The (only!) official ES all things Kirk Cousins should we shouldn't we off-season thread.

[Tsailand]

I think Kirk thinks he could succeed in a lot of systems, not just Gruden's.  Furthermore, when a team picks up a QB that's thrown for 14000 yards in three seasons (my projection), they are going to make whatever changes they need to their system to make it the best fit for their new QB.

 

If our 2018 negotiation with Kirk includes "you should take our lowball offer because you can't succeed elsewhere", he is going to walk away and look to prove us wrong.

[HTTRDynasty]

Just now, Tsailand said:

I think Kirk thinks he could succeed in a lot of systems, not just Gruden's.  Furthermore, when a team picks up a QB that's thrown for 14000 yards in three seasons (my projection), they are going to make whatever changes they need to their system to make it the best fit for their new QB.

 

If our 2018 negotiation with Kirk includes "you should take our lowball offer because you can't succeed elsewhere", he is going to walk away and look to prove us wrong.

 

C'mon man.  There's something to be said for familiarity with the place you've played in your whole career, and the system you've flourished in the last two years.  Why do you think the Cousins situation is so unique?  Why do you think above average QB's don't hit the open market every year?  They don't all receive the contract figures they'd demand in the open market when signing extensions with their teams.  In fact, very few do.  The price for a top QB on the open market would be astronomical, yet they are willing to take less and stay with the teams, systems, and people they feel comfortable with.  

 

If SF drafts a QB in the first it makes it more likely Cousins will sign a LTD here once we up our offer, even if it is not at the price he would command on the open market.

[TSO]

4 minutes ago, HTTRDynasty said:

They don't all receive the contract figures they'd demand in the open market when signing extensions with their teams.  In fact, very few do.  The price for a top QB on the open market would be astronomical, yet they are willing to take less and stay with the teams, systems, and people they feel comfortable with.

 

I agree with you in terms of SF taking a QB increasing our leverage (albeit slightly, in my mind, because I also agree with @Tsailand that Kirk can succeed in any traditional pro-style offense), but I disagree here totally.

 

Those teams you mention that sign their QBs to extensions often set the market themselves with record-breaking contracts. The most we can say is that there's no telling how much said QB would get on the open market, but I think it's going way overboard to suggest that they'd automatically get more when they're signing for record-breaking contracts as is with their respective teams.  

 

Goes both ways. QBs often don't want to test the market because their teams step up and pay them with historical figures.     

[Califan007 The Constipated]

If the 49ers don't draft a QB, the media will read it as the 49ers saying "Don't worry, Kirk...just hang tight until next year." If the 49ers DO draft a QB, especially in the first round, the media's take will be....what?

[HTTRDynasty]

1 minute ago, thesubmittedone said:

Those teams you mention that sign their QBs to extensions often set the market themselves with record-breaking contracts. The most we can say is that there's no telling how much said QB would get on the open market, but I think it's going way overboard to suggest that they'd automatically get more when they're signing for record-breaking contracts as is with their respective teams.  

 

Goes both ways. QBs often don't want to test the market because their teams step up and pay them with historical figures.     

 

 

I disagree.  Even the latest record-breaking contract was considered a let-down by agents and other QB's around the league.  Luck could have gotten a much bigger contract on the open market, and could have easily held out for more than he signed for.
 

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/16621472/andrew-luck-indianapolis-colts-87-million-guaranteed-contract-letdown-future-quarterbacks

Quote

Andrew Luck got paid, but he should have held out for more

 

The numbers are eye-popping at first, sure. But within the context of the NFL quarterback market, Andrew Luck's new deal is a pretty big letdown.

This is a deal that has been anticipated for more than a year now by people around the NFL. Agents have been drooling in anticipation of a contract they believed would set new benchmarks and really drive the top of the quarterback market upward for the first time in years. Team executives have been watching to see how much of his considerable leverage Luck would wield against the Colts.

 

The answer? Not that much.

 

Look, there's no crying for Luck here. The numbers set several records. The $87 million in injury guarantees ($47 million of which is guaranteed at signing) far surpasses the $65 million that Eli Manning got last year. The $23.3 million a year surpasses Aaron Rodgers' $22 million and Joe Flacco's $22.133 million. The $140 million total surpasses Jay Cutler's $126.7 million.

 

But it's not as great as it was supposed to be. The average salary is less than the $25 million many were predicting. The $47 million at signing is $13 million less than Ndamukong Suh got. Pushing off $27 million of the guarantee into the third and fourth years is seen by people around the league as too risky to the player. It's a nice deal, not a great one.

 

In fact, it helps keep a surprisingly stagnant portion of the NFL marketplace stagnant.

 

Why? Well, I've been asking agents and executives that question over the past few weeks in anticipation of a Luck deal, and they all say the same thing. Quarterback is the ultimate leadership position. How does it look in the locker room if you insist on setting records and eating up all the cap space? Remember last year, when Manning got so upset about a report that he wanted to make more than Rodgers made? He didn't, a source said, and he hated that someone would suggest he did. This is the way these guys think -- especially those like Manning and Ben Roethlisberger, who have won their Super Bowls and made their big second-contract money already.

 

But Luck should have been different. Luck should have raked the Colts over the coals. If ever a player were going to take a stand and demand the league's first fully guaranteed veteran deal, this was the guy to do it. He didn't even come close.

 

Instead, like so many of his quarterback brethren before him, Luck chose to take the very pretty bird in the hand over the potentially historic bonanza in the bush. Tough to blame him, but if you're a quarterback looking for a big deal in the coming years, he did kind of let you down.

 

If anybody was going to blast through the ceiling of the NFL quarterback market, it was going to be Andrew Luck. Instead, he settled for just nudging it upward a bit.

 

 

[RWJ]

This is why I keep thinking IF KC is not signed to a LTD by the draft we will draft a QB in 2nd or 3rd round to learn behind KC for a season.  Also insurance policy in case KC leaves which becomes very likely. 

[TSO]

@HTTRDynasty I don't see how Luck's record setting contract not being AS RECORD SETTING as anticipated by some has any bearing on anything. 

 

It was still record setting. And it's only speculation that he would've got more on the open market, albeit fair speculation. 

 

Even so, he'd be the exception here which is why people were anticipating it to be more than it was, right? 

[HTTRDynasty]

1 minute ago, thesubmittedone said:

@HTTRDynasty I don't see how Luck's record setting contract not being AS RECORD SETTING as anticipated by some has any bearing on anything. 

 

It was still record setting. And it's only speculation that he would've got more on the open market, albeit fair speculation. 

 

Even so, he'd be the exception here which is why people were anticipating it to be more than it was, right? 

 

My point is that Luck accepted less than he could have gotten in order to stick with the team he was currently on.  He is not the only one who has done this.  I would say he's actually in the majority, not the minority when it comes to this.  As the article mentioned, QB's like Big Ben and Manning have done the same.  Ditto with Aaron Rodgers, Russell Wilson, Andy Dalton, Ryan Tannehill, etc.

 

My point has always been that we don't need to offer Kirk market value.  But we do need to make him a respectable offer.  And I think any respectable offer we make will look a little better without Kirk having SF as a fall-back option.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

7 minutes ago, thesubmittedone said:

@HTTRDynasty I don't see how Luck's record setting contract not being AS RECORD SETTING as anticipated by some has any bearing on anything. 

 

It was still record setting. And it's only speculation that he would've got more on the open market, albeit fair speculation. 

 

Even so, he'd be the exception here which is why people were anticipating it to be more than it was, right? 

 

Interestingly enough, it's that same speculation being used on how much Cousins would get on the open market that's driving quite a bit of the conversation on him and the Redskins, both in the media and here on ES. All we "know" right now is that one team--the Redskins--are willing to spend $24 mil on him for one year. A number of media members have said the Skins are scared ****less to let Kirk find out what other teams would pay for him...and fans have speculated that the Redskins would have to pay him north of $30 mil a year if he hit free agency (they said that about this year, actually lol)...The speculation--Cousins and Luck's--is based on the perceived leverage each player possesses, of course. This is my long-winded way of saying I think I agree with you both lol ...current teams make offers that QBs are willing to take to forsake seeing exactly how much they "could" get in an open market--which in itself sets the market, and players probably are more likely to do so when considering the system and coaches they have succeeded with can't just be taken for granted at every other franchise.

[WelshSkinsFan]

3 minutes ago, RWJ said:

This is why I keep thinking IF KC is not signed to a LTD by the draft we will draft a QB in 2nd or 3rd round to learn behind KC for a season.  Also insurance policy in case KC leaves which becomes very likely. 

 

The draft is not the deadline to get this done and so I don't see no LTD by Thursday as meaning Kirk leaving becomes very likely.  Right or wrong we still potentially have 2 years of team control left and Kirk has made it clear he will sign here if he gets market value, we just did not offer that yet but again we are not at the deadline.  I don't think there is a QB in this draft worth signing and I doubt the team feels any differently, they like Colt and Nate and with KC still here there is no need to reach for a position that is not yet a need.  Should it become a need next year we already know there are better options coming out so that would be the time to draft someone.  Taking a lousy player now won't help, they will still be lousy next year and sitting a year is overrated these days as with the CBA limiting reps the third string QBs are basically not getting any true development anyway.

[TSO]

6 minutes ago, HTTRDynasty said:

 

My point is that Luck accepted less than he could have gotten in order to stick with the team he was currently on.  He is not the only one who has done this.  I would say he's actually in the majority, not the minority when it comes to this.  As the article mentioned, QB's like Big Ben and Manning have done the same.  Ditto with Aaron Rodgers, Russell Wilson, Andy Dalton, Ryan Tannehill, etc.

 

Not really, the article mentions that those guys already got their big contracts so that's a big part of the reason they don't constantly ask for more. 

 

My point still stands, though. Those teams give their guys record breaking contracts AS IS and it's enough to entice them not to test the market in the first place. They set the market themselves. 

 

We can argue all day whether or not they would get more on the open market, or how much more, but that doesn't change that one simple fact. 

5 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

This is my long-winded way of saying I think I agree with you both lol ...current teams make offers that QBs are willing to take to forsake seeing exactly how much they "could" get in an open market--which in itself sets the market, and players probably are more likely to do so when considering the system and coaches they have succeeded with can't just be taken for granted at every other franchise.

 

Yup, spot on.  

[HTTRDynasty]

9 minutes ago, thesubmittedone said:

 

Not really, the article mentions that those guys already got their big contracts so that's a big part of the reason they don't constantly ask for more. 

 

My point still stands, though. Those teams give their guys record breaking contracts AS IS and it's enough to entice them not to test the market in the first place. They set the market themselves. 

 

We can argue all day whether or not they woluld get more on the open market, or how much more, but that doesn't change that one simple fact. 

 

The article said it was the way QB's think in general, but especially (meaning it was an add on) for those guys that already got their big contracts.

 

Anyway, to the bolded point, the only guys who have really set the market in recent years are previous SB champions like Flacco, Rodgers, Roethlisberger, or Eli Manning, or a guy who has consistently been hailed as the next big thing since sliced bread ever since his college days in Luck. 

 

Russell Wilson's contract wasn't record-breaking.  Neither was Dalton's, Tannehill's, Newton's, etc.  Cousins is a lot closer to those guys in terms of accomplishments and perceived skill level around the league than he is to Rodgers or Luck.

[Reaper Skins]

40 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

If the 49ers don't draft a QB, the media will read it as the 49ers saying "Don't worry, Kirk...just hang tight until next year." If the 49ers DO draft a QB, especially in the first round, the media's take will be....what?

The media take will be even a rookie has more upside than Kirk Cousins, and the Redskins are dumb for tying themselves to him

[TSO]

30 minutes ago, HTTRDynasty said:

 

Russell Wilson's contract wasn't record-breaking.  Neither was Dalton's, Tannehill's, Newton's, etc.  Cousins is a lot closer to those guys in terms of accomplishments and perceived skill level around the league than he is to Rodgers or Luck.

 

Disagree on numerous levels here. First: 

 

Quote

Newton, 26, was entering the fifth-year option on his rookie contract, which would pay him $14.666 million in 2015. The more than $20 million average in "new money" places him with the Green Bay Packers' Aaron Rodgers, Pittsburgh Steelers' Ben Roethlisberger, Atlanta Falcons' Matt Ryan, Baltimore Ravens' Joe Flacco and New Orleans Saints' Drew Brees in the $20-million-a-year quarterback club.

Deals signed over the past year by Newton's QB draftmates, Colin Kaepernick of the San Francisco 49ers and Andy Dalton of the Cincinnati Bengals, leaned in part on annual escalators based on performance and included less than $20 million fully guaranteed at signing.

Those contracts were not factors in the Newton negotiations.

 

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/panthers/2015/06/01/cam-newton-contract-extension-2020-andrew-luck-russell-wilson/28302041/

 

So maybe not record-breaking but definitely not with the likes of Dalton or Tannehill. 

 

Second: 

 

Quote

The Seattle Seahawks and quarterback Russell Wilson have agreed to a contract extension, according to Sports Illustrated's Peter King. The deal is worth $87.6 million over four years, a significant pay upgrade for the Super Bowl-winning quarterback. The deal includes a $31 million signing bonus and roughly $60 million in guaranteed money.

 

Wilson was entering the final year of his four-year, $3 million rookie contract. Wilson's rookie contract did not include a fifth-year option because he wasn't a first-round pick. Because of that, Seattle would have had to use the franchise tag on him in 2016 -- currently projected at more than $25 million -- if no extension had been signed by then.

 

Wilson is the second of the four starting quarterbacks selected in the 2012 NFL Draft to receive a new deal. Ryan Tannehill signed a six-year, $95.3 million deal earlier this offseason. However, it was Cam Newton's five-year, $103.8 million extension that raised the price even more for young quarterbacks. Andrew Luck is the next quarterback in line to receive a new contract, which will now likely be priced similarly to Wilson's.

 

Earlier in the offseason, it was reported that Wilson and the Seahawks could end up agreeing to a fully guaranteed contract. That news came after Wilson guided the Seahawks to Super Bowl XLIX, where Seattle narrowly lost to New England after Wilson threw a goal-line interception with under a minute to play.

 

http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2015/7/31/8097505/russell-wilson-seahawks-contract-extension-87-million

 

So Wilson, like Newton, are in another category above Tannehill and Dalton. Guaranteed money is king and Wilson got more than Newton in that front. 

 

 

 

As for what Cousins is worth or who he's more comparable to... I don't know why that's so important right now because I'm not sure Kirk is asking to break records or be the highest paid QB. We actually don't know what he's really asking for outside of media speculation. We do know the team hasn't offered him anywhere near a record-breaking contract, at least in terms of guaranteed money. We also know that, last year, his camp offered 19.5 million per year with the guaranteed amount unknown but supposedly "significant". But that doesn't sound record breaking at the time, either.

 

So, yeah... I'm not sure where we're going with this but my point still hasn't changed in the least bit. QBs who play well get paid big time, and whoever is up next usually gets the record breaking contract, at least in guaranteed money. I don't think this is even debatable.

 

When you say "the only guys who have really set the market in recent years" and then proceed to list like 5 different QBs I just have to laugh, no offense. Because that's actually a lot for a position that's arguably the hardest one to play in all of sports and doesn't have that many good players. 

[HTTRDynasty]

20 minutes ago, thesubmittedone said:

 

Disagree on numerous levels here. First:

https://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/nfl/panthers/2015/06/01/cam-newton-contract-extension-2020-andrew-luck-russell-wilson/28302041/

So pretty much the opposite of what you're saying there.

 

Second:

http://www.sbnation.com/nfl/2015/7/31/8097505/russell-wilson-seahawks-contract-extension-87-million

 

So Wilson, like Newton, are in another category above Tannehill  and Dalton. Guaranteed money is king and Wilson got more than Newton in that front. 

 

As for what Cousins is worth or who he's more comparable to... I don't know why that's so important right now because I'm not sure Kirk is asking to break records or be the highest paid QB. We actually don't know what he's really asking for outside of media speculation. We do know the team hasn't offered him anywhere near a record-breaking contract, at least in terms of guaranteed money. We also know that, last year, his camp offered 19.5 million per year with the guaranteed amount unknown but supposedly "significant". But that doesn't sound record breaking at the time, either.

 

So, yeah... I'm not sure where we're going with this but my point still hasn't changed in the least bit. QBs who play well get paid big time, and whoever is up next usually gets the record breaking contract, at least in guaranteed money. I don't think this is even debatable.

 

When you say "the only guys who have really set the market in recent years" and then proceed to list like 5 different QBs I just have to laugh, no offense. Because that's actually a lot for a position that's arguably the hardest one to play in all of sports and doesn't have that many good players. 

 

Huh?  I'm not really sure what we're arguing at this point tbh.

 

How was it the opposite of what I was saying?  I said Newton and Wilson's contracts weren't record-breaking, which is what you were arguing.  Big Ben, Phillip Rivers and Eli Manning got more in guaranteed money that same offseason.  I never said Newton wasn't earning as much as other top QBs. 

 

I'm not sure what you're arguing in the rest of your post.  My point has consistently been that QB's are willing to take less than they would get on the open market in order to stay with their current team.  And that nearly all QB's do this.  I believe Cousins will as well if we make him a serious offer.  An offer that does not have to be what he'd get on the open market.

 

I did make a list of "guys who have set the market in recent years".  I proceeded to list 5 guys because those guys all shared the same thing (other than Luck, who is the exception for a lot of reasons): Superbowl titles.  Not sure what makes that so funny.

[TSO]

22 minutes ago, HTTRDynasty said:

 

Huh?  I'm not really sure what we're arguing at this point tbh.

 

How was it the opposite of what I was saying?  I said Newton and Wilson's contracts weren't record-breaking, which is what you were arguing.  I never said he wasn't earning as much as other top QBs.  Big Ben, Phillip Rivers and Eli Manning both got more in guaranteed money that same offseason.

 

I'm not sure what you're arguing in the rest of your post.  My point has consistently been that QB's are willing to take less than they would get on the open market in order to stay with their current team.  And that the majority of QB's do this.  I believe Cousins will as well if we make him a serious offer.  An offer that does not have to be what he'd get on the open market.

 

I did make a list of "guys who have set the market in recent years".  I proceeded to list 5 guys because those guys all shared the same thing (other than Luck): Superbowl titles.  Not sure what makes that so funny.

 

Me neither.  

 

Ok, if they weren't "record-breaking" they were very close to being so. I just don't understand why that negates my point unless you want to argue for the sake of it. Here, I'll even amend my statement. These guys get record-breaking or "near record-breaking" contracts by their teams.

 

My point is that the teams step up and pay their guys enough to entice them not to want to test the open market. I felt like you were suggesting these guys take considerably less and would make much more on the open market. Those teams in the open market also don't want to destroy their cap for the sake of it. So I don't buy that for one second. Not when these QBs are receiving massive deals that actually set the market themselves (again, often record-breaking or near record-breaking but that's not the key, the key is "setting/upping the market" which those contracts definitely do). 

 

If it's truly less, it's negligible. And I'm glad you agree that Cousins will as well if we make a serious offer. Almost felt like you were suggesting otherwise. 

 

As for the last point, it's funny because 5 guys out of maybe 15 who are really worth it in the league that "recently set the market" is a pretty significant chunk. Furthermore, those guys who won said Super Bowls also had way better defense's to support them in that endeavor, right? Kirk compares pretty well in terms of their contributions to their teams at that time, I'd say. Would rather not get into that, though. It's been debated to death already, and I already know all the arguments against that line of thinking. Everyone does.    

[Califan007 The Constipated]

It's fun being a spectator instead of a participant for a change lol...

 

[TSO]

1 minute ago, Califan007 said:

It's fun being a spectator instead of a participant for a change lol...

 

 

 It's the friggin worst but somehow I just can't help but be an idiot and get involved here from time to time. But I enjoy debating/discussing stuff with @HTTRDynasty so it's not that bad this time.  

[Morneblade]

Just now, Califan007 said:

It's fun being a spectator instead of a participant for a change lol...

 

 

 

No kidding, I'm staying out of this one for the time being. Although I find the arguments that Kirk is going to be traded, all the San Fran, stuff and him hitting the open market hilarious.

[HTTRDynasty]

@thesubmittedone Yea, this argument was pretty pointless it seems .  My fault for not being more clear.

 

To try to clear it up: I have heard speculations this off-season that Kirk wants to test the open market.  I have also heard from the man himself that he just wants to play where he's wanted.  My point is that if we make him a serious enough offer to entice him to stay, he will be willing to take less than he would see on the open market because he would want to stay in a system, culture, HC, etc. that he is comfortable with, as is the case with other QB's.  In addition, QB's are willing to forgo the open market and stay with their teams when they receive an offer that would entice them enough to not want to risk injury or poor play before they get a chance to hit the open market.

 

I get your point that those other QB deals shouldn't really be seen as taking "less" because a lot of them are still signing record-breaking contracts.  And I'm not denying that those contracts should be considered great deals for the player.  But anytime you introduce another bidder (in this case a team) for someone's services, that price is likely going to increase.  Which is why teams work so hard to lock these guys up before they hit the open market.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

8 minutes ago, thesubmittedone said:

 

 It's the friggin worst but somehow I just can't help but be an idiot and get involved here from time to time. But I enjoy debating/discussing stuff with @HTTRDynasty so it's not that bad this time.  

 

You KNOW I enjoy it lol...but the tennis match you guys have/had going was fun to read. It was like seeing a really good football game where you didn't have anything invested in who won lol...just enjoy the plays. *thumbsup*

[skinfan2k]

he can play under the transition tag at $28 in 2018.  It's basically a 71M deal over 3 years. 

[NoCalMike]

"I want to play where I'm wanted"  is a sort of a passive-aggressive statement.   I am not really blaming Kirk, he isn't the first player to say something like that, but I mean if goes strictly by the money being offered to him as a free agent next offseason, I can almost guarantee another team will "want him more"   

 

I'd like Kirk to return, but I am pretty sure  he is going to get offered more money by another team if he ends up being an unrestricted free agent.

 

And this idea that he's somehow playing for free right now or something? I know it's not a LTD, but he is making a ton of money, perhaps even more than he should be getting due to the way the franchise tag works.  If he got injured during training camp and never played another snap ever, he'd retire never having to worry about making money ever again.

[Burgold]

9 hours ago, NoCalMike said:

"I want to play where I'm wanted"  is a sort of a passive-aggressive statement.  

I think that it's a dishonest statement. Where you are wanted is defined by more than the paycheck. The fans, by and large, have proven that they want you. The Head Coach went out on a limb to prove that he wanted you and has been a strong advocate. His fellow players certainly have expressed enough sentiment to make him feel wanted. He's been given a franchise tag twice... that should make you feel wanted. Heck, it should make you feel loved.

Now, I have nothing against players being greedy. I think that's part of the job, but his definition of "WANTED" is so thin and transparent. Mind you, I still blame the FO more than Cousins for not getting this done at this point, but I think this is a two person tango.

[RWJ]

On ‎4‎/‎22‎/‎2017 at 6:18 PM, WelshSkinsFan said:

 

The draft is not the deadline to get this done and so I don't see no LTD by Thursday as meaning Kirk leaving becomes very likely.  Right or wrong we still potentially have 2 years of team control left and Kirk has made it clear he will sign here if he gets market value, we just did not offer that yet but again we are not at the deadline.  I don't think there is a QB in this draft worth signing and I doubt the team feels any differently, they like Colt and Nate and with KC still here there is no need to reach for a position that is not yet a need.  Should it become a need next year we already know there are better options coming out so that would be the time to draft someone.  Taking a lousy player now won't help, they will still be lousy next year and sitting a year is overrated these days as with the CBA limiting reps the third string QBs are basically not getting any true development anyway.

JMPO, If the Skins sign Peterman from Pitt in the 3rd round, I think he can develop into a Gruden system style QB and do well.   Again, JMO.  Crapshoot is what the draft is.  Who thought Prescott would become the kind of QB he has in 1 year.  In 2018 he may come back down to earth.  Remains to be seen.