The W
Views: 100063588
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Calendar | Color chart | Log in for more!
25.10.14 2304
The W - Football - Chris Cooley gets a little too revealing
This thread has 88 referrals leading to it
Register and log in to post!
Thread rated: 4.94
Pages: 1
(867 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (14 total)
The Thrill
Banger








Since: 16.4.02
From: Green Bay, WI

Since last post: 192 days
Last activity: 38 days
#1 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.25
Welcome home, men of the 2nd Bn, 127th Inf, 32d "Red Arrow" Brigade, WI Army Nat'l Guard! Good luck to those down south.

Ever wanna see an NFL tight end study his playbook...naked?

Looks like you just missed your chance. (ESPN) Apparently Cooley uploaded that photo to his blog by mistake.

And no, I didn't see it. No, I don't know where you can, you goofs.









NWAWisconsin.com...Live, Local Pro Wrestling!

Promote this thread!
JustinShapiro
Scrapple
Moderator








Since: 12.12.01
From: Pittsburgh, PA

Since last post: 10 days
Last activity: 16 min.
#2 Posted on | Instant Rating: 8.14
Those are balls. This close, they always look like football plays. Nope, you’re looking at balls.
Bullitt
Shot in the dark








Since: 11.1.02
From: Houston

Since last post: 3 days
Last activity: 3 days
#3 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.14
And I just got finished re-watching AD season one, too.
Mr. Boffo
Scrapple








Since: 24.3.02
From: Oshkosh, WI

Since last post: 454 days
Last activity: 415 days
#4 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.90
I saw it. It looked like he had been in the pool, if you know what I mean.
If you insist on seeing it, it's at http://playingthefield.net/content/view/58/27/ .
StaggerLee
Scrapple








Since: 3.10.02
From: Right side of the tracks

Since last post: 8 days
Last activity: 5 days
#5 Posted on | Instant Rating: 1.82
Well, at least he's rich and famous.
kwik
Summer sausage








Since: 5.9.02
From: Norwich, NY

Since last post: 75 days
Last activity: 22 min.
AIM:  
#6 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.54
It actually gets better (not so much that he posted his junk for the world to see, but whatever...)

One of the Washington Post bloggers (voices.washingtonpost.com) asked Cooley's brother, who also runs his site, if this would prompt any editorial changes to the blog, like maybe "no more naked pictures?", and here was his response:



    The rule is, no more posting without a full editing look by me," Tanner said. "We already thought we had this rule after Chris posted his check with his routing number and everything on it, but then this happened






Big Bad
Scrapple








Since: 4.1.02
From: Dorchester, Ontario

Since last post: 6 days
Last activity: 4 hours
#7 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.56
Now, if Cooley wants to post illicit photos of his wife on his blog, that's just fine.



“How is it that I am a good actor? What I do is I... pretend to be the person I’m portraying. You’re confused. Case in point: in Lord of the Rings, Peter Jackson comes to me and says ‘I would like you to be Gandalf the Wizard,’ and I said ‘You are aware that I am not really a wizard?’ and Peter Jackson said ‘I would like you to use your acting skills to portray a wizard for the duration of the show.’ So I said ‘Okay’ and then I said to myself ‘Mmm.. How do I do that?’ And this is what I did: I imagined that I was a wizard, and then I pretended, and acted, in that way on the stage. How did I know what to say? The words were written down for me in a script. How did I know where to stand? People told me where to stand." -- Sir Ian McKellen, Extras
supersalvadoran
Landjager








Since: 10.1.08
From: westbury, new york

Since last post: 10 days
Last activity: 7 days
#8 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.07
Now, if I was a coach on the Redskins, I would be rather pissed at Cooley. Not at showing his wang on the internet, though that's a image none of us needed. I would be mad at him taking pics of pages in the team's playbook and posting it on his blog. Yeah, it may not have had anything significant on it, but why you want to show ANY info from your playbook to where your opponents could gather up tips about how the Skins run their D? I thought teams made it a big point for their players NOT to show anything about the playbook at any cost, like it was CIA info or something.

I would say it's a really stupid move on his part. But after reading Kwik's post, it sounds like par for the course. What's next? "I wanted to show you guys how my real name is spelled; I didn't mean to show you my whole social security card, duhhhhh!".



Zeruel
Thirty Millionth Hit
Moderator








Since: 2.1.02
From: The Silver Spring in the Land of Mary.

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 21 hours
#9 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.05
    Originally posted by supersalvadoran
    I would be mad at him taking pics of pages in the team's playbook and posting it on his blog.


Did you look at the pic? There wasn't a play in the pic. It was a test he had to take in prep for the Saints. For those who don't want to click and look (you don't really see anything, and I don't know if that's good for you or bad for Cooley) it says the following:

TIGHT ENDS TEST
Vs. New Orleans Saints

1. Briefly describe the the plays of their defensive ends.

. ___91___
. ___94___
. ___93___

He does have notes next to the numbers but I can't make out enough words to transcribe it. The resolution is too low and zooming it makes it less readable.

2. Do they match out personnel on 1st and 2nd down when we go Zebra?

Yes

On 3rd down?

Yes

3. Who are their starting Safeties in Regular and Tiger personnel?

41 55(?? I can't make it out) 43 45(?? hard to read)

4. Do the Safeties change in Nickel? If so, who comes in?
No

5. Which LB comes out of the game if they Sub to Nickel personnel?
55, we (??) out (??)

6. 1st & 2nd down blitzes -- they like to blitz from what side of the defense?

(?? it looks like he wrote "1 Tech"
----

It is an interesting look into how a player preps for a game, except for the whole naked-on-a-bed thing. Ug.





-- 2006 Time magazine Person of the Year --

"Who would want to rent a chicken?" -- The Bowler
supersalvadoran
Landjager








Since: 10.1.08
From: westbury, new york

Since last post: 10 days
Last activity: 7 days
#10 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.07
    Originally posted by Zeruel
      Originally posted by supersalvadoran
      I would be mad at him taking pics of pages in the team's playbook and posting it on his blog.


    Did you look at the pic?



Nope, I prefer not to; I read the story on ESPN. I still can't understand why he would want to post this page on the blog, knowing how paranoid and protective some coaches can get about their playcalling. Yeah, it was just a test, but maybe the Saints could had gotten some info into how the Skins D view their players by what he wrote in his answers. Not that it did them any good on Sunday. My point being is that, based on what I've heard about teams and their playbooks, you're supposed to keep everything about the book under lock and key like your life depended on it, not put it out to where everyone can see it.

Oh, and Zeruel, I have to give you credit to checking out the pic. You either braver or more sexually comfortable with yourself than I could ever hope to be.





Zeruel
Thirty Millionth Hit
Moderator








Since: 2.1.02
From: The Silver Spring in the Land of Mary.

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 21 hours
#11 Posted on | Instant Rating: 4.05
    Originally posted by supersalvadoran
    My point being is that, based on what I've heard about teams and their playbooks, you're supposed to keep everything about the book under lock and key like your life depended on it, not put it out to where everyone can see it.


I get your point. I would be livid, just being a fan, if there was a play diagram on his blog. Most of the test was hard to read. If the Saints can read his notes, they can see how their defense has been scouted and what their tendencies are. That is a bad thing, unless you're a Saints fan.


    Oh, and Zeruel, I have to give you credit to checking out the pic. You either braver or more sexually comfortable with yourself than I could ever hope to be.




Yea and yes. It's just a penis. I think. I couldn't tell if I was looking at the frank or beans.

(edited by Zeruel on 16.9.08 0507)


-- 2006 Time magazine Person of the Year --

"Who would want to rent a chicken?" -- The Bowler
tarnish
Frankfurter








Since: 13.2.02
From: Back in the Heart of Hali

Since last post: 503 days
Last activity: 3 days
AIM:  
Y!:
#12 Posted on | Instant Rating: 7.60
    Originally posted by Zeruel

    1. Briefly describe the the plays of their defensive ends.
    . ___91___
    . ___94___
    . ___93___



#91 & #94
Def'n both smallish players
- ?? ?? ?? - Bull Rush Technique
- Use hands well
- Can shed blocks [but] don't always do it

#93 - Long arms - ?? ?? ?? ??, ?? [Loves?] a RIP Technique



    5. Which LB comes out of the game if they Sub to Nickel personnel?
    55, we (??) out (??)



I think it says, "#55 [comes out], WB [Weakside Backer] is out anyway". That doesn't totally make sense to me, but then again, I don't know the Saints' defense.



    6. 1st & 2nd down blitzes -- they like to blitz from what side of the defense?

    (?? it looks like he wrote "1 Tech")



I suspect that's exactly what he wrote.

A Defensive Lineman in "1 Technique" is lined up in the gap between the center and the Offensive Guard. The numbered techniques can vary between teams an defenses, but these are the ones I always knew. You also see variations like "4i Tech" which generally means "4 technique, inside shade" which is not straight head-up on the Offensive Tackle like a true 4, but also not in the gap between Guard and Tackle (B Gap) like a true 3.

That said, he doesn't actually answer the question, which was "which SIDE of the defense" not "which gap". Unless, of course, the Saints use another numbering system (I've seen one where odd numbers are strong side and evens are weak side and vice versa).

    Originally posted by supersalvadoran

    Oh, and Zeruel, I have to give you credit to checking out the pic. You either braver or more sexually comfortable with yourself than I could ever hope to be.



Firstly, the pecker's at the bottom of the image. You can easily crop it out or move the window so that the part you don't want to see is off the page.

Second, it's a fucking penis; get over it. I assume you have one that's somewhat similar. Nobody's asking you to stare at it, touch it, or otherwise do anything other than snicker and think, "check out tool boy putting his junk on the Interweebs."
JustinShapiro
Scrapple
Moderator








Since: 12.12.01
From: Pittsburgh, PA

Since last post: 10 days
Last activity: 16 min.
#13 Posted on | Instant Rating: 8.14
I clicked on the pic with all deliberate speed.

Penis report: flaccid, circumcized, not shot from the most flattering angle.

Testicles report: largely obfuscated by the penis. well, not that largely.
BigDaddyLoco
Scrapple








Since: 2.1.02

Since last post: 13 hours
Last activity: 2 hours
#14 Posted on | Instant Rating: 3.47
I actually sat and stared at the thing forever and came away seeing nothing ... I'm fine with this, but a little disturbed that I spent so much time investigating this.
Thread rated: 4.94
Pages: 1
Thread ahead: NFL Playoff Seedings after Week 2
Next thread: 2008 College Football Week 3
Previous thread: MNF Week 2 '08: Eagles @ Cowboys
(867 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
We Canadians are lucky ... both TSN and the CBC pick up the BBC feed of all the games. Snooty English accent + good football = an entertaining time to be had. It really does make a difference when the play by play man has something worthwhile to say.
Related threads: Jason Taylor won't be in Miami's Camp this summer - Spagnuolo turns down Redskins job - Joe Gibbs Resigns - More...
The W - Football - Chris Cooley gets a little too revealingRegister and log in to post!

The W™ message board

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim

This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.126 seconds.