responding. Haha
 
  • Like
Reactions: OldSchool
Don't know if its been mentioned before but I just realized that the rams were actually interested in signing cooks before Watkins. So watkins was their backup plan and that worked out nicely on the field. I'm thinking their original plan A will have better results.
 
  • Like
Reactions: A.J. Hicks
jacktheripper85 said:
I’m not too sure about this LAChamp46 Guy. There is a poster on the Niner board who goes by arja21 who constantly refers to Goff as a trailer and not a truck. Can there possibly be 2 different guys on the planet who use that same analogy?
Click to expand...
huh?

I'm getting famous....

seriously....I heard it before....from the sweater guy on path 2 the draft....

it fits...jack....watch the highlights...similar to Dak and Zeke....
 
LoyalRam said:
D@mn Champ, this is a trolling stew! If 40 times were what determined NFL Excellence, then Tavon Austin and Renaldo Nehemiah would be headed for, or in, the NFL Hall of Fame.
Click to expand...
Well, 40 is just part of the equation....you do have to be able to "play" football...like wr's need to be able to catch....lb's need to be able to tackle...
LoyalRam said:
Slow yur effin roll! ~LACHAMP46
Click to expand...
Exactly....
no one KNOWS how much any one member here at ROD knows....some "THINK" they do tho....

that aint trollin???
bubbaramfan said:
Every Rams opponent will have their #1 corner on Cooks
Click to expand...
Not necessarily...maybe if your #2 is solid....put your #2 on Cooks, with safety help over the top....#1 goes with Woods....all by himself.
 
  • 3Like
Reactions: Karate61, hotanez and nighttrain
UKram said:

View: https://youtu.be/p7WTwT5SRUo


Cowherds take fwiw
Click to expand...




Picked4td said:
It’s a win-win but for now the pats got the better end of the deal cuz they got a 1st in this years draft for a guy they weren’t going to resign and would have at best got a 3rd comp in 2years if they didn’t trade. Plus it only cost them last years salary for his 1 year of service. Pretty good value all around tbh
Click to expand...


Replying in reference to both posts here:

1. We all love draft picks. They are fun. They represent hope. But, draft picks bust in every draft. Remember the 2013 draft? It was terrible from top to bottom. Before that was proven, everybody had there favorites and felt they knew who was can't miss. Proven NFL players are more valuable than picks(chances) in every way except cost.

2. New England got a great deal, yes. But, McVay really wanted Cooks. New England had the leverage on Snead. They weren't going to do anyone any favors. New England hasn't won anything until the make they picks and those players hit the field. Belichick's drafting over the last few years hasn't been impressive.

3. Mangini is jealous. He went from Mangenius to Man-you-are-a-dumb-ass, as a head coach. Andy Reid doesn't have a good track record with selfish players. He doesn't like dealing with them. He puts up with them. Marty Schottenheimer was an old rigid coach. It's dumb to predict that McVay and Phillips will have problems with Talib, Peters, Suh, Shields and Cook, especially since two of them come without character risks, and only one has been a problem meshing in the locker room. I believe that McVay's capabilities leading a team cause a divide. Some people believe in his ability and admire him, and others doubt him out of spite and jealousy.

I have faith in the vetting that Snead and McVay have done before acquiring these players. I am confident that all of our excitement as Rams fans will be justified next season.
 
  • 4Like
Reactions: hotanez, kurtfaulk, Mackeyser and 1 other person
Elmgrovegnome said:
Mangini is jealous. He went from Mangenius to Man-you-are-a-dumb-ass, as a head coach.
Click to expand...
I'm guessing here...only a guess...that Mangini had a winning record and went to the playoffs...with Cleveland....just like Belichick.....of course, correct me if I'm wrong.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back