PDA

View Full Version : Cochran's offer withdrawn


barrett
03-11-2009, 03:19 AM
According to the fella over at the examiner, the Texans have withdrawn their offer to Cochran thus making him an official free agent.

http://www.examiner.com/x-778-Houston-Texans-Examiner~y2009m3d10-Texans-withdraw-qualifying-offer-to-Cochran

I'm somewhat disappointed by this. I feel like he was very productive when healthy. A big time "rotation guy". A positive to this is it says alot for both Bulman and Nading's developement. Also, I recognize that he could still be re-signed if no one picks him up. I would think that any team that saw his film would snatch him up though.

dalemurphy
03-11-2009, 04:37 AM
I'm not happy about this! maybe it's an injury issue or they think he'll sign for less? He's a pretty good player that would cost us relatively nothing to keep. THis is when I have a hard time with Kubiak. He clearly is upset with how Cochran handled his injury last year and now our roster has gotten worse. Meanwhile, we're still paying Studdard $500,000 to eat all the ice cream and tell cool stories about Vince Young's shower etiquette.

Malloy
03-11-2009, 04:48 AM
On the other hand, if the Texans withdrew an offer it means that there was an offer out there, but that Cochran for reasons unknown decided not to take it.

Too bad... bye bye...

dalemurphy
03-11-2009, 04:52 AM
On the other hand, if the Texans withdrew an offer it means that there was an offer out there, but that Cochran for reasons unknown decided not to take it.

Too bad... bye bye...

It was his RFA tender. Those offers often sit there for weeks or even months while a contract extension is being negotiated. For instance, I doubt OD or R. Butler have signed their tenders yet either. It's not a rejection of the Texans' offer, it's just part of the RFA process.

Malloy
03-11-2009, 04:55 AM
Its wierd though, was the offer so bad that he would'nt even think about it?

Speculation at best, but you have a point, it could have happened differently from what I suggest :)

dalemurphy
03-11-2009, 05:09 AM
Its wierd though, was the offer so bad that he would'nt even think about it?

Speculation at best, but you have a point, it could have happened differently from what I suggest :)

All low level RFA tenders are exactly the same: 1 yr, $1.01 million. That he didn't sign it is not an indication of Cochran desire/lack of desire to be in Houston. Normally, once tendered, players don't sign the tenders until weeks later or they never do because a contract extension gets worked out.

Malloy
03-11-2009, 06:05 AM
Gotya!

Kaiser Toro
03-11-2009, 09:04 AM
Antonio Smith better be greater than (Weaver + Cochran) x 2.5, immediately.

Texans_Chick
03-11-2009, 09:13 AM
Kubiak mentioned concerns about Cochran before. He liked Cochran's effort but he kept on getting various injuries that would keep him off the field.

You want your big fellows to be the guys that you don't have to worry that they will be on the field.

cj5776
03-11-2009, 09:29 AM
I wonder if the offer was given to him before Bush became DC and involved in who stays and who goes?

keyser
03-11-2009, 10:28 AM
I'm hoping there is some untold story going on behind the scenes. Cochran looked pretty good to me, and would have come cheap. I'm amazed that they wouldn't even bring him to camp. I have to assume the coaches know what they're doing here, but it seems like a strange situation to me.

barrett
03-11-2009, 10:33 AM
all i can figure is they have enough confidence that he'll return for even less money or they really don't think he's worth their time. if that's the case then so be it. i hope it's the prior. i hope it's money checkers they are playing.

dsorc
03-11-2009, 12:05 PM
This is really not a big loss. Why pay 1mill to a guy that at best will be your 4th option at DE. Smith is going to get more snaps than Weaver most likely, at least this year based on the monetary investment. Mario shouldn't be coming off the field that much. Bulman is better than Cochran and will be the primary backup for less money. McClover and Nading can be the 4th and 5th DEs for less money combined that Cochran and would probably give about the same production. We may also bring a vet min guy or a 2nd day draft pick to shore up the depth if needed. Also don't forget that Cochran is still rehabbing his foot injury so that also has to be in the FOs mind.

Specnatz
03-11-2009, 12:14 PM
This is really not a big loss. Why pay 1mill to a guy that at best will be your 4th option at DE. Smith is going to get more snaps than Weaver most likely, at least this year based on the monetary investment. Mario shouldn't be coming off the field that much. Bulman is better than Cochran and will be the primary backup for less money. McClover and Nading can be the 4th and 5th DEs for less money combined that Cochran and would probably give about the same production. We may also bring a vet min guy or a 2nd day draft pick to shore up the depth if needed. Also don't forget that Cochran is still rehabbing his foot injury so that also has to be in the FOs mind.

:mcnugget:

Psst Weaver was released, so the odds are good that this happens.

Polo
03-11-2009, 12:23 PM
Cochran was oft injured.

If he was a guy that could stay on the field he would have value.

wags
03-11-2009, 12:23 PM
:mcnugget:

Psst Weaver was released, so the odds are good that this happens.

Perhaps he means the #of snaps Smith plays this year will be greater than the # Weaver played last year??

Polo
03-11-2009, 12:24 PM
Perhaps he means the #of snaps Smith plays this year will be greater than the # Weaver played last year??

I doubt it.

Maddict5
03-11-2009, 12:35 PM
I doubt it.


i dont

dsorc
03-11-2009, 01:00 PM
Perhaps he means the #of snaps Smith plays this year will be greater than the # Weaver played last year??
This is what I meant. Weaver played something like 2/3 of the snaps or less. More probably less. Bulman and Cochran were taking up a lot of snaps because Weaver sucked. I assume they'll let Smith grab more snaps and hope he earns his contract. But if he doesn't live up to expectation I expect Bulman to slowly creep into Smith's playing time.

Malloy
03-11-2009, 01:04 PM
I doubt it.


i dont


Get a room you two!

Specnatz
03-11-2009, 01:07 PM
This is what I meant. Weaver played something like 2/3 of the snaps or less. More probably less. Bulman and Cochran were taking up a lot of snaps because Weaver sucked. I assume they'll let Smith grab more snaps and hope he earns his contract. But if he doesn't live up to expectation I expect Bulman to slowly creep into Smith's playing time.

yes that was the case late last season but not over the time he has been here.

Texan4Ever
03-11-2009, 01:08 PM
Well, Antonio Smith and Earl Chocran are similar physically but if we don't sign Chocran does that help/hurt are cap space?

Specnatz
03-11-2009, 01:29 PM
Well, Antonio Smith and Earl Chocran are similar physically but if we don't sign Chocran does that help/hurt are cap space?

Does not effect it either way, there was no dead money involved.

76Texan
03-11-2009, 04:48 PM
My initial reaction is this:

With A. Smith in the fold.
If we resign Cochran for a lot of money, it probably won't make sense to go into the draft to get a first day guy.

The better options are (IMO):
Not to resign Cochran and draft one on the first day, or trade down a bit and get one late in the first or early in the third round (depending on how they rate the DEs on their board.)
Sign Montgomery instead and look for a pash rush specialist in the draft (a tweener possibly), or a less polished guy to groom (a bit later in the third or fourth, maybe even fifth.)

kiwitexansfan
03-11-2009, 05:24 PM
While Cochran has been a good asset his loss is hardly crippling. Let him walk away after the big money somewhere else.

Their are plenty of hard working hussle guys who can take his place.

infantrycak
03-11-2009, 05:32 PM
If we resign Cochran for a lot of money, it probably won't make sense to go into the draft to get a first day guy.

If we re-sign Cochran it will be for less than the $1 mil tender they had out to him as in close to league minimum.

TexansSeminole
03-11-2009, 05:33 PM
I guess they felt like they could get a better player in the draft or through free agency. Maybe they are giving him time to sign with another team if they offer him that much money.

We found an upgrade over Weaver, A. Smith. Hopefully we can bring in a replacement for Cochran that can get at the QB.

76Texan
03-11-2009, 06:27 PM
If we re-sign Cochran it will be for less than the $1 mil tender they had out to him as in close to league minimum.

Sorry I didn't pay enough attention to the details.
The gist remains though. I have never once blasted Cochran, only had praises for his effort. (Just like Maddox).

Nadings, Bulman, Cochran, they are all young players.
And I am sorry for using the term "a lot" (why I always hate the business side of football) when there are bigger contracts out there...