• Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

About bobandweave

  • Rank
    The Rookie

Contact Methods

  • Redskins Fan Since
  • Favorite Redskin
    Clinton Portis
  • Not a Skins Fan? Tell us YOUR team:
  • Location
  • Interests
  • Occupation

Recent Profile Visitors

1,150 profile views
  1. Different situation completely Brees was going no where and there was a lawsuit at play. Kirk wants to test the open market he's very public about that he won't come out and ruin his brand but that's code for him wanting to leave. But your right this did happen just saying completely different situations Agree nothings going to change between now and July except more QB needy teams will have addressed those needs making it more unlikely we can trade him then. That's why its best to do this song and dance with all cards on the table now so we can move on if we have to. I don't want to move on but I'm convinced nothing will get done here because I think Kirk thinks his value to the league is way higher then it really is and until he gets smacked with reality like Adrian Peterson is these days his false sense in his value will keep a deal from getting done. He wants to test the market, unless the team overpays. Not a good commitment from him in anyway towards the future of our team.
  2. Yes you bring up two good points - I remember the Colt McCoy win in Dallas. And yes I know that QBs who are quality backups like Tyrod Taylor and like Kirk Cousins will move on if they show they can start. Thing is this is about timing to me. When we needed to rely on Colt against the Cowboys he delivered. That's not the same as saying this guy can do it outside of spot duty game here or there. Kirk came off the bench and beat the Ravens in 2012 like this and went to Cleveland and won a game there. Does that mean that in 2012 Kirk could have led the team to victories in the future weeks? Unknown right? If your Qb goes down early in the season then you have a decision to make. Either you throw your highly paid backup who can play well for a game maybe two into the mix and secure some victories until eventually the bottom drops out and the other guys adjust to that player and the team inevitably starts losing again OR you can save what 2.5 million and draft a guy and take the approach that if the starter goes down the teams screwed so what good are those 1-2 extra wins when they seasons basically lost anyway? Those 1-2 extra wins on a lost year hurt your draft position. Why not save that 2.5 million you can use on a different starter and instead just draft someone cheap and use that guy? If the drafted guy plays well guess what? You now have a commodity to trade. If he plays like ass then guess what? Your drafting someone else to replace him Lets not get me wrong, not talking about high draft picks here. Not talking 1st-2nd-3rd round QBs. The tendency with these backups are that it takes a game or two to get enough film on him by the opposing Defenses so any new QB will get a honeymoon period for a week or two where he's effective. We saw this last year with the Eagles Qb. Once there was film on him his production really regressed. Since this is already built in then the answer to me is that the team drafts a running QB to be the backup. If he's called upon due to injury you put him in, his running ability opens up the rushing attack and you can float on that for for the one to two games you need him for except your saving millions this way. Now this all goes out the window on the off chance that like in 2012 when the playoffs were a possibility and the starter got injured that you need someone you can rely on more. But that's happening later in the season and 3 million is a lot for this possibility. What happens in that situation when your in the mist of a losing season and those extra wins a Colt McCoy gives you only hurts you longer term in the draft? That s not good. To me the only case a higher paid backup QB makes the most sense is what we went through in 2012 (mid season playoffs on the line) but that was a rookie coming into get those wins (cheap late round QB choice) and the other time we saw it with Colt against the Cowboys hurt us because the season was lost anyway
  3. No Sir it's you that simply does not understand overpaying and market value. I understand it very well. Paying a guy the most money of all 32 teams starters is overpaying. That's not market value. If you want to talk market value and the baseline is Kirk is a top 10 QB in this league and not what you think - all top 10 QBs in the league should be paid the most money ever - then market value is 20 million a year. We are already overpaying Kirk now giving him 24 million a year. Market value by definition is "the amount for which something can be sold on a given market" So you mean to say that we are holding an asset that another team would gladly give him 25 million a year, making him the highest paid QB in NFL history let alone in the league today, and you know this how? How do you know what other teams would pay him? Is it only because he was tagged? Because I doubt the notion that any team besides us would be willing to pay that guy the highest amount ever signed by any team and if that's the sticking point I'd much rather just dump him to the Texans or Browns and start over. When you invest wrongly into the QB position like you want us to do it's after effects are crushing to the entire organization and we have a long history of seeing other teams investing wrongly into a QB including ourselves and it make that team have losing records for multiple seasons. The mark of a failing team is screwing up at this very position and when we put him to the test last season he failed to deliver. I've yet to see outside of a game here or there that this guy can ever come through and win a big game. I hope he can. I want him to. But there is a lack of evidence that when he's against tougher opponents he can deliver. His signature win last year came against the Packers and it was Rob Kelley and his three TDs that game that won it when the Packers were at the very worst of the season for them. When he went up against Carolina and the Giants to get in the playoffs he lost those games and looked very bad. When he was up against the terrible Bears he won that game. He can win games against bad teams but can he against the good ones? Anyone saying he can and they know he can do this is delusional. Show it. I dare you. That's why you don't just give this guy 25 million a year. That can ruin an NFL team
  4. I don't disagree this is Colt in a nutshell but say Colt was on the Vikings last year when Teddy B was lost for the season. Would they have gone with him and kept that first round pick instead of targeting Bradford? To me teams place too much monetary value on backup QBs like this. The Eagles sank 6 million into one year of a QB like this - Chase Daniels - and when they moved Bradford never gave him a shot. It's wasted money to me. I always thought the way the Ravens treat backup QBs was the way I would go with it. They have Flacco, undisputed starter and for years the backup was Tyrod Taylor and that's it. They drafted him in the 6th round so he was cheap and never bothered to waste millions on someone else. They knew if the starter went down there were guys they could get to play unemployed they could sign if they had to. Plus when your starting QB is lost for the season 9/10 times so is your season anyway. Never understood paying the price for a what if scenario. Its like in fantasy when some players covet rb handcuffs. Okay if the starter goes down your going to have the backup just in case and I get the concept, just think its capital better used elsewhere.
  5. Your talking to someone that thought we should have tagged him this year with the option for him to explore the market. I never bought into the idea that there were gobs and gobs of these imaginary teams dying to sign Kirk Cousins to a 25 million dollar a year long term deal out there like some of you always pretend to know, I would have preferred to have seen this for real. I know you think these clubs exist, I seriously doubt they do. Only way to find out would be to put this to the test. Since we choose not to do this we basically told the world if he's gone next year for nothing then so be it, we hold him hostage this season. I never agreed to that approach. Also never agreed that Kirk is on the same level as Andrew Luck. He is not, he doesn't have the pedigree that Luck has or his ability. But this is where I will agree to disagree, if there are gobs of teams out there dying for him then we should have explored that and we didn't. Front office mistake I hope the mods see this personal attack on me and give you a warning. Don't speak about me again like this. It's breaking the rules and who the hell are you anyway to be allowed to do that?
  6. Good point, now I wonder something else. Why are QBs like Colt McCoy who possess such a low ceiling considered valuable backups? Is it only because no one wants them to start? I never understood that. He's maybe worth 4 wins in a 16 game season, but everyone talks about him like he's some valuable asset. If a QB's best result is terrible how are they valuable? Is it only because they can understand a game plan and are a teacher for other QBs who may struggle with it? Never understood why a team would want to pay a guy a lot of money knowing as a starter he sucks
  7. For QBs? I agree it happens with other positions. I disagree that this happens with QBs and can't think of any that lasted until July. That's like a team saying what they do between April and July doesn't matter. That's the OTAs, that's the mini camps, that's deep into training camp. Teams need to know what QB's they have so taking that long to decide what to do with one usually does not happen. The reason this happens with other positions is if your stud WR isn't there that's okay because teams sport another 6 of that position anyway. There is only one starting QB on a team. And who wants that story distraction anyway?
  8. Wrong approach considering that by then the draft and Free Agency have occurred so the only way if they can't sign him long term is to hope for another tragedy like Teddy Bridgewater this offseason which creates a market. By the time July rolls around the league won't be in the market for QBs like they are now. The time to get this done isn't July, that's for other positions like WR. With QBs you need your plans in place before OTAs even if the plan is a competition. Plus injuries like Teddy B do happen, if they happened to Kirk it's curtains for us with him. So your best move is not to wait until July but two weeks before the NFL draft so you have time to move on if it comes to that
  9. you can't hand the team over to someone who's never done anything in the league before. What you do is Draft someone, bring in another vet like Krapyourpants sorry don't like the guy but a camp arm makes sense for him and then the team holds an open competition at the position. That's how the Seahawks found Russell Wilson. They brought in a highly touted FA QB in 2012 they paid over 10 million for and drafted Wilson in the 3rd same offseason. Then they held an open competition and the drafted QB beat out two other vets and he never looked back. I wouldn't just give the job to Nate, we don't have enough on him to do that yet but he's worthy of being in a competition.
  10. If all your money goes to one guy like this don't ya think that guy should be able to mask the failures of the team around him and lift them up? You would think he could do that if he's worth the highest paid contract of every teams QB in the league since money should equal performance and we've seen year after year the same elite guys - Brady example - of lifting the team to success despite having every aspect of his team in great shape like your alluding to. If a QB can't do this, then you shouldn't be making that guy the highest paid player in the league. Not all contracts make sense and giving him the highest contract in the NFL does not make sense
  11. Well ya, you nailed it. QBs are judged by wins and Kirk's lack of them is one major issue with him. Only stat geeks think he is a top 5 QB without those wins. And when you break it down the difference of 25 a year and 20 a year over five years is only a difference of 25 million bucks. When your talking about the highest paid QB in the entire league making at least 100 million over 5 years what is the big deal with 25 million? That's like not getting a Stacy McGee type of guy (he just signed for 25 million). It shouldn't be that big of a deal, except the player they are looking at giving that money to hasn't shown he's a winner in this league yet. Then it's a huge huge deal. And I don't think you can get past this. We've tried one year deals of proving it with him, and he failed that test. There isn't anything he can do in April to show us all that he changed this. If 25 is enough to kill this getting done then we should just accept it won't work and move him while we can
  12. First who the hell cares who is at fault here? Blaming the team does not fix this issue, blaming Kirk does not fix this issue either. Kirk holds the decision on what he will sign long term for and the team has a decision on what they can live with paying him. Two separate decisions are at play now and both sides are deciding not to work together. Is Kirk right his number is 25 million and won't sign for less? Based on what? The fact that the team tagged him? Teams tag players all the time for different reasons like they don't have a better answer that season, just because a guy gets tagged doesn't mean he's got to get that much for the next 5 years too. Tags are tools NFL teams use to buy time to negotiate and not all players who get tags get that as a base number for multiple years. Sometimes that happens (Dez Bryant) and sometimes that does not happen. It's not always the same for every player Is the team wrong for wanting to pay someone 20 million a season instead of 25 million a season? Maybe maybe not. No QB in the league makes an average of 25 million a season in this league. Not one guy does that. If you knew you were breaking the bank at the highest paid position possible do you want to be known as the team that broke that financial glass ceiling and became the first to pay someone that much? If they had a Superbowl to show for it sure you can justify doing that. Kirk's been in the league for 5 years now, has led this team to one single playoff berth and it was 1 and done. They should have reservations about doing that with the teams reputation on contracts and the results on the field. Either way it does not matter. If the team is not budging then they should cut bait and find someone else. As for drafting someone else, why **** that? Because Kirk was someone they drafted!!!! How is someone so obtuse that they can't admit that we had success drafting a QB and then take a dump on the idea of drafting someone else? Doesn't make any sense to me
  13. Then trade him. The Texans are ripe for getting something done there. They put there eggs in the Romo basket and when that went belly up they are looking at drafting a QB at pick 25, going after Jay Cutler, or starting Tom Savage next year. Kirk would blow all of those choices away and they have the cap room to get something done. He goes out of the NFC so we would only have to play him once every 4 years. Then why prolong this? Rip the band aide off and surrender. If you can't get something done then move on and start over. Doing nothing does not solve this problem. There are reasons to doubt him being able to repeat his last two years here - New play caller, new offensive weapons - that this is an unwinnable situation for us. If he produces less, doesn't have a winning record, or struggles will we want to offer him the price he wants next off season? No. What will change between our feeling now and July? Nothing. It's an empass and the longer we wait to move him the more likely teams like Houston move on