Jump to content
Washington Football Team Logo
Extremeskins
Forum Rules and Guidelines

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

Ron78

By Ron78
in The Stadium

Recommended Posts

HTTRDynasty

HTTRDynasty

Posted
Posted

Nothing new here with Blackmon's take on Kirk's contract.  But it's pretty interesting that he's kind of breaking the unspoken rule of not speaking about other players' contract situations (not being in other players' pockets):

 

Quote

In all fairness, [Kirk Cousins] deserves anything over $19 [million per year]. But the tricky thing is do you max out, therefore it's harder for people to sign on our team? Or do you find a happy medium and bring guys in and build our team to where we can win? At the end of the day, it's a team sport.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
skins island connection

skins island connection

Posted
Posted

 

 watching that little clip of Mike S. tells a lot more than what first appears.

 The man enjoyed coaching, but probably grew tired of the politics involved in the NFL today.

 

 His comments about Cousins verifies what he saw in him when he drafted him, and his remarks about needing a good defense to win SBs holds water. I believe that if there was no Griffin in the draft and he got Cousins, KC would be a lot further in his maturity, his ups and downs, and we'd have a much clearer image of what the guy should be making, and it very well might not even be a discussion about it.

 

But, we're all faced with the reality of the situation. He will get better, I don't doubt that, but a supporting cast [ functioning defense ] is needed to take away the pressure. Had KC been the starter in 2012 or even 2013 if the team rode or died with him for the entire season to further groom him, he'd have a lot of the jitters out of him.

Its all buts and ifs, and I'm actually split somewhat in the big picture; I can see where the FO would be concerned about making him one of if not THE top paid QB, because of the lack of playing time. If I were Scot, I'd be concerned. But, looking back at all the failures we've had at QB, we've got someone who can move the ball and put up points. That part of me says give him the 'chance' to be the top paid QB but offer a nice amount that won't turn him away, and simply incentivize the contract, but not with unrealistic goals, give him the chance to play for bigger pay without subjecting him to putting pressure on himself and end up making mistakes.

 

There are not many teams who have a QB who has been with them for 5+ years, and those teams are perennial winners for the most part; I don't think taking a chance with Cousins will damage that streak.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DC9

DC9

Posted
Posted
59 minutes ago, PartyPosse said:

Texans didn't give up 2 firsts for his services.

 

XRNj5.gif

 

I feel like we're close to a break through... so I'll try one more time.

 

I didn't say they did.  I said they gave him big money when he played mediocre for like 8 to 10 games....

 

Is that:

 

A - Just another example of QB being a premier position in the NFL and teams being more likely to take a chance on one

 

or

 

B - Just another example of QB being a premier position in the NFL and teams being more likely to take a chance on one

 

Take your time when answering.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DC9

DC9

Posted
Posted
2 hours ago, wit33 said:

Suspend DC9, save him from himself. ;)

 

Relax man, some don't have same fervor you do, in regards to Kirk, that's okay. Scott and the organization agreed Kirk hadn't quite earned a max offer, we'll see who's proven right again this off-season with Kirk.

 

I will say though, I'm not for another year of him playing under the franchise tag. It's okay if fans are undecided, but those running the team need to make a decision asap and put it all to rest. 

 

When did the NFL start giving "max" deals?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
goskins10

goskins10

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, mistertim said:

 

 

 

edit

 

Anyway, we really can't keep hanging on to this "He's only a 2 year starter" thing. The guy at this point is a 5 year NFL veteran with over 40 starts under his belt, who also happens to be possibly asking for the biggest contract in the NFL. Time to take the kid gloves off. He has displayed some of the same issues throughout his career. He is on and off. He'll play great for a while but then fold sometimes when it comes to big games under the bright lights. Edit

 

It is an actual fact that he only a 2 yr starter. Yes, he is also a 5 yr veteran, but those spot starts as a back-up are just not the same thing as being the #1 for 5 yrs. You guys keep wanting to treat it the same. Did he get some additional benefit from being a back-up for 3 yrs? Of course, but it's still nothing like being the starter. And no matter how many times you and others say it is, will not change the facts.

 

Also, you just described all but a small handful of QBs.

 

Also, you still have not answered the question about the concern is over a total of at most $3M/yr. Are you are really saying the team needs to let Kirk go over $3M/yr - not to mention if it turns out bad it will be only 3 yrs as the contract will be structured so the team can get out of it after 3 yrs will relatively low CAP hit? With $70M in CAP space? And a CAP going higher every year? You seem to be hung up with this - he is not the best QB so he should not be paid the highest. Unfortunately those two things do not correlate.

 

Do you think Andrew Luck is the best QB in the NFL? He is currently being paid the most. Carson Palmer is #2 highest paid with Joe Flacco #4. Are those 3 of the 4 best QBs? Not even close.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
maskedsuperstar

maskedsuperstar

Posted
Posted
On 1/12/2017 at 1:28 PM, mistertim said:

 

No it isn't Kirk's fault that the run game wasn't working. It is his fault that his game wasn't working.

 

And not everyone who played poorly in those must win games is likely going to want to be the highest paid player in the NFL. Just one.

It shouldn't have come down to that game.

Kirk was 2nd in the league, behind Stafford in tying or go ahead TD's in the 4th qtr. The defense lost the leads. Detroit, Cincinnati, Arizona etc.

We all know that there were red zone issues. But OMG! The defense never stopped anybody. Pick a game! Doesn't matter which game. Every opposing teams offense had its way with the Skins defense. 32nd in 3rd down defense! The worst in NFL history! Ridiculous! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
onedrop

onedrop

Posted
Posted
12 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

 

It is an actual fact that he only a 2 yr starter. Yes, he is also a 5 yr veteran, but those spot starts as a back-up are just not the same thing as being the #1 for 5 yrs. You guys keep wanting to treat it the same. Did he get some additional benefit from being a back-up for 3 yrs? Of course, but it's still nothing like being the starter. And no matter how many times you and others say it is, will not change the facts.

 

 

I would add that riding the pine, being groomed and learning from an established starter for 3 years is just a slightly different experience than sitting behind a guy from your own draft class and all the drama that surrounds him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mistertim

mistertim

Posted
Posted
4 hours ago, DC9 said:

 

Dude, there is no other explanation.

 

It's just as easy for you to say "well you just think I hate Cousins."

 

But that's not all I've said.  You're just not giving the proper weight to facts.

 

I'm not sure where else we can take this.  Essentially you want to agree to disagree that the sky isn't blue.

 

 

What facts are you even talking about? You've been offering up opinion just like anyone else. And "there is no other explanation" is nothing but a statement of faith because you can't seem to get over the possibility that I just don't think Kirk is as good as you do without attributing it to some sort of hate of the guy because of RG3. I've given plenty of specific reasons why I think Kirk is a good but not great or elite QB and that have precisely zero to do with RG3, who you brought up not me, as he has absolutely nothing to do with my personal football analysis of Kirk. But I've also said that I'd like to keep him; it's just the contract numbers I'm hearing that I'm against. But you just keep coming back with the tired old "well you must just hate him" drivel.

 

Also, the sky is actually clear.

 

2 hours ago, DC9 said:

 

 

 

I feel like we're close to a break through... so I'll try one more time.

 

I didn't say they did.  I said they gave him big money when he played mediocre for like 8 to 10 games....

 

Is that:

 

A - Just another example of QB being a premier position in the NFL and teams being more likely to take a chance on one

 

or

 

B - Just another example of QB being a premier position in the NFL and teams being more likely to take a chance on one

 

Take your time when answering.

 

If you take "take a chance" and replace it with "be stupid and desperate" then you are definitely on to something. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DC9

DC9

Posted
Posted

Until you've found that QB you're going to be looking for him.

 

We can't wait to get back onto the train as a fan base.

 

Maybe because we're so addicted to drama we can't comprehend what it's like to have nice things.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DC9

DC9

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, Rskins06 said:

Wonder what today would look like had Mike been able to start the QB he wanted?  Kyle would probably be HC with Mike in some sort of consulting position.  Would the team be better off today or close to the same?

 

Mike was awful at personnel on the defensive side of the ball.  I don't think there are many picks from when he was here that are still in the league other than Riley and Amerson.

 

That and his loyalty to dudes like Bobby Slowick were going to be his down fall.  Kyle has always been an excellent play caller.  I've been head over heels for him since he chased those refs down the tunnel after the game to tell them to **** right off.

 

If Mike had a say at all we'd be in the poops.  Not sure Kyle was ready when he was here, and he still may need another year or two.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Rskins06

Rskins06

Posted
Posted

I liked Kyle, no doubt.  I always believed he would have taken over for Mike.  Agreed, Mike was bad at personnel on the Defensive side of the ball, but had they been able to convince him of a need for GM to run personnel (doubt his ego would have allowed that) could have been different.......but, not the topic so back to current program which is already in progress?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DC9

DC9

Posted
Posted
9 minutes ago, Rskins06 said:

I liked Kyle, no doubt.  I always believed he would have taken over for Mike.  Agreed, Mike was bad at personnel on the Defensive side of the ball, but had they been able to convince him of a need for GM to run personnel (doubt his ego would have allowed that) could have been different.......but, not the topic so back to current program which is already in progress?

 

Not sure that would've worked though.

 

That's the same reason the Broncos fired him because he wanted say over personnel and he wouldn't give it up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Taco Bell

Taco Bell

Posted
Posted
10 hours ago, onedrop said:

I would add that riding the pine, being groomed and learning from an established starter for 3 years is just a slightly different experience than sitting behind a guy from your own draft class and all the drama that surrounds him.

 

And, one of the most important ones of all is, Aaron was drafted well before the CBA rules cut down on practice time, which has dramatically reduced the number of reps backup QBs who are there to develop actually obtain.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Nfcbeasts4721

Nfcbeasts4721

Posted
Posted

I I didn't like Kirk Cousins body language and especially what he said when asked if he wants to return a redskin .."that's not up to me".."the ball is not in my court"...I'm sorry but that totaly sounds like someone that does not want to be here..maybe he was that flustered after the loss but it's completely different than Garcon's response when asked where do u wanna play...with mcvay and now Barry in LA I just get a nasty feeling for the months to come..if mcvay was the reason for our successful offense and there's uncertainty of who's gonna take over, that might be another little thing to push Kirk away...how is his and grudens relationship?..like I've said before its all up to Kirk at this point...if he truly does not want to be here I guess we(at least me)will begin to panic if he gets franchised..than it has to be obvious at that point he does not want to be here right?...nobody wants to b the d coordinator here, Gruden will end up taking over,Kirk will get franchised forcing a trade(somebody got a brown paper bag)d Jackson will go to LA with Kirk,will get some no name scrubb for d coordinator ,2017 will be a disaster with only 4 wins Gruden gets fired and the process starts all over..HTTR!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...