So why was Amari Cooper traded twice in his prime?

[Bills aPHILLYate]

1 hour ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

Why did 2 teams trade Cooper in his prime?

 

Because both teams were headed for horrendous years (the Raiders went 4-12 that year and the Browns look like they're in that neighborhood) and both wanted to dump salary and pick up draft picks as part of a look towards the future.

 

That was the primary reason he was traded in-season in both cases. I

Those are the reasons for those specific cases but it isn't for the 2nd trade during his prime (Dal to Cle). Dallas wasn't in the dumps when they traded him away. That was purely a misjudgment of the value of the contract goin forward.

 

That's why I offered the other perspective that provides more of a baseline answer regardless of the variables effecting the teams trading him away. 

[ColoradoBills]

3 minutes ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

 

 

 

Um, no, that's not his assumption at all. You're drastically mis-stating what he appears to have assumed. What you did there is all on you, reflective instead of your apparent misunderstanding of the very good reasons that produced these moves.

 

Why did the Raiders let him go? The same reasons losing teams looking to the future trade good players for draft picks every single year when the present is awful and they want to look to the future. It's anything but "no reason." They dealt away Khalil Mack at nearly the same time. Was that also because he sucked? LaCanfora reported on the Sunday morning [just before the Cooper trade] that everything was for sale in Oakland.) The idea that there was no reason is just stupid.

 

Gruden leaked damaging, untruths about Amari to the media, potentially harming his value right before he traded him…"Also zero evidence it was Gruden, but while we’re taking leaps let’s do it lol", you say?

 

OK, let’s take leaps. Why would Gruden put something in an email that might leak that was against his own self-interest? Golly, great question. It isn’t as if Gruden is a guy with a history of leaked emails in which he said stupid, rude things that would be against his own self-interest. That would never happen. Gruden is famous for his reticence, his cool head, and for never going against his own interest in emailed communi … oh, wait. 

 

And did it go against his own interests? Gruden got a first for Cooper, just what he asked for.

 

"Dallas traded for Amari for a first, paid him, then dumped him for a fifth a few years later. For no reason," you say? Good Lord, no reason? You may be the first person in the history of the world to say that saving $16M is "no reason."

 

Saying there was no reason is disingenuous. Dallas was in salary cap trouble and they saved $16M by trading him. I myself would not call $16M “no reason” in any possible way.

 

They had CeeDee Lamb as their number one and Gallup as a guy who looked like he was developing into a good #2 and was younger and cheaper and had TD weaons as well. “No reason”? Please.

 

"Cleveland traded for Amari, paid him, then dumped him for a third a few years later. For no reason," you say?  Again, “no reason” is either willful misunderstanding or flat-out ignoring the facts.

 

This kind of trade happens multiple times a year. Teams that are greatly underachieving their own expectations gain a bit of a more realistic POV and start looking to the future by dumping salary, trading away guys who would require big contracts, especially older guys requiring big contracts, and start collecting draft picks.

 

It's the opposite of “no reason,” it’s a wildly obvious reason.

 

!And none of this means anything. lol," you say? Again, that's just you pretending that there was "no reason" for these outcomes when the reasons were obvious. It means plenty. It means that lots of guys get traded for lots of reasons. Some of them go on to help their new teams a ton.)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gruden should have kept Amari.  Look at the WR draft picks during his 2nd Raiders term.

 

Marcell Ateman  - 7th round

Hunter Renfrow - 5th round (His best pick)

Henry Ruggs III - 1st round 12th overall

Lynn Bowden Jr. - 3rd round 80th overall

Bryan Edwards - 3rd round 81st overall

 

Definitely should have re-signed Amari to a 2nd contract.

 

 

[VW82]

On 10/24/2024 at 6:06 AM, Mister Defense said:

But I really disagree with your first sentence!  The OP said "teams couldn't wait to get rid of him", one of the most loaded BS things I have heard said about a BILLS' player on this board, as it is pure nonsense, with zero support for the irrational hate comment.  Surprised that you somehow lend credence to that, in part, by saying that Lofton was not a star player anymore when traded, as the Bills and 3 AFC Championships after he arrived would disagree.  And then somehow discounting  Moss in this 'Cooper has been traded too many times, so teams couldn't wait to get rid of him' nonsense, by stating that Moss was a 'malcontent'.  

 

Seems silly to accept and support such a loaded, biased unsupported point in the OP using those two examples, VW.

 

And while I agree that Cooper may not reach the Pro Bowl again--too many weapons on this offense--I think his presence on this team will mean other Bills' players will do so now in the coming years.  With Cooper leading the way, quietly, unassuming, but with great dedication and passion to the sport and the Bills.

 

 

I'm not "lend(ing) credence" to the idea that "teams couldn't wait to get rid of him." I never said anything close to that. I said Amari wasn't a star player which made him easier to trade away, or put another way, the fact that he was traded twice in his prime is evidence that he wasn't a true star.  

 

And yeah, Lofton wasn't a star anymore when he was traded to the Bills. He was coming off two very pedestrian seasons with the Raiders, and IIRC his first year here wasn't anything to write home about either. So three non-star/prime seasons in a row before he found his place in the k-gun in his mid-30s. Packers Lofton was a star. 

 

Comparing Amari with Randy Moss seems like a stretch in any sense, but it's especially dubious given Moss got traded for being a malcontent whereas Cooper has always been a good solider despite having occasional performance issues (e.g. production/drop issues at the end of both Raiders and Browns tenures).

 

We do agree about Cooper's presence helping everyone else in the offense though per your last paragraph.

Edited Friday at 06:08 PM by VW82

[Mister Defense]

6 hours ago, ColoradoBills said:

LOL at some of the "theories" on this board.

 

2018 was Jon Grudens first year as HC.  He did a lot of wheeling and dealing.

New HCs tend to get their players and get rid of expensive (or soon to be expensive) players to acquire "their guys".

 

Amari was on his 4th year of his rookie contract and had his 5th year option already picked up.

In the 6 games for the Raiders Cooper was 22 of 31 for 280 (12.7 Y/R) 1 TD and a 71% completion percentage.

Hardly bad stats.

He was TRADED before they committed to a long-term contract and got back their 1st rounder.

 

Stuff like this happens all the time with new Head Coaches.  Are we really saying Gruden's 2nd stint as HC for the Raiders

with his 22-31 record was doing a lot of smart things?

 

 

 

Great stats to back up excellent points, analysis.

 

Almost comical how illogical the ideas are that you needed to respond to, as if there was no consideration of logic, facts, or reason: 'Darn the facts, I will just throw out some random disparaging ideas about out new high quality wide receiver, hoping a few others with similar low (no?)  standards for truth and reason support me'.  (Notice how they have not?)

 

Excellent to see someone adding objectivity and reason to this discussion.

 

 

[Mister Defense]

6 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

 

 

 

Um, no, that's not his assumption at all. You're drastically mis-stating what he appears to have assumed. What you did there is all on you, reflective instead of your apparent misunderstanding of the very good reasons that produced these moves.

 

Why did the Raiders let him go? The same reasons losing teams looking to the future trade good players for draft picks every single year when the present is awful and they want to look to the future. It's anything but "no reason." They dealt away Khalil Mack at nearly the same time. Was that also because he sucked? LaCanfora reported on the Sunday morning [just before the Cooper trade] that everything was for sale in Oakland.) The idea that there was no reason is just stupid.

 

Gruden leaked damaging, untruths about Amari to the media, potentially harming his value right before he traded him…"Also zero evidence it was Gruden, but while we’re taking leaps let’s do it lol", you say?

 

OK, let’s take leaps. Why would Gruden put something in an email that might leak that was against his own self-interest? Golly, great question. It isn’t as if Gruden is a guy with a history of leaked emails in which he said stupid, rude things that would be against his own self-interest. That would never happen. Gruden is famous for his reticence, his cool head, and for never going against his own interest in emailed communi … oh, wait. 

 

And did it go against his own interests? Gruden got a first for Cooper, just what he asked for.

 

"Dallas traded for Amari for a first, paid him, then dumped him for a fifth a few years later. For no reason," you say? Good Lord, no reason? You may be the first person in the history of the world to say that saving $16M is "no reason."

 

Saying there was no reason is disingenuous. Dallas was in salary cap trouble and they saved $16M by trading him. I myself would not call $16M “no reason” in any possible way.

 

They had CeeDee Lamb as their number one and Gallup as a guy who looked like he was developing into a good #2 and was younger and cheaper and had TD weaons as well. “No reason”? Please.

 

"Cleveland traded for Amari, paid him, then dumped him for a third a few years later. For no reason," you say?  Again, “no reason” is either willful misunderstanding or flat-out ignoring the facts.

 

This kind of trade happens multiple times a year. Teams that are greatly underachieving their own expectations gain a bit of a more realistic POV and start looking to the future by dumping salary, trading away guys who would require big contracts, especially older guys requiring big contracts, and start collecting draft picks.

 

It's the opposite of “no reason,” it’s a wildly obvious reason.

 

!And none of this means anything. lol," you say? Again, that's just you pretending that there was "no reason" for these outcomes when the reasons were obvious. It means plenty. It means that lots of guys get traded for lots of reasons. Some of them go on to help their new teams a ton.)

 

The fact is plenty of really good players have been traded multiple times. Some turned out to have problems. Diggs for one.

 

Plenty also turned out to be really good pickups for nearly every team they played for. Look at Anquan Boldin, for one. Ahmad Rashad. James Lofton. Joey Galloway. Keyshawn Johnson. Randy Moss (though he clearly did screw Oakland, but benefitted the Pats a ton). Wes Welker. Brandon Marshall, of course. 

 

There are tons of others.

 

Trades happen.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Superb stuff Thurman!  Always were one of my favorite Bills, a dynamic game changer, one of the best all around backs ever.

 

Frankly, I was done with this thread, having given my two cents, or many cents, so it may have taken me a while to respond to that comically illogical mess of a post. Now I do not need to-- as I could not add almost anything to your extremely well supported slam dunk throttling.

 

I read the version in red, in the quote box, and really like that, the structure making your points and analysis even sharper, more direct,

 

You take every 'point', and carefully shred it, annihilate it, with superb facts, logic, and analysis, something he clearly cannot do.

 

I wish that could be the last post in this silly thread, but hoping that logic like yours wins over most, and I think it does.  We should wait to come back to this until after the Bills win in February next year.
 

If you agree with what I say here everyone who reads that should give it an 'awesome'...

 

 

 

Edited Friday at 11:43 PM by Mister Defense

[Thurman#1]

18 hours ago, Bills aPHILLYate said:

Those are the reasons for those specific cases but it isn't for the 2nd trade during his prime (Dal to Cle). Dallas wasn't in the dumps when they traded him away. That was purely a misjudgment of the value of the contract goin forward.

 

That's why I offered the other perspective that provides more of a baseline answer regardless of the variables effecting the teams trading him away. 

  

Hunh? Thanks for your kindness about the rest, but I absolutely addressed that trade from Dallas to Cleveland in the post. You might disagree, but at least I did address it. Here's what I said:

 

19 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

"Dallas traded for Amari for a first, paid him, then dumped him for a fifth a few years later. For no reason," you say? Good Lord, no reason? You may be the first person in the history of the world to say that saving $16M is "no reason."

 

Saying there was no reason is disingenuous. Dallas was in salary cap trouble and they saved $16M by trading him. I myself would not call $16M “no reason” in any possible way.

 

They had CeeDee Lamb as their number one and Gallup as a guy who looked like he was developing into a good #2 and was younger and cheaper and had TD weaons as well. “No reason”? Please.

 

Trades happen.

 

 

 

 

You're right that it's not the same reason as the other two, but Dallas had very good reason to let him go.

 

Like your name, by the way. Have a good day, and see you on the boards.

 

 

Edited Saturday at 12:15 PM by Thurman#1

[FireChans]

19 hours ago, Thurman#1 said:

 

 

 

 

 

Um, no, that's not his assumption at all. You're drastically mis-stating what he appears to have assumed. What you did there is all on you, reflective instead of your apparent misunderstanding of the very good reasons that produced these moves.

 

Why did the Raiders let him go? The same reasons losing teams looking to the future trade good players for draft picks every single year when the present is awful and they want to look to the future. It's anything but "no reason." They dealt away Khalil Mack at nearly the same time. Was that also because he sucked? LaCanfora reported on the Sunday morning [just before the Cooper trade] that everything was for sale in Oakland.) The idea that there was no reason is just stupid.

 

Gruden leaked damaging, untruths about Amari to the media, potentially harming his value right before he traded him…"Also zero evidence it was Gruden, but while we’re taking leaps let’s do it lol", you say?

 

OK, let’s take leaps. Why would Gruden put something in an email that might leak that was against his own self-interest? Golly, great question. It isn’t as if Gruden is a guy with a history of leaked emails in which he said stupid, rude things that would be against his own self-interest. That would never happen. Gruden is famous for his reticence, his cool head, and for never going against his own interest in emailed communi … oh, wait. 

 

And did it go against his own interests? Gruden got a first for Cooper, just what he asked for.

 

"Dallas traded for Amari for a first, paid him, then dumped him for a fifth a few years later. For no reason," you say? Good Lord, no reason? You may be the first person in the history of the world to say that saving $16M is "no reason."

 

Saying there was no reason is disingenuous. Dallas was in salary cap trouble and they saved $16M by trading him. I myself would not call $16M “no reason” in any possible way.

 

They had CeeDee Lamb as their number one and Gallup as a guy who looked like he was developing into a good #2 and was younger and cheaper and had TD weaons as well. “No reason”? Please.

 

"Cleveland traded for Amari, paid him, then dumped him for a third a few years later. For no reason," you say?  Again, “no reason” is either willful misunderstanding or flat-out ignoring the facts.

 

This kind of trade happens multiple times a year. Teams that are greatly underachieving their own expectations gain a bit of a more realistic POV and start looking to the future by dumping salary, trading away guys who would require big contracts, especially older guys requiring big contracts, and start collecting draft picks.

 

It's the opposite of “no reason,” it’s a wildly obvious reason.

 

!And none of this means anything. lol," you say? Again, that's just you pretending that there was "no reason" for these outcomes when the reasons were obvious. It means plenty. It means that lots of guys get traded for lots of reasons. Some of them go on to help their new teams a ton.)

 

The fact is plenty of really good players have been traded multiple times. Some turned out to have problems. Diggs for one.

 

Plenty also turned out to be really good pickups for nearly every team they played for. Look at Anquan Boldin, for one. Ahmad Rashad. James Lofton. Joey Galloway. Keyshawn Johnson. Randy Moss (though he clearly did screw Oakland, but benefitted the Pats a ton). Wes Welker. Brandon Marshall, of course. 

 

There are tons of others.

 

Trades happen.

 

 

 

 

 

There’s lots of reasons. Lots of reasons could be culture, attitude, contract etc etc.

 

The guys you referenced, like Brandon Marshall, Randy Moss, were traded in large part due to their attitudes. That’s kind of the point. We all accept they were basically locker room malcontents. Do we have solid facts? Were we in the building? No. 
 

I don’t know if Amari is or isn’t. What I do know is that it’s unusual for a player of his caliber to play for 4 teams before 30.

 

This is no different than folks screaming there’s no way Diggs could be a problem and force his way out of Buffalo lol. If Amari is great here, great. Would it surprise me if he’s playing elsewhere in 2026? No.

[Mister Defense]

57 minutes ago, FireChans said:

There’s lots of reasons. Lots of reasons could be culture, attitude, contract etc etc.

 

The guys you referenced, like Brandon Marshall, Randy Moss, were traded in large part due to their attitudes. That’s kind of the point. We all accept they were basically locker room malcontents. Do we have solid facts? Were we in the building? No. 
 

I don’t know if Amari is or isn’t. What I do know is that it’s unusual for a player of his caliber to play for 4 teams before 30.

 

This is no different than folks screaming there’s no way Diggs could be a problem and force his way out of Buffalo lol. If Amari is great here, great. Would it surprise me if he’s playing elsewhere in 2026? No.

 

It is obvious to anyone, or to any adult, that it is  monumentally different than the Diggs' situation. First of all, unless their heads were in the sand, they heard/read/saw how undermining Diggs was here toward the end.  Almost no one I know did not believe that was the seminal reason that Diggs was traded. And that, added with what we had heard had happened in Minnesota, convinced most he was a malcontent.

 

And you do the same ol' immensely illogical--and unscrupulous-- thing, say you "don't know if Amaria is or isn't" a malcontent, but he  was traded four times.

 

 Just sayin', right? 

 

Just throwing that out there, with zero evidence--and zero logic shown.  Again.

 

Literally zero to indicate Cooper was in any way a  malcontent, but you just, again, throw out that BS to tarnish the guy. 

 

Just so no one is stupid enough to consider this hatesense as viable in any way. These are Cooper's stats in his last two years in Cleveland:

 

 2022:  78 receptions    1,160 yards   14.9 yards a catch and 9 TDs

 2023:  72 receptions    1,250 yards  17.4 yards a catch and 5 TDS, and elected to the Pro Bowl

 

And zero, zlich, nada, not one single word or reference whatsoever by any Cleveland player, coach, reporter, water boy--no one indicating that in any way he was a malcontent.  Why does the poster then say he does not know if Coooper "is or isn't one? Because the facts mean zero to some people.

 

Don't let the facts get in the way of your hate.

 

 

 

Edited Saturday at 01:34 PM by Mister Defense

[Magox]

Because CD lamb emerged and they thought that Gallup would develop more than he did, it was a cost cutting measure.

 

Cleveland shipped him off because they were going nowhere quickly with no hope in sight.

[FireChans]

23 minutes ago, Mister Defense said:

 

It is obvious to anyone, or to any adult, that it is  monumentally different than the Diggs' situation. First of all, unless their heads were in the sand, they heard/read/saw how undermining Diggs was here toward the end.  Almost no one I know did not believe that was the seminal reason that Diggs was traded. And that, added with what he had heard had happened in Minnesota, convinced most he was a malcontent.

 

And you do the same ol' immensely illogical--and unscrupulous-- thing, say you "don't know if Amaria is or isn't" a malcontent, but he  was traded four times.

 

 Just sayin', right? 

 

Just throwing that out there, with zero evidence--and zero logic shown.  Again.

 

Literally zero to indicate Cooper was in any way a  malcontent, but you just, again, throw out that BS to tarnish the guy. 

 

Just so no one is stupid enough to consider this hatesense as viable in any way. These are Cooper's stats in his last two years in Cleveland:

 

 2022:  78 receptions    1,160 yards   14.9 yards a catch and 9 TDs

 2023:  72 receptions    1,250 yards  17.4 yards a catch and % TDS, and elected to the Pro Bowl

 

And zero, zlich, nada, not one single word or reference whatsoever by any Cleveland player, coach, reporter, water boy--no one indicating that in any way he was a malcontent.  Why does the poster then say he does not know if Coooper "is or isn't one? Because the facts mean zero to some people.

 

Don't let the facts get in the way of your hate.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

You are getting very emotional. It’s not hate at all. 
 

The word out of Cleveland was that Amari wanted out.

 

https://www.si.com/nfl/bengals/news/unhappy-in-cleveland-browns-star-wide-receiver-amari-cooper-sounds-open-to-trade-01j4x2sbt5ph

 

He wanted to be traded for Aiyuk. He commented on instagram that he wouldn’t mind being traded lol.

 

So zero zilch nada? 👎 

Edited Saturday at 01:34 PM by FireChans

[Mister Defense]

3 minutes ago, FireChans said:

You are getting very emotional. It’s not hate at all. 
 

The word out of Cleveland was that Amari wanted out.

 

https://www.si.com/nfl/bengals/news/unhappy-in-cleveland-browns-star-wide-receiver-amari-cooper-sounds-open-to-trade-01j4x2sbt5ph

 

He wanted to be traded for Aiyuk. He commented on instagram that he wouldn’t mind being traded lol.

 

So zero zilch nada? 👎 

 

 

But just like your designed to be misleading post, you know perfectly well that your and a few others' implication in this thread is not the more generic definition of malcontent, and one seldom actually used anymore,  that he was just dissatisfied there and wanted to go elsewhere.  I think you must know that likely applies to the vast majority of players on a team like that in Cleveland, or Dalls, right now.

 

Instead, it is clear that you have meant the definition that now almost always applies to the term for most, someone who complaint, makes trouble, undermines.

 

Yup, so zero, zlich to indicate that, which is your crystal clear intended  use of that term.

 

 

[FireChans]

Just now, Mister Defense said:

 

 

But just like your designed to be misleading post, you know perfectly well that your and a few others' implication in this thread is not the more generic definition of malcontent, and one seldom actually used anymore,  that he was just dissatisfied there and wanted to go elsewhere.  I think you must know that likely applies to the vast majority of players on a team like that in Cleveland, or Dalls, right now.

 

Instead, it is clear that you have meant the definition that now almost always applies to the term for most, someone who complaint, makes trouble, undermines.

 

Yup, so zero, zlich to indicate that, which is your crystal clear intended  use of that term.

 

 

I mean, making social media posts in the offseason about wanting to be traded IS malcontent behavior. It’s Stefon Diggs-like behavior, right? That’s basically what he did, right?

 

If a Bills player next AUGUST, is tweeting “I wouldn’t mind a trade,” would that raise your eyebrows? I mean that’s on the doorstep of the season. What if that Bill had already been traded two times prior? Nothing to see here? Not malcontent behavior?

 

Thats the parallel to Diggs. 
 

Maybe Cooper is a model citizen and a victim of the salary cap and being closer to the 20th best WR than the 5th has made teams dump him.
 

Maybe he’s not perfect and has used what leverage he has to get off teams he doesn’t want to be on, or to get better contracts. Even if he has, who cares? 

I don’t know. It’s not hate to understand that most guys don’t play for 4 teams. I don’t even care if Cooper becomes a problem a year or two from now, because he’s trying to get more money. That’s his prerogative. 
 

The real problem is fans seeing guys like Diggs or Cooper float around from team to team as mercenaries, and then start thinking they are gonna be different in Buffalo, and they are gonna buy a house next to Josh’s and raise their family for 40 years here. 
 

“Diggs would never pull the same Vikings playbook in Buffalo!”

 

Of course, he did.

 

”Cooper would never make social media posts about wanting to leave the team now that he’s in Buffalo”

 

Of course, he could. If his money’s not right or he’s not happy, it’s totally on the board. 
 

So yeah, no hate. Just no expectations either. If Cooper is happy a Bill and plays here for 3 years and has no issues, awesome. If he gets a 2 year extension and then starts acting out a bit when his deal is coming to an end because he’s looking for another payday, I won’t be surprised and hurt and shocked. Sounds like some of you will be though, just like some of you are still so shocked and hurt about Diggs.

[machine gun kelly]

On 10/23/2024 at 3:27 PM, Augie said:

 

That is one ugly list of owners! Yikes! 

 

He should love catching balls from Josh and having a decent owner for the first time ever. 

You took the words out of my mouth, and add into it Beane will probably extend him given what he will do the rest of the year, and will provide stability to the Bills.  He’s in many ways the anti Diggs in he is introspective, and thinking man as a ches expert, etc.

 

He also now has a line that protects Josh, amd solid RB’s to work with along side him and two solid TE’s.  Our defense is far superior to the Raiders and Dallas, and even Cleveland has been porous this year.  There are no correlations between the Pegulas to Haslam, Mark Davis, and Jerrah.

 

 

[Mister Defense]

3 hours ago, FireChans said:

I mean, making social media posts in the offseason about wanting to be traded IS malcontent behavior. It’s Stefon Diggs-like behavior, right? That’s basically what he did, right?

 

If a Bills player next AUGUST, is tweeting “I wouldn’t mind a trade,” would that raise your eyebrows? I mean that’s on the doorstep of the season. What if that Bill had already been traded two times prior? Nothing to see here? Not malcontent behavior?

 

Thats the parallel to Diggs. 
 

Maybe Cooper is a model citizen and a victim of the salary cap and being closer to the 20th best WR than the 5th has made teams dump him.
 

Maybe he’s not perfect and has used what leverage he has to get off teams he doesn’t want to be on, or to get better contracts. Even if he has, who cares? 

I don’t know. It’s not hate to understand that most guys don’t play for 4 teams. I don’t even care if Cooper becomes a problem a year or two from now, because he’s trying to get more money. That’s his prerogative. 
 

The real problem is fans seeing guys like Diggs or Cooper float around from team to team as mercenaries, and then start thinking they are gonna be different in Buffalo, and they are gonna buy a house next to Josh’s and raise their family for 40 years here. 
 

“Diggs would never pull the same Vikings playbook in Buffalo!”

 

Of course, he did.

 

”Cooper would never make social media posts about wanting to leave the team now that he’s in Buffalo”

 

Of course, he could. If his money’s not right or he’s not happy, it’s totally on the board. 
 

So yeah, no hate. Just no expectations either. If Cooper is happy a Bill and plays here for 3 years and has no issues, awesome. If he gets a 2 year extension and then starts acting out a bit when his deal is coming to an end because he’s looking for another payday, I won’t be surprised and hurt and shocked. Sounds like some of you will be though, just like some of you are still so shocked and hurt about Diggs.

 

Time will tell.

 

I obviously don't agree with any comparison between Diggs and Cooper. Like Jaire Alexander said after Diggs went after him before the Packers' game, and during, and after, "He is a child".  Alexander, taking the high road, was being kind.  But I  agreed with his assessment. On the other hand, Cooper has always seemed to handle himself like a man.

 

I think others have made a great case in this thread by refuting the 3 trades as a reason to doubt him. 

 

From everything I have heard about Cooper, his character, work ethic and production, including great stats in the last two years, he is the opposite kind of player and person as Diggs. He would seem to be very happy just to do his job, catch a lot of footballs, get in the end zone a lot, and keep himself out of the spotlight.

 

We will see how things turn out, but I definitely agree with your more optimistic options late in your post, and think the Bills will  be very pleased with his production and what he does to improve  the Bills' overall  offense going forward. I think that the things we saw in his first week, including 34 points scored, Josh having his most productive 2nd half ever, and Coleman garnering 125 yards and Rookie of the Week, are harbingers of things to come, 

 

I'd predict that after 3-4 more games a high percentage of Bills' fans will be calling for Beane to sign him to a new contract.  And I think they will.

 

 

 

 

Edited Saturday at 05:50 PM by Mister Defense

[BADOLBILZ]

 

IMO teams want their best players to want to win the most.   It sets the tone.   So his "it's-a-business" demeanor isn't seen as ideal for a star player.   I don't disagree....he has been associated with more losing than you'd expect given the talent on the teams he's had so there could be something to it.  But the Bills were beggars in this market.   He is very talented and in the short term at least he opens up the offense greatly.   If he plays in the NFL for a lot longer and settles in as a WR2-WR3 somewhere I think he will be more appreciated.   

[Mister Defense]

23 minutes ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

IMO teams want their best players to want to win the most.   It sets the tone.   So his "it's-a-business" demeanor isn't seen as ideal for a star player.   I don't disagree....he has been associated with more losing than you'd expect given the talent on the teams he's had so there could be something to it.  But the Bills were beggars in this market.   He is very talented and in the short term at least he opens up the offense greatly.   If he plays in the NFL for a lot longer and settles in as a WR2-WR3 somewhere I think he will be more appreciated.   

 

 

Hmm, I had never thought about that, that Cooper's weak attitude toward the game, not taking it as seriously as other top players, not being as passionate, "may be associated with more losing than you'd expect given the talent on the teams'" he's been on.

 

I was surprised to read that actually.

 

I had thought that Cooper's teams, especially the cowgirls and Browns  were at least fairly successful when he was on them. And I had also thought that his own statistics during much of that time were excellent. And also  because he made three Pro Bowls with those two teams, and two with the Raiders.

I am shocked to find out that he may have actually been a catalyst in those teams' losses, rather than in the success they may have had. Well, he was likely their  #1 wide receiver on those teams, so it  does make sense that if he did poorly, the teams would too.

 

I think I am starting to agree with the criticism of Cooper by the very few doing so in this thread, as I am learning so much about him. 

 

It is shattering my my previous perceptions and attitudes about the guy.

 

Just a few days ago I would have rated the trade for Amari Cooper as a 8-9. But now I have moved that down to a 2!

 

Oh, well, maybe another receiver will become available before the draft deadline.

 

 

 

 

 

 

[BADOLBILZ]

20 minutes ago, Mister Defense said:

 

 

Hmm, I had never thought about that, that Cooper's weak attitude toward the game, not taking it as seriously as other top players, not being as passionate, "may be associated with more losing than you'd expect given the talent on the teams'" he's been on.

 

I was surprised to read that actually.

 

I had thought that Cooper's teams, especially the cowgirls and Browns  were at least fairly successful when he was on them. And I had also thought that his own statistics during much of that time were excellent. And also  because he made three Pro Bowls with those two teams, and two with the Raiders.

I am shocked to find out that he may have actually been a catalyst in those teams' losses, rather than in the success they may have had. Well, he was likely their  #1 wide receiver on those teams, so it  does make sense that if he did poorly, the teams would too.

 

I think I am starting to agree with the criticism of Cooper by the very few doing so in this thread, as I am learning so much about him. 

 

It is shattering my my previous perceptions and attitudes about the guy.

 

Just a few days ago I would have rated the trade for Amari Cooper as a 8-9. But now I have moved that down to a 2!

 

Oh, well, maybe another receiver will become available before the draft deadline.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yeah Cooper played on Raiders and Cowboys teams that greatly underperformed expectations.   I mean when that Carr/Cooper team went 12-4 they looked like a team that was going to be around for awhile.   And they totally fell apart.   Cowboys teams he was on regularly fell way short as well.

 

Wins and losses aren't often mentioned as a WR stat but for comparison sake he's 77-70 in his career despite playing on a lot of talented teams........and hindsight-perceived locker room cancer Stefon Diggs is 96-46.  

 

But Cooper is a big talent.   The fact that he has four career 200+ yard games speaks to how explosive he can be. 

 

 

Edited Saturday at 09:24 PM by BADOLBILZ

[FireChans]

4 hours ago, Mister Defense said:

On the other hand, Cooper has always seemed to handle himself like a man.

He is 3 months removed from saying he would welcome a trade on social media. What?

[Coach Tuesday]

2 hours ago, BADOLBILZ said:

 

IMO teams want their best players to want to win the most.   It sets the tone.   So his "it's-a-business" demeanor isn't seen as ideal for a star player.   I don't disagree....he has been associated with more losing than you'd expect given the talent on the teams he's had so there could be something to it.  But the Bills were beggars in this market.   He is very talented and in the short term at least he opens up the offense greatly.   If he plays in the NFL for a lot longer and settles in as a WR2-WR3 somewhere I think he will be more appreciated.   

This is a good point.  There were always whispers that he was a bit of a dog (not a dawg) but maybe he just doesn’t have the fire that some guys have (like Diggs, who maybe has too much of it).  To be fair none of the QBs Cooper played with were strong alphas except maybe Dak, but Dak has not been able to overcome the dysfunction of that franchise.  Maybe Cooper will do better on a team with a real leader at QB where he can just go ball.  

Back to Diggs, reading between all of the lines, I suspect he would let Allen have it whenever Allen ran a play as called but not featuring Diggs, and it got into Allen’s head and hindered his ability to play within structure.  It became toxic on the field.  I don’t think he’ll have that issue with Cooper unless he gets fixated on his contract year target share but again, the kind of moping he’s known for is 1/1000 of what Diggs would get up to and I think they can handle it.

[mannc]

Actually, Cooper's been traded three times in his prime...it's just not as unusual as it used to be and no longer means that a guy is a "disappointment."  He's exactly what the Bills needed and the price was more than reasonable...