49ers released Chris Cook *Updated*

Did a little research on Chris Cook. Athletically, he has every measurable to match up with any player and be successful on the field. The question is -- was scheme a big culprit in his struggles? Minnesota plays a Tampa-two style which is horribly unaligned with Cook's style of play and what he was most successful with at Virginia.

What we play here is better tailored to his strengths, so we'll see if it pans out. Again, very high reward with absolutely zero risk taking him on. Great move by Baalke.

Originally posted by OnTheClock:
Did a little research on Chris Cook. Athletically, he has every measurable to match up with any player and be successful on the field. The question is -- was scheme a big culprit in his struggles? Minnesota plays a Tampa-two style which is horribly unaligned with Cook's style of play and what he was most successful with at Virginia.

What we play here is better tailored to his strengths, so we'll see if it pans out. Again, very high reward with absolutely zero risk taking him on. Great move by Baalke.

Totally agree. Cook is well suited for press coverage, but not bailing back into zone after the initial jam. That's what the Tampa 2 asked him to do. I don't think he has the read & react instincts to be an effective press-zone corner. He needs to be in press-man. Just tell him to stick to his man and he'll be much more effective.

Originally posted by SofaKing:

Originally posted by OnTheClock:
Did a little research on Chris Cook. Athletically, he has every measurable to match up with any player and be successful on the field. The question is -- was scheme a big culprit in his struggles? Minnesota plays a Tampa-two style which is horribly unaligned with Cook's style of play and what he was most successful with at Virginia.

What we play here is better tailored to his strengths, so we'll see if it pans out. Again, very high reward with absolutely zero risk taking him on. Great move by Baalke.

Totally agree. Cook is well suited for press coverage, but not bailing back into zone after the initial jam. That's what the Tampa 2 asked him to do. I don't think he has the read & react instincts to be an effective press-zone corner. He needs to be in press-man. Just tell him to stick to his man and he'll be much more effective.

Agreed...Baalke has a way of finding talent in these "camp fodder" parts with Brock, Cox, Dorsey...hopefully Cook is another, as is Carrier, Swanson, Martin and Gabbert (if needed). Thanks for the research and insight fellas.

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by SofaKing:

Originally posted by OnTheClock:

Did a little research on Chris Cook. Athletically, he has every measurable to match up with any player and be successful on the field. The question is -- was scheme a big culprit in his struggles? Minnesota plays a Tampa-two style which is horribly unaligned with Cook's style of play and what he was most successful with at Virginia.

What we play here is better tailored to his strengths, so we'll see if it pans out. Again, very high reward with absolutely zero risk taking him on. Great move by Baalke.

Totally agree. Cook is well suited for press coverage, but not bailing back into zone after the initial jam. That's what the Tampa 2 asked him to do. I don't think he has the read & react instincts to be an effective press-zone corner. He needs to be in press-man. Just tell him to stick to his man and he'll be much more effective.

Agreed...Baalke has a way of finding talent in these "camp fodder" parts with Brock, Cox, Dorsey...hopefully Cook is another, as is Carrier, Swanson, Martin and Gabbert (if needed). Thanks for the research and insight fellas.

I am even more hopeful now for Cook and think he could land that last spot on the roster, a la Asomugha. I hope he's successful because he's so young and if it was just the system causing problems, a shift over to us + some hard word by Cook to improve himself will = big dividends for our team. We wouldn't have to give Culliver a big deal, and we could keep him as the slot corner.

Would love it if we could consider this our future strong CB tandem: Brock/Cook/Culliver/(rookie here)/Morris

Originally posted by OnTheClock:

Originally posted by NCommand:

Originally posted by SofaKing:

Originally posted by OnTheClock:
Did a little research on Chris Cook. Athletically, he has every measurable to match up with any player and be successful on the field. The question is -- was scheme a big culprit in his struggles? Minnesota plays a Tampa-two style which is horribly unaligned with Cook's style of play and what he was most successful with at Virginia.

What we play here is better tailored to his strengths, so we'll see if it pans out. Again, very high reward with absolutely zero risk taking him on. Great move by Baalke.

Totally agree. Cook is well suited for press coverage, but not bailing back into zone after the initial jam. That's what the Tampa 2 asked him to do. I don't think he has the read & react instincts to be an effective press-zone corner. He needs to be in press-man. Just tell him to stick to his man and he'll be much more effective.

Agreed...Baalke has a way of finding talent in these "camp fodder" parts with Brock, Cox, Dorsey...hopefully Cook is another, as is Carrier, Swanson, Martin and Gabbert (if needed). Thanks for the research and insight fellas.

I am even more hopeful now for Cook and think he could land that last spot on the roster, a la Asomugha. I hope he's successful because he's so young and if it was just the system causing problems, a shift over to us + some hard word by Cook to improve himself will = big dividends for our team. We wouldn't have to give Culliver a big deal, and we could keep him as the slot corner.

Would love it if we could consider this our future strong CB tandem: Brock/Cook/Culliver/(rookie here)/Morris

He has a great opportunity here, that's for sure. Like NC said, Baalke has an eye for these kind of guys. Rogers, Whitner, Dorsey were high draft picks that were viewed as underachievers. Their original teams had not interest in retaining them. They came here and flourished. I hope the same for Cook.

Originally posted by NCommand:
Puck, really enjoy your posts but not sure what your concerns are re: FA. The issue seems more with the FA themselves who choose not to sign with us for reasonable contracts and for a chance to win a Supebowl. Baalke has damn near gone after every FA possible this year that would fit our offensive. defensive and/or ST unit. Talent is not why we've lost. In fact, one could make a very good argument that we've been the most talented and deepest roster in the NFL for the past 3 years and it's only getting stronger. Clearly, you don't get to an NFCCG, to the Superbowl and back to the NFCCG unless you have supreme talent. One poor officiating call, one play made, one ball dropped, incorrect personnel used, coaching scheme and philosophy, etc. can be the difference between 2 equally talented teams (as we've seen ad nasseum). In fact, "talent" would be about 10th on the list for reasons we didn't finish and get to and win the Superbowl. It's that clear by now.

I understand your concerns re: the secondary but I don't fall in that category. Whitner and Brown and Rogers all signed with the Browns and Raiders, for God's sakes...they sold out for the money. Period. Trust me, you'll never hear from them again (ala Goldson). And Culliver was going to start over either Brown and Rogers LAST YEAR prior to the injury and Brock beat out both THIS YEAR. So their time was up. Now Fangio has a younger, faster, more physical and aggressive secondary with a few years under his system and for the first time, he'll be allowed to call both press and off-coverage schemes (something we could never do with Brown and Rogers).

In fact, if they play press well, it will allow Bethea to be a beast around the LOS (tackles and blitzing). And we haven't even touched the draft yet. Even if Culliver's legal issues get in the way, Wright will have his first full off season and would have started over Cox in the playoffs minus the injury. Morris, Swanson, Cook, etc. will all have a real shot to earn a significant role now.

So again, it seems like your issue is more with the FA's not wanting to play for a Championship team for a reasonable and fair contract more than our FO alone.

I can agree with some of your post but its foundation is built upon speculation that Trent "went after every FA possible that fit our scheme". That's completely assumption based with little to no proof. Trent himself has said that he will not be a big player in FA as he has each year now. I agree with your assessment that supreme talent gets you to ALMOST land, but when we see a pattern that continue to stop at almost, its means for a change in your offseason and or your strategic approach .

Also you speak about this "younger faster secondary" (which is true), but what risks were taken in the name of gem searching that seems to be heading straight for the bite you in the arse direction? Cully's post injury status was uncertain before his legal issue, Wright is uncertain prior to his off field problems, Cook does not have the ball skills and awareness (which you CANNOT teach) no matter how much some of our bias optimist harp exclusively on his measurables. Cox is also uncertain. Our entire CB unit is 3's and 4's outside of Brock. My point is that since their legendary defensive year in 2011, the CB unit has been the weak link and you mean to tell me that on the 4th year this is the status of the CB unit going into the draft?

Originally posted by NCommand:
Once Seattle did have to pay for Bennett (he and Avril had very cheap contracts), they lost 10+ FA's, couldn't afford to sign Allen and will go through this again next year when they have to resign Avril to a market-value contract. Seattle got VERY lucky last year with all the excellent veteran FA's last year that contributed to a wicked rotation. That won't happen again.

All success in sports is so dependent on luck that I often think I should switch my interest to blackjack! LOL! The niners were unlucky with WRs last year having so few games with all their weapons...but they were fairly lucky with the OLine. Kaepernick was dinged up, but played through it so the team was lucky. But Bowman's injury at the end of the Seattle game is unlucky for this coming year. Good GMs can usually make the luck turn out OK...even if some/much of it is bad.

There are risk assessments in how many players are kept for each position and Baalke/Harbaugh have been pretty darn good in this regard. I can't remember a player going down and the team unraveling. It would happen if CK were seriously injured...but that's true with almost any team's starting QB. Gore? Good back ups. Willis? No real down turn. Perhaps the most serious injury last year, in terms of team impact, was Iupati being replaced by Snyder. Even though I worried at times, there was never a point where the team really suffered due to inferior back ups until the playoffs.

Edit--I discount WRs in the last sentence because it seems like the team hasn't fielded two or more good WRs since...hmm...when was it? TO and...

40 pages for a dude that probably won't even make the team.

Originally posted by ChazBoner:
40 pages for a dude that probably won't even make the team.

well we have probably had 40 pages for people who saw little nfl regular season action like nate davis, korey sheets and that qb we had last year we cut and now i do not even remember his name

Originally posted by Puckdaddy:
I can agree with some of your post but its foundation is built upon speculation that Trent "went after every FA possible that fit our scheme". That's completely assumption based with little to no proof. Trent himself has said that he will not be a big player in FA as he has each year now. I agree with your assessment that supreme talent gets you to ALMOST land, but when we see a pattern that continue to stop at almost, its means for a change in your offseason and or your strategic approach .

Also you speak about this "younger faster secondary" (which is true), but what risks were taken in the name of gem searching that seems to be heading straight for the bite you in the arse direction? Cully's post injury status was uncertain before his legal issue, Wright is uncertain prior to his off field problems, Cook does not have the ball skills and awareness (which you CANNOT teach) no matter how much some of our bias optimist harp exclusively on his measurables. Cox is also uncertain. Our entire CB unit is 3's and 4's outside of Brock. My point is that since their legendary defensive year in 2011, the CB unit has been the weak link and you mean to tell me that on the 4th year this is the status of the CB unit going into the draft?

No proof? The Niners were linked to just about every key FA this offseason from press CB's to "speed" WR's. They tried. In the end, every single FA chose $ to go to crap teams like the Redskins, Browns, Raiders and Bills. No doubt we could have and probably would have offered them (or did) fair contracts for a chance to win a Superbowl. If they don't accept, how is that a fail by the FO? Baalke says every year we're not going to be a big player in FA...there is usually only 1 or 2 big players in FA anyhow (Redskins of the past and now, the Raiders and Browns). But don't mistake that for the fact that Baalke doesn't explore every option and at least TRY to offer these professionals fair deals. In fact, has their been a more active FO linked to at least talks and scheduled visits with FA's than us? Some FO's don't even BOTHER to try. Meanwhile, we continue to extend and lock up own to contract steals in the interim and look to 6 picks in the top 100 with a truck load of players from last year coming into the fold. So to your point, again, "talent" is not the issue here.

Some could argue that talent AND depth have been the sole reason for overcoming the odds to get to 3 straight NFCCG's and I still say, talent is about 20th on the list of reasons why we didn't get over the hump...I'd put coaching, improper use of personnel, poor game plans, in-game adjustments, TO's, tunnel vision schemes, injury (Goldson knocking Brown out, Iupati, Miller, etc.), ST, penalties, critical calls against us, poor secondary's ability to play deeper balls, stubbornness, etc. as way above "talent" as a reason we didn't win it all the past THREE years.

That said, I completely understand your concerns regarding the secondary. That's a tough spot to be in when you have declining veterans but still playing at a pretty high level (and you pay a lot too) to slowly work in youth and upside (and cheaper). I believe Culliver's injury blew up the plan. From what it sounded like, he was slated to start over either Brown or Rogers (most likely Rogers b/c of $ and the fact that Culliver can also slide inside to the slot). Then you would have had Brown - Culliver coupled with Reid and Whitner. Then, like what happened this year, you'd hope someone pushes Brown (Brock won out both Brown and Rogers). So the team was forced to keep Roger's expensive contract effing up in FA and in depth. Cooper was young so they chose the veteran in Nnamdi but they did retain Morris. You're right about the injury to Culliver as now he's more of an unknown than a top CB's in the NFL coming into his own. But make no mistake about it...Wright is a very good CB and will be pushing very hard for a starting role next year and Brock is already our #1. The #3 is probably locked up in Cox as he played outstanding for us when it mattered most...during the playoff run. So of Culliver, Wright and Cox (don't count out Cook here on the outside or Morris in the slot), you have all the youth, speed and upside you want PLUS they all have lots of experience in OUR system. Now you add in the blue-chip rookies too? Now you've ID'd your starters AND have depth and the pipe-line stacked up for the immediate and LT future (for much cheaper too...that will afford us the option to sign CK, Aldon in 2+ years, Crabtree & Iupati perhaps, etc.).

So "the plan" is still on track just with a few more ?'s surrounding Culliver and the #2. We may have a drop off in experience but not much and as a unit, they should get better and better as the season progresses AND they allow Fangio to play a more balanced scheme between press and off-coverage (more exotic coverage schemes). You are making quite a few negative assumptions about Cook, Culliver, Cox, Wright, Morris, Swanson, etc. in OUR defensive scheme. Let them play out first, throw in the rookies and UDFA and probably another veteran FA signing just before the draft or right after it and let it all play out. We as fans tend to overvalue our own and as we've found out, those who have moved on tend to fall off the map (Goldson, Sopoaga, Franklin, Haralson, Johnson, Morgan, etc.).

We have to remember that we didn't think anything of Brock or Cox and trust me, nobody thought anything of Cooper either. Culliver? Even Whitner and Rogers were moderate signings at best with LOTS of concerns about them. In the end, all these guys have played very well for us in our system. And we've added experience to others as well in Wright and Morris. We'll have new-look CB's in Cook to go along with 2-4 new CB's as well in their first exposure and may the best men win!

Originally posted by SofaKing:

Originally posted by OnTheClock:
Did a little research on Chris Cook. Athletically, he has every measurable to match up with any player and be successful on the field. The question is -- was scheme a big culprit in his struggles? Minnesota plays a Tampa-two style which is horribly unaligned with Cook's style of play and what he was most successful with at Virginia.

What we play here is better tailored to his strengths, so we'll see if it pans out. Again, very high reward with absolutely zero risk taking him on. Great move by Baalke.

Totally agree. Cook is well suited for press coverage, but not bailing back into zone after the initial jam. That's what the Tampa 2 asked him to do. I don't think he has the read & react instincts to be an effective press-zone corner. He needs to be in press-man. Just tell him to stick to his man and he'll be much more effective.

I thought the same thing when I heard Cook had poor PFF numbers. That Frazier and his tampa2 scheme was not a right fit for Cook. I know Leslie Frazier made a name for himself using tampa2, but I'm not so sure MIN played much tampa2 last season. The games I watched (CIN, CHI, DET) I only saw tampa2 as an occasional coverage call. Most of the time, they were in cover2, but man coverage. Most of the plays that were mentioned earlier in this thread all show him in man coverage, not zone coverage. I feel I can tell when a defense calls tampa2. The CBs play press and force an inside release, then the CB plays the flats in zone coverage. The MLB will follow any route up the middle of the field, with 2 deep safeties.

Here are the plays mentioned earlier in this thread. None of this is Cook in tampa2.

Cook in the slot.


Cook on top.


Cook on the bottom.



http://www.vikings.com/media-vault/videos/NFL-Network-Playbook-Vikings-at-Bengals/b2375640-70b6-45ec-8dea-fa90e1438860
starting @ 1:30
First play: He's in man coverage.
Second play: He's in the slot, in man coverage.
Third play: This is zone coverage, but it's not tampa2. Looks like cover3 as he inherits the WR streaking down the sideline into his deep zone.


Since I can't show every defensive snap for MIN, I looked up what their scheme was last season and found this article, which helps to support my view that MIN doesn't play a predominantly tampa2 coverage call (in 13-14). I actually did see Cook play in a tampa2 coverage call sparingly, and he looked good being physical at the line of scrimmage. Here is one play where he comes up to make a good tackle:

Cook is the CB at the top of the screen. MIN shows a single high safety look presnap. After the snap, the safety (blue) that was in the box will drop to his deep zone to form a cover2. The middle LB (red) will start to drop into an intermediate zone as he looks to follow any route going up the middle. The CBs both force an inside release and play their shallow zones. This is tampa2.


Cook forces the inside release by the WR, then aggressively comes up to make the tackle in the flat as he plays his zone assignment.


Now, I don't know what happened when Cook came into the league as a rookie. It may be that Frazier, when he first got the MIN gig, tried to install a tampa2 scheme and that messed with the positional coaching that Cook received (so much emphasis on zone and little on man coverage). Towards the later part of the 13-14 season, Cook was getting burned in man coverage, not zone.There's no reason for any of us to think that Cook received good positional coaching in MIN. If Cook turns his career around, I will give Donatell a lot of credit.

Originally posted by sincalfaithful:

Gee... I still believe Jim Knows what he is doing, look what he did last year again... Got us to the NFC Champion.

OK everyone, just saw the interview of Bethea on NFL Network. He confirmed the plan for him was to play the SS position (duh) BUT they want him close to the LOS to make plays on the ball (I'm assuming that means re: the read-recognition in the run game and blitzing). So if Cook's comments hold true, perhaps we will see a single high S with more press on the outside (maybe more than just a wrinkle or a package defensive set).

What do you all think?

Originally posted by NCommand:
OK everyone, just saw the interview of Bethea on NFL Network. He confirmed the plan for him was to play the SS position (duh) BUT they want him close to the LOS to make plays on the ball (I'm assuming that means re: the read-recognition in the run game and blitzing). So if Cook's comments hold true, perhaps we will see a single high S with more press on the outside (maybe more than just a wrinkle or a package defensive set).

What do you all think?

I'm very excited about it, and I think the presence of Reid makes this possible. He has a cerebral approach to the game, and we can trust him as the center-fielder. This was not possible with Goldson, who was a bit more reckless and a free-lancer. We needed to use mostly Cover 2 to avoid getting burned.

We are now more versatile in our coverage schemes. I don't think Fangio will abandon any of our previous stuff. He loves to mix up coverage to throw the QBs off balance, particularly the underneath coverage. Now he can do more with the safeties, and added press ability from the corners.