ESPN: Kirk Cousins Open to Being Traded

[TheGreatBuzz]

What is it going to take for people to realize that Rex isn't on the team anymore?

[Skinsfan_13]

So? What does that have to do with whether or not he is a good QB? Peyton Manning had 490 yards in his first 2 starts. Tom Brady had 214 yards in his first 2 starts; what a couple of bums. But seriously, that is such a cherry picked and silly stat to try and trot out to say a guy is good or not. 

It shows that he's fully capable of making NFL throws/reads. I assumed you watched those games? Right? Pretty accurate on the deep ball, seems to get rid of the ball.  I'm not saying the guy should start, but I also think he's shown that he's plenty capable of coming in and getting the job done. And btw...the starter has had two serious knee surgeries, is coming off a so so year and doesn't do a good job protecting himself. We need a solid guy backing up RG3.

[SpacePenguin]

The worst possible scenario almost always seems to unfold for this franchise for the last 20 years or so.

I would rather have Kirk Cousins than a 3rd round pick, because Griffin plays with reckless abandon and often refuses to step up into the pocket, instead trying to outrun everyone to the sideline or backpedal. Even assuming that he regains his timing, corrects his footwork, and develops better pocket presence, there is still the very real possibility that another knee injury either sidelines him for a good portion of the season, or ends his career. Kirk's got his flaws as well, as he'll force some throws,rely too much on throwing recievers open, and is wildly inconsistent to date, but doesn't seem to be a major injury risk.

I also thought Kirk, although inconsistent, looked more like a NFL QB than Griffin did for the entirety of last season. He got the ball out on time, which made the supposedly "turned awful in one year" OL look a hell of a lot better. Whatever (justifiable) reasons one chooses to point out to explain why Griffin struggled with this at times doesn't change the result.

I realize most disagree, but it's fine that they do. I just want the Redskins to become a winning football team, and couldn't care less about which QB makes that possible. I simply don't think either is a "franchise QB" at this point, and neither do I think that draft position (or acquisition costs) should determine how easily a QB gets that title.

Of course, it isn't up to me what happens, and I'm not so full of myself to try to convince anyone that I am correct. It's all merely my opinion. I've avoided posting about this up until this point because I consider most of the content of this debate to be rhetoric stated in such a way that causes said debate to decline into dualism, which only serves to polarize opinions to the point that it becomes more like a thread about politics or religion than any sort of reasonable football discussion. I would not choose to spend my time debating either politics or religion with anyone, as there is no point in discussing matters that one has predetermined to have a "right" and a "wrong" side (or good and evil, if you prefer).

[mistertim]

It shows that he's fully capable of making NFL throws/reads. I assumed you watched those games? Right? Pretty accurate on the deep ball, seems to get rid of the ball.  I'm not saying the guy should start, but I also think he's shown that he's plenty capable of coming in and getting the job done. And btw...the starter has had two serious knee surgeries, is coming off a so so year and doesn't do a good job protecting himself. We need a solid guy backing up RG3.

Without any context it means the guy threw the ball a lot. I just find it odd that you picked one stat that makes him look good out of the two decent games he had. If his two good games were the last two he started would you be going on about "well if you look at his last two starts..."? Yes he looked accurate at times but also looked very inaccurate at times. The guy looks like a decent QB but he was, overall, pretty inconsistent. He made some nice throws but also some terrible ones that led to all of the INTs he had. I have no problem if we keep him as a backup but if a team offers a 3rd for him I'm taking it all day long because while you apparently have confidence in him coming in and putting the team on his back if RG3 goes down, I don't really see it that way. Difference of opinion. I don't see a huge drop off between him and Rex or some other vet we might bring in.

[SpacePenguin]

Without any context it means the guy threw the ball a lot. I just find it odd that you picked one stat that makes him look good out of the two decent games he had. If his two good games were the last two he started would you be going on about "well if you look at his last two starts..."? Yes he looked accurate at times but also looked very inaccurate at times. The guy looks like a decent QB but he was, overall, pretty inconsistent. He made some nice throws but also some terrible ones that led to all of the INTs he had. I have no problem if we keep him as a backup but if a team offers a 3rd for him I'm taking it all day long because while you apparently have confidence in him coming in and putting the team on his back if RG3 goes down, I don't really see it that way. Difference of opinion. I don't see a huge drop off between him and Rex or some other vet we might bring in.

Eh, I can see your point. Yards alone don't mean much in a vacuum. I'd keep Cousins unless they could get a 2nd, you say a 3rd. It's not a big deal. Some people act like the difference between our opinions are worlds apart, or that anyone that has a slightly different opinion from themselves is some kind of fanboy. It's silly, most of us are not that far apart on this.

The discussion was just steered into hyperbole by those with extreme viewpoints (as often tends to happen) lol.

[Skinsfan_13]

Without any context it means the guy threw the ball a lot. I just find it odd that you picked one stat that makes him look good out of the two decent games he had. If his two good games were the last two he started would you be going on about "well if you look at his last two starts..."? Yes he looked accurate at times but also looked very inaccurate at times. The guy looks like a decent QB but he was, overall, pretty inconsistent. He made some nice throws but also some terrible ones that led to all of the INTs he had. I have no problem if we keep him as a backup but if a team offers a 3rd for him I'm taking it all day long because while you apparently have confidence in him coming in and putting the team on his back if RG3 goes down, I don't really see it that way. Difference of opinion. I don't see a huge drop off between him and Rex or some other vet we might bring in.

I guess I see a lot of positives in Cousins and he already does certain things better than Griffin does. I never ever said he could "put a team on his back" if Griffin goes down. Not true. He's probably not that type of guy. But I do think if Griffin goes down that Cousins is fully capable of coming in and the offense not missing a beat. We've seen that in a couple of his starts already.  Especially with the additions the offense has made I believe he could come in and have success like he did against Clev and Alt.  

The worst possible scenario almost always seems to unfold for this franchise for the last 20 years or so.

I would rather have Kirk Cousins than a 3rd round pick, because Griffin plays with reckless abandon and often refuses to step up into the pocket, instead trying to outrun everyone to the sideline or backpedal. Even assuming that he regains his timing, corrects his footwork, and develops better pocket presence, there is still the very real possibility that another knee injury either sidelines him for a good portion of the season, or ends his career. Kirk's got his flaws as well, as he'll force some throws,rely too much on throwing recievers open, and is wildly inconsistent to date, but doesn't seem to be a major injury risk.

I also thought Kirk, although inconsistent, looked more like a NFL QB than Griffin did for the entirety of last season. He got the ball out on time, which made the supposedly "turned awful in one year" OL look a hell of a lot better. Whatever (justifiable) reasons one chooses to point out to explain why Griffin struggled with this at times doesn't change the result.

I realize most disagree, but it's fine that they do. I just want the Redskins to become a winning football team, and couldn't care less about which QB makes that possible. I simply don't think either is a "franchise QB" at this point, and neither do I think that draft position (or acquisition costs) should determine how easily a QB gets that title.

Of course, it isn't up to me what happens, and I'm not so full of myself to try to convince anyone that I am correct. It's all merely my opinion. I've avoided posting about this up until this point because I consider most of the content of this debate to be rhetoric stated in such a way that causes said debate to decline into dualism, which only serves to polarize opinions to the point that it becomes more like a thread about politics or religion than any sort of reasonable football discussion. I would not choose to spend my time debating either politics or religion with anyone, as there is no point in discussing matters that one has predetermined to have a "right" and a "wrong" side (or good and evil, if you prefer).

Pretty much sums it up.

[BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93]

"Looked more like an NFL QB"?

Jesus Christ, it's not like Griff looked like Beck out there.

That' type of phrase is full of hyperbole

[mistertim]

"Looked more like an NFL QB"?

Jesus Christ, it's not like Griff looked like Beck out there.

That' type of phrase is full of hyperbole

lol, I know. With the way some people in here talk you'd think Griffin threw 10 TDs and 22 INTs with a 49% completion rate and a QB rating of 50.

[NickyJ]

I agree, SpacePenguin. He looked like a martian QB.

 

If any QB shreds his knee and doesn't put up hall of fame stats months afterwards, he doesn't deserve to be called a franchise QB. I mean, it's not like he won the Heismann trophy in college, carried our team on his back, and got us our first division title in 10 years with a team that everyone agreed absolutely sucked, all while managing to be crowned rookie of the year. Yeah. Let's go with the guy who put up 2010 Rex Grossman stats who has won one game in 4 career starts.

[SpacePenguin]

"Looked more like an NFL QB"?

Jesus Christ, it's not like Griff looked like Beck out there.

That' type of phrase is full of hyperbole

You cut out the part, "I thought". The statement is completely true. It's a personal opinion, with zero exaggeration. Both QBs were up and down, but Kirk got the ball out on time, and mainly because of this, he looked more like an NFL qb TO ME. Of course Griffin has a much higher ceiling. I'm not calling for Kirk to start, just don't want to trade him for a mid round draft pick.

I guess that's blasphemy to some. To each their own

[BRAVEONTHEWARPATH93]

You cut out the part, "I thought". The statement is completely true. It's a personal opinion, with zero exaggeration. Both QBs were up and down, but Kirk got the ball out on time, and mainly because of this, he looked more like an NFL qb TO ME. Of course Griffin has a much higher ceiling. I'm not calling for Kirk to start, just don't want to trade him for a mid round draft pick.

I guess that's blasphemy to some. To each their own

Dude if you think Kirk is/ was better, that's fine but the way you worded it made it sound like Griff should be struggling to stay in the league as a QB

[SpacePenguin]

Dude if you think Kirk is/ was better, that's fine but the way you worded it made it sound like Griff should be struggling to stay in the league as a QB

Sorry if you took it that way. Probably not the best way to phrase that, in retrospect. I don't think Kirk is better under normal circumstances, but last season was anything but normal.

Cousins came in and looked a lot crisper than Griffin, but that's at least in part due to outside factors. They seemed to use the spread more often with Kirk, for one.

I think Griffin has a chance to be great, and is a far better prospect than Cousins. Cousins could win a few games possibly, if needed. That's more than I think of Colt McCoy.

[RG3Hunna]

The worst possible scenario almost always seems to unfold for this franchise for the last 20 years or so.

I would rather have Kirk Cousins than a 3rd round pick, because Griffin plays with reckless abandon and often refuses to step up into the pocket, instead trying to outrun everyone to the sideline or backpedal. Even assuming that he regains his timing, corrects his footwork, and develops better pocket presence, there is still the very real possibility that another knee injury either sidelines him for a good portion of the season, or ends his career. Kirk's got his flaws as well, as he'll force some throws,rely too much on throwing recievers open, and is wildly inconsistent to date, but doesn't seem to be a major injury risk.

 

I have a simple question for you.

 

 

Ask yourself WHY does RGIII continuously choose not to step up in the pocket? Or WHY does RGIII run for his life instead of throwing from the pocket? Could it be because the interior offensive line was swiss cheese last year? Could it be because the RT isn't a starter he truly is a back up but due to us not having a RT we had to start him? Could it be because teams were double teaming Garcon daring other receivers to get open and those other receivers not named Jordan Reed couldn't get open?

 

In the 3rd round you can find a starting C, RG, or RT so again why would we keep Kirk Cousins when we have an opportunity to obtain a piece that can give RGIII enough confidence to stay in the pocket and step up in the pocket and make a throw rather then running for his life?

[SpacePenguin]

I have a simple question for you.

Ask yourself WHY does RGIII continuously choose not to step up in the pocket? Or WHY does RGIII run for his life instead of throwing from the pocket? Could it be because the interior offensive line was swiss cheese last year? Could it be because the RT isn't a starter he truly is a back up but due to us not having a RT we had to start him? Could it be because teams were double teaming Garcon daring other receivers to get open and those other receivers not named Jordan Reed couldn't get open?

In the 3rd round you can find a starting C, RG, or RT so again why would we keep Kirk Cousins when we have an opportunity to obtain a piece that can give RGIII enough confidence to stay in the pocket and step up in the pocket and make a throw rather then running for his life?

That's not a simple question at all! It's one request and five seperate questions.

I understand that the interior OL played poorly at times. However, instead of sideline sprinting or backpedaling, while behind the exact same (supposedly completely awful) OL and the same personnel, would Cousins not get rid of the ball?

Now, granted, the results of getting rid of the ball were mixed at best, but preferable to his taking the beating that Griffin did. Like I said before, there are definitely factors beyond Griffin's control. I'm sure it's much easier to get rid of the ball quickly when you have more than 2 receivers out in patterns. I'm certain its much easier to run an offense when you have more than 1 legitimate receiving threat. That doesn't mean I'm going to completely ignore the tendencies he developed.

You can though. I really don't mind. I feel that if you want to blame something, the scheme/playcalling was just as much at fault as both the OL and Griffin were. There is plenty of blame to go around in a 3 win season.

I've already said why I'd prefer Cousins to a 3rd round pick several times. I hope Griffin has a great year and stays healthy, but I don't consider either possibility to be a certainty. To each their own though, I can't really blame a fan for being optimistic.

[planter]

I would not part with Cousins unkess it could bring one of the top four/five OTs in the first round. Cousins for nothing less than the "points" value of a mid 2nd round pick. Then move up to the first round by giving the same team this year's 34th pick. Ideally we could get one of the top 3 OTs but the cost might be prohibitive.

[mistertim]

I would not part with Cousins unkess it could bring one of the top four/five OTs in the first round. Cousins for nothing less than the "points" value of a mid 2nd round pick. Then move up to the first round by giving the same team this year's 34th pick. Ideally we could get one of the top 3 OTs but the cost might be prohibitive.

We need an RT. With good scouting you can get a high quality starting RT outside of the first round. Most of the "top four/five OTs" off the board will likely be LT prospects who would quite possibly be wasted as RTs. 

[Skinsfan_13]

I have a simple question for you.

 

 

Ask yourself WHY does RGIII continuously choose not to step up in the pocket? Or WHY does RGIII run for his life instead of throwing from the pocket? Could it be because the interior offensive line was swiss cheese last year? Could it be because the RT isn't a starter he truly is a back up but due to us not having a RT we had to start him? Could it be because teams were double teaming Garcon daring other receivers to get open and those other receivers not named Jordan Reed couldn't get open?

 

In the 3rd round you can find a starting C, RG, or RT so again why would we keep Kirk Cousins when we have an opportunity to obtain a piece that can give RGIII enough confidence to stay in the pocket and step up in the pocket and make a throw rather then running for his life?

Too many people just think the draft pick would net a quality starter. The good teams have solid depth and we have that in Cousins.

[RG3Hunna]

That's not a simple question at all! It's one request and five seperate questions.

I understand that the interior OL played poorly at times. However, instead of sideline sprinting or backpedaling, while behind the exact same (supposedly completely awful) OL and the same personnel, would Cousins not get rid of the ball?

Now, granted, the results of getting rid of the ball were mixed at best, but preferable to his taking the beating that Griffin did. Like I said before, there are definitely factors beyond Griffin's control. I'm sure it's much easier to get rid of the ball quickly when you have more than 2 receivers out in patterns. I'm certain its much easier to run an offense when you have more than 1 legitimate receiving threat. That doesn't mean I'm going to completely ignore the tendencies he developed.

You can though. I really don't mind. I feel that if you want to blame something, the scheme/playcalling was just as much at fault as both the OL and Griffin were. There is plenty of blame to go around in a 3 win season.

I've already said why I'd prefer Cousins to a 3rd round pick several times. I hope Griffin has a great year and stays healthy, but I don't consider either possibility to be a certainty. To each their own though, I can't really blame a fan for being optimistic.

HAHAHAHA

 

The one thing Cousins does better than RGIII is not holding on to the ball too long. With all the beatings RGIII has taken he has slowly started to hold on to the ball too long and not trust what he sees. This isn't a regular draft this is one of the most deepest drafts at WR, G, OT, DE, OLB in a longggggg time.

 

We need RT, G, DE, OLB, ILB, FS, SS (in no particular order of need)

 

Trading cousins can net us a starter, I wouldn't trade him for a 4th round pick or lower but I damn sure would trade him for a 1, 2 or 3rd round pick. 

Too many people just think the draft pick would net a quality starter. The good teams have solid depth and we have that in Cousins.

2nd round netted us Amerson and the 3rd round got us Jordan Reed. Two players who are now starters on this team, one being a borderline future superstar at his position. 

 

I'm allllll for depth but what good is depth if your starters at C, G, RT, one ILB position are average to below average? That's why the Shanahan regime failed they were too busy trading back in the draft building depth that the starters at key positions were average players lacking any playmaker capabilities.

 

Playmakers win you games(lineman can be playmakers too) , if you can field a team with more playmakers than your opponents chances are you're going to win a LOT of games.

[planter]

...Most of the "top four/five OTs" off the board will likely be LT prospects who would quite possibly be wasted as RTs.

While the top 3 OTs may be too rich for us, the fourth (Z. Martin) is projected as RT or guard. He can play every position on the line includind spelling Trent. Currently we do not have a reliable sub for Trent. If Skins believe they have a "franchise" QB then O-line frugality is unwise.

[skins island connection]

 I've read through quite a few pages of posts here, and I just shake my head at some of them.

 

 All stats, W/Ls, yds, etc etc aside,  a lot of the 'discussions' are not looking at the actual TEAM performance as a part of last year's cliff dive of a season. The defense was horrendous, special teams was non-existent, o-line was shaky at best, yet a lot of unwarranted criticism is directed towards Kirk, and Griffin, for that matter.

 

 IMO, trading Cousins would be a mistake, given Griffin's history. He's 1 cheap shot/hard hit away from being out of the game, maybe long term, but some want to put all their eggs in one basket, and that's a dangerous way to gamble a team's success.

We all saw how good, and bad, both QBs can be; they are 2 different, and I mean different, styles of QBs, both bring a lot to the game. Griffin is a much better overall athlete and Cousins is a better pocket passer, so far.

 

I just do not understand the idea of trading away an insurance policy to have extra cash in your pocket; there's no guarantee that any QB we happen to use as a back-up to Griffin will be worthy, and if Gruden turns things around, and the defense and special teams somehow decide they want to play, and the team is in the running for the playoffs [ paloffs ] I would be much more comfortable with Cousins stepping in to keep it going, and I'd be a lot more confident that he could get the job done.

 

Griffin needs the majority of reps, granted, but Cousins, if he's kept here, needs to get more involved in the 1st team offense, in the event Griffin goes down; it isn't a question of Cousins being traded, both of them are young, eager, and skilled enough to take this team a long way, but the 'Lets Make a Deal' mentality of trading away a good thing for whats behind door #2 does make me question the thought process of some here.

 

SIC

[Wyvern]

I liked SIC's post -- we need help in a lot of places, and given the circumstances for this team, backup QB is maybe a higher priority than many would think.

Given Griffin's desire/mentality to make the big play, his new freedom to alter the play, and willingness to give up his body to get that first down -- it's logical to assume the odds of some degree (minor, major) of injury to Griffin might go up as well.

If it's a stinger, or a single game injury -- maybe a decent backup QB -- could avoid a loss. If you think the Skins might be capable of contending for the NFC East crown or a wildcard, maybe that game (or games) could be the difference.

Unless Gruden/McVey/Forester completely overhaul the offensive schemes -- Cousins will still be experienced with the Skins play-book and with some chemistry with the Skins players. He's shown he can compete in the NFL, and a quick study of the game. That's not always easy to find.

The Skins will know what they're getting with Cousins and how well he fits with the Skins. However, would they have that same level,of confidence with an extra 2nd or 3rd round draft-pick they got for trading Cousins? Remember Jarvis Jenkins, Josh LeRibeus, Kevin Barnes, Malcolm Kelly, Fred Davis, Rashaud Baumann, Devin Thomas, Taylor Jacobs, -- some examples that 2nd or 3rd round picks don't always pan out.

[RG3Hunna]

We have the best back up QB in the NFL while Seattle, San Fran and Denver don't. We just went 3-13 while Seattle won the superbowl, Denver was the runner up and San Fran was the 3rd best team in the NFL.

 

Back Up QB's do not matter when your team sucks. If we don't trade cousins for a 1-2 or 3 we're gonna be kicking ourselves in the rear while we see Chris Chester starting RG, Tyler Polumbus starting RT and Akeem Jordan starting ILB.

 

a 2nd /3rd rounder netted us David Amerson and Jordan Reed one being a game changer/star the other looking like the starting CB for the next 6-8 years. Why exactly again would we not take a 2nd rounder or 3rd rounder for a guy who isn't going to play? lol

 

When teams start sending blitzes at Chris Chester and Polumbus and the sacks start to add up everybody will be screaming "Why didn't we trade cousins for a 2nd or 3rd rounder and get a RG or RT?" 

 

Please watch the San Fran game how they ABUSED Chris Chester and Polumbus, you ready for that again?.......I guess look at the bright side huh? we have Kirk Cousins the best back up in the NFL nevermind our weak starters at key positions can only get us a 3-13 season lol.

[NIKKI8]

I hope Cousins isn't traded this off-season but if he is I doubt we will get a 2014 pick for him. My guess would be a 2015 conditional pick based on the number of snaps he takes.  

[TD_washingtonredskins]

We have the best back up QB in the NFL while Seattle, San Fran and Denver don't. We just went 3-13 while Seattle won the superbowl, Denver was the runner up and San Fran was the 3rd best team in the NFL.

 

Back Up QB's do not matter when your team sucks. 

 

You can make the counter to that point pretty easily too. The Patriots of 2001 seemed to be a crappy team but I'm sure they are happy that they didn't strip their team of depth to stock up on picks. Obviously it's an extreme example, but for every "good team with crappy backup" example you find, we can find teams that needed to rely on its backup. 

 

Believe me, if we can get a very high pick for Cousins (2nd or better), I won't lose sleep about trading him. However, I don't think it's a slam-dunk decision at all. We have a team-friendly contract and adequate backup at the most important position in sports. That can't be ignored or downplayed. 

[RG3Hunna]

You can make the counter to that point pretty easily too. The Patriots of 2001 seemed to be a crappy team but I'm sure they are happy that they didn't strip their team of depth to stock up on picks. Obviously it's an extreme example, but for every "good team with crappy backup" example you find, we can find teams that needed to rely on its backup. 

 

Believe me, if we can get a very high pick for Cousins (2nd or better), I won't lose sleep about trading him. However, I don't think it's a slam-dunk decision at all. We have a team-friendly contract and adequate backup at the most important position in sports. That can't be ignored or downplayed. 

 

 

I use to also want a 1st or 2nd rounder but at this point i'm ok with an 3rd rounder ONLY if it's an early 3rd rounder. This draft will have NFL starters in the 3rd round at positions like C, RT, G, DE and maybe ILB..... plus we could get our pass catching RB like Charles Sims in the 4th.