wit33

Members
  • Content count

    1,004
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About wit33

  • Rank
    The Benchwarmer
  • Birthday 12/07/1983

Contact Methods

  • Location
    Litchfiel Park AZ
  • Zip Code
    66666

Profile Information

  • Birthdate
    2002
  • Interests
    collecting mice
  1. The people who belittle others on a fan page about what's discussed are hilarious. Like, who are you? Lol... Does it serve self fulfillment?
  2. None of this has anything to do with his agent, who appears to have Kirk's full faith. You cant swallow up the cap (be the highest paid layer in history) and have all phases around you be good. When paid elite, you have to have the ability to make up for deficiencies in other parts of the team. Staffords deal won't be an easy one for some of the reasons you listed. I'm with you on that.
  3. http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/20081141/kirk-cousins-washington-redskins-open-deal-season Yes, this supports what I've been saying, but it's nice to hear some one finally stating this and not providing safe cliche answers based off how the NFL was ran 5, 10 or 20 years ago to the situation. Its a new NFL! First principles must be applied or teams will lose and be late to the party.
  4. Your whole response is opinion, you realize this, right? My point is that the Skins have controlled Kirk for last 3 years as their starter for an average salary of $15million. Solid job job by the organization, right? Most in here credit Kirk for maximizing his earning potential. Why does this not apply to the Skins over the last 3 years? They've kept risk and cost at a minimum in a day in age where QBs are waaaay overpaid. Today's money in the NFL is different, slowly you'll see a shift in how deals are made in the NFL.
  5. Kirk is finishing up a 3 year deal as the starter: 4th year on rookie deal - 1 million or so 1st franchise tag - 20million 2nd franchise tag - 24million ***45million total for a 15 million per year average For the fun of it, add the transition tag next year at 28.9, putting a four year total of roughly 74million: a per year average of 18.5million. Sure, I'm cherry picking the last year of rookie deal, but he was anointed the starting quarterback position and provided his best value that year to date. Would the organization be wrong in thinking this way? Use first principle methods, the NFL is changing, in regards to player's willingness to take shorter deals and maximize earnings. A 1 yr deal can set up guys for life nowadays. Organizations will have to adapt!
  6. If you don't have a legend at the position , how much does it really matter? All games will still come down to Turnovers, FG kicks, clutch plays, and luck.
  7. I appreciate the Skins applying first principles to negotiation last in today's NFL. The masses are stuck with how hints suppose to be done. Keep it moving FO. The Skins have gotten a top half of league starter for last 3 years at about $45million in total dollars. $15 million a year. Continue to go against the grain, if you don't have a LEGEND at the QB position. He average guys are beginning to not net the return of their price tags.
  8. I think most come to this conclusion, due to similarities between Kirk and Andy Dalton with Gruden. Not to mention how friendly his system was in the arena league
  9. Yes, the Jay element is something I think is way under reported.
  10. Kirk and reps leverage is the 1 year franchise number. The way to earn max dollars is to continue signing one year deals. I have know clue what numbers are being discussed, but if Kirk and reps are using the franchise tag number as a baseline, then why would a franchise sign any player to a long term deal. I understand it enables a franchise to control the player's rights, but the consecutive franchise tags have provided this. Its interesting, I think this contract situation is being discussed by franchises on how to position themselves against players. Or will it become like the NBA, where the players (Quarterbacks) run the league.
  11. Maybe he's the new Lebron and continues to sign one year deals. In all actuality, if the goal is to make the most money, this is how he should continue to do it. It's long been known the QB has franchises by the balls, the Skins are just so lucky to have a guy willing to be the first to do it. Yaaaa :/ Slight, sarcasm, but that's how they've chosen to roll with things. With the Skins FO playing a part as well.
  12. I understand he's not a Skin beat reporter, but to characterize those who have questions whether Kirk is a 6-10 ranked QB to the last game of season against Giants is silly. I am one who values TD passes and production overall in red zone, so him overlooking Kirk's needed development in this area, doesn't make much football sense. With all this said, I think stats are good to assist in following the league as a whole, but for myself, having not missed a game in 15 years, I don't really need stats to tell me about a Skin player. --- Maybe the trenches stats would be of benefit, as I follow the ball when watching as a fan for most part.
  13. I thought it wasn't a strong interview by the ESPN guy. He seemed a little nervous and not have a whole lot of supporting information. This while being interviewed by some one handling him with "kitten gloves", due to the interviewer being slanted. Totally my opinion, but it would've been nice to have a neutral interviewer.
  14. @elkabong82 I don't believe Gruden has lobbied hard for Kirk. He's pretty measured with his words when speaking about Kirk, in my opinion. It's quite clear the FO and Gruden are on the same page, proof with recent extension. The opposite is actually being understated. The possibility Gruden is providing the front office leverage through feeling the offense can continue to be above average without Kirk. Just a thought. I truly don't know. Could I say Kirk is stupid if he doesn't sign? Ahh... to be in the middle and see both sides, what a position.