- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Brandin Cooks vs. Jarvis Landry
Posted on 1/22/16 at 1:25 pm to Lester Earl
Posted on 1/22/16 at 1:25 pm to Lester Earl
quote:QB efficiency...
for someone that constantly argues in favor of efficiency, this isnt like you.
Posted on 1/22/16 at 1:45 pm to BigPerm30
"The real comparison is Jarvis Landry vs. Stanley Jean Baptist"
Makes me sick thinking about it.
Makes me sick thinking about it.
This post was edited on 1/22/16 at 1:48 pm
Posted on 1/22/16 at 2:04 pm to shel311
quote:
QB efficiency...
efficiency in any sport I'm talking about. You rarely, if ever, deviate. Just weird to see you crack on this issue.
It's pretty clear, despite whoever the QBs are, that Cooks can do everything that Landry can do. But there are things that Cooks can do that Landry can't, such as getting behind a defense. Look at the YPC. Look at average catch length. Look at the TD's.
Cooks had a lower drop rate in 2015 as well. All around he is a better WR.
Posted on 1/22/16 at 2:09 pm to Lester Earl
save your breath LE. They have their purple and gold glasses on.
This post was edited on 1/22/16 at 2:10 pm
Posted on 1/22/16 at 2:14 pm to Lester Earl
quote:
the guy that needs 84 catches to get 1100 yards
or the guy that needs 110 fricking catches to get to 1100 yards
yea surely not a product of the offense and qb
fricking laughable at this point
Posted on 1/22/16 at 2:15 pm to Lester Earl
How about block and not be a little bitch. Cooks isnt so good at that. Dude soft as baby poo
Posted on 1/22/16 at 2:20 pm to deNYEd
Its so obvious people who even try to argue cooks simply dont watch miami games. Cooks is an extremely fast receiver who does fairly well bc of the system he is in. Jarvis would excel in any system
Posted on 1/22/16 at 2:23 pm to deNYEd
i love Jarvis Landry, he is my favorite LSU WR of all time, and he is a really good pro player. But if you cant see him limitations when watching him play, I dont know what to say.
yea maybe he is "tougher" than Cooks(he's slower, he gets hit more), maybe he has better intangibles, but how can anyone overlook Cooks production, despite WAY less volume, is beyond me.
yea maybe he is "tougher" than Cooks(he's slower, he gets hit more), maybe he has better intangibles, but how can anyone overlook Cooks production, despite WAY less volume, is beyond me.
Posted on 1/22/16 at 2:24 pm to deNYEd
quote:
Cooks is an extremely fast receiver who does fairly well bc of the system he is in.
What system do the Saints run exactly?
What system does Miami run?
Generic terms you're using with zero meaning.
And I'm pretty positive that the Cooks skillset is valuable in every single system, derp.
Why were the other 3 receivers from Miami able to average 16+ ypc from the same QB?
This post was edited on 1/22/16 at 3:11 pm
Posted on 1/22/16 at 2:27 pm to deNYEd
Landry is conveniently great at the things you cannot measure: heart, toughness, blocking, cutting, agility
Of course, when you want to bring up a concrete measurement, it's the QB play impacting his hard statistics.
Meanwhile, great WRs across the league are ripping off huge numbers with QBs way worse than Tannehill.
Furthermore, you give Landry 6 more games and 80 more targets and his numbers still aren't as impressive
Both guys can be good at what they do without belittling the other's accomplishments
Of course, when you want to bring up a concrete measurement, it's the QB play impacting his hard statistics.
Meanwhile, great WRs across the league are ripping off huge numbers with QBs way worse than Tannehill.
Furthermore, you give Landry 6 more games and 80 more targets and his numbers still aren't as impressive
Both guys can be good at what they do without belittling the other's accomplishments
Posted on 1/22/16 at 2:58 pm to GynoSandberg
quote:
cutting, agility
You can measure that to an extent. I believe Cooks had the best numbers for those drills at the combine. May have even broken records
quote:
Meanwhile, great WRs across the league are ripping off huge numbers with QBs way worse than Tannehill.
And he has WRs on his own team able to get completions down field
This post was edited on 1/22/16 at 3:00 pm
Posted on 1/22/16 at 3:07 pm to Lester Earl
quote:
Lester Earl
What is the point of continuing these arguments? Its the same tards that continue to downplay Cooks and Ingram and that we should have drafted Landry AND Hill.
1. As if it could have happened
2. Hill isn't even a complete RB, as to why Gio is still playing so much.
Posted on 1/22/16 at 3:23 pm to htran90
quote:This thread is dumb. But so are the "you only wannnnnt him because he went to LSU. Take off your glasses." Do I think Landry is better than Cooks? No. But if I would have said I wanted Juice over Stephone Anthony I would have been a dumbass pussy LSU homer. Well...........
What is the point of continuing these arguments? Its the same tards that continue to downplay Cooks and Ingram and that we should have drafted Landry AND Hill.
1. As if it could have happened
2. Hill isn't even a complete RB, as to why Gio is still playing so much.
Posted on 1/22/16 at 3:29 pm to lsupride87
quote:
This thread is dumb. But so are the "you only wannnnnt him because he went to LSU. Take off your glasses." Do I think Landry is better than Cooks? No. But if I would have said I wanted Juice over Stephone Anthony I would have been a dumbass pussy LSU homer. Well...........
I said it on the first page, why not BOTH?
If you're comparing Cooks to Landry and Hill to Ingram it is a pointless argument.
Posted on 1/22/16 at 3:41 pm to htran90
quote:It is both
I said it on the first page, why not BOTH?
Posted on 1/22/16 at 3:53 pm to GynoSandberg
quote:Yea, cause that's not a plausible reason.
it's the QB play impacting his hard statistics
quote:How'd Antonio Brown do when Roethlisberger was out?
Meanwhile, great WRs across the league are ripping off huge numbers with QBs way worse than Tannehill
Posted on 1/22/16 at 3:54 pm to htran90
quote:
Its the same tards that continue to downplay Cooks
Posted on 1/22/16 at 4:28 pm to shel311
quote:
How'd Antonio Brown do when Roethlisberger was out?
Because the gap between Landry/Vick to Roethelisberger is equivalent to the gap between Tannehill and Brees? Tannehill to Brees is A LOT closer than that atrocity.
Brown also had a 100+ yard game against KC right before Ben came back.
Posted on 1/22/16 at 4:34 pm to shel311
Do you think that Landry would have near the same # of targets or receptions with the Saints?
Who would run deepr routes for the Saints to stretch the defense for the Saints if we had Landry instead of Cooks? Teams would just sit underneath all gamr
Do you think he'd be near as good a punt returner?
Keep in mind that Sproles went from the mid 20's to #1 in punt return average when he left the saints
Cooks had an incredible second half of the season. Touchdown machine scoring 8 in the last 9 games
Who would run deepr routes for the Saints to stretch the defense for the Saints if we had Landry instead of Cooks? Teams would just sit underneath all gamr
Do you think he'd be near as good a punt returner?
Keep in mind that Sproles went from the mid 20's to #1 in punt return average when he left the saints
Cooks had an incredible second half of the season. Touchdown machine scoring 8 in the last 9 games
This post was edited on 1/22/16 at 4:40 pm
Posted on 1/22/16 at 4:52 pm to TigerBait1127
This is a stupid thread
Didn t we have like a 10 page thread discussing this shite a few months ago?
Didn t we have like a 10 page thread discussing this shite a few months ago?
Back to top


1






