Kirk Cousins 2017 contract discussion/prediction

[Burgold]

1 hour ago, TheGreek1973 said:

For Cousins having front row seats for Hamilton is not that big of a deal.  Hanging out with the Pope for a weekend, he will sigh for a vet minimum.  Dan you got any pull with the Vatican? 

Dan's a Jew. He probably can't get a seat with the Pope, but being one of the Chosen People a one on one with G-d isn't out of the question.

[Voice_of_Reason]

1 hour ago, Tsailand said:

He could also go to Broncos, Jets, Texans after 2017, many other teams....

Remember when a certain other QB's agent said he had gotten interest from ten or twelve other teams, but in reality only the Browns wanted him?  This is going to be the opposite situation.  Nobody is publicly expressing interest in Kirk, because they assume he will be tagged before free agency, and because talking to him right now wold be against NFL rules.  But if he does hit free agency, you are going to see a ridiculous bidding war.

Agree, but he's not going to get to FA. My prediction is that they use the tag on him, then come to an agreement before the tag-deadline in June. 

Because that's just more intense, and why not?

[Renegade7]

I like having a contract thread.  I do not like talk of him not being a Redskin.  Please, don't kill my vibe.

[Morneblade]

I see this going down the way it went down with Josh Norman. As soon as our season is over (whenever that might be) Scot is going to lock Kirk in a room until the long term deal is signed. No tag. No FA looming. None of that. Kirk will be locked up, and he will be locked up VERY quickly.

[Rex Tomb]

1 hour ago, Morneblade said:

I see this going down the way it went down with Josh Norman. As soon as our season is over (whenever that might be) Scot is going to lock Kirk in a room until the long term deal is signed. No tag. No FA looming. None of that. Kirk will be locked up, and he will be locked up VERY quickly.

Yep - I'm quite sure McC has seen enough to get the deal done ASAP.  Pay that man what he deserves!  Aside from the start of the season, Cousins has been absolute house money!

[Veryoldschool]

1 hour ago, Morneblade said:

I see this going down the way it went down with Josh Norman. As soon as our season is over (whenever that might be) Scot is going to lock Kirk in a room until the long term deal is signed. No tag. No FA looming. None of that. Kirk will be locked up, and he will be locked up VERY quickly.

 

I'm inclined to think the discussions are going to be brief and jubilant.  JG and SM stuck their necks out to give Cousins the opportunity to play and he has succeeded beyond their wildest dreams.  Snyder and Allen are no longer the league chumps for the 2012 mega bust they drafted they are the shrewd minds who drafted, developed and extended Cousins a franchise and NFL star.  Everyone wins including the fans!  It might be the biggest contract in the history of the league no matter the Skins are going to be contenders for another decade with Cousins in the lineup.

[bobandweave]

People need to face it that Kirk without question is the best damn thing we've had at QB this teams had in 30 or more seasons. Kirk's shown this year that money won't change his ability to perform and with a market place like the above where losers like Brock Osweiler and Joe Flacco are making money hand over fist and playing like ass, to throw out some silly numbers like X number of years for whatever with something guaranteed is just silly and we need to get to the heart of what we actually need in this contract to know if it was a good deal or a bad one. Numbers will not tell the story if the contract is good or bad.

Also we all need to understand that there is no chance in hell baring something completely unseen today that Kirk will ever touch any part of free agency after the way he's played this season. Put that out of your mind and know that will never happen. I have never said one bad word about Scot but I will this. If Scot lets Kirk anywhere near Free Agency then he should be fired, to me that is a fireable offense. This is a contract that must be done for the betterment of this franchise and he must get it done. Not getting the deal done is not an option for anyone. At worst for next year Kirk is going to get slapped with the franchise tag again and we all know it. If Scot wants to push it out one more season he better be damn sure that's okay with Kirk before doing it. Kirk is here to stay

Now about the actual contract, we all need to understand what QBs are getting paid (why I posted that) and understand that Kirk undoubtedly will sign something in line with the market he works in. And with that the keys to the contract must be team friendly which which are

1. Flexibility getting out of it if needed (See Joe Flacco as to why that's absolutely necessary. If they aren't playing like a top guy why are you paying anyone like a top guy? Bad business for everyone)

2. Understanding from the player how this all works. The more money Kirk takes away from the cap, the less money there is for the 51 other men. The less money there is for the 51 other guys, the harder it will be to win games because with no money you aren't re-signing anyone (See New Orleans as to why it's bad for one guy to eat too much of a teams cap over the last five seasons). When the teams winning that's better for the player signing the contract as he will get more endorsement deals as a winner then a loser  (See Tom Brady and know the only reason he isn't the top paid guy is because he wants to win and understands this). So with that understanding placed completely in Kirk's head I want to see the player agree to not demand the absolute most money he can squeeze out of the team and instead make a team friendly deal for himself and the team.

I think if we get those things from Kirk we will be in great shape. The headlines once the deal is signed will say "Kirk Cousins most expensive QB ever" and the reporters will poo-poo us for signing him to that deal saying "What has he done to deserve that? Stupid Redskins" looking at you Steven A, but when the dust settles and we get over the initial sticker shock and the bean counters put him on the chart above we should all see that Kirk is not be at the top and we have outs in case he ended up not living up to the deal ala Osweiler/Flacco/Kapernick etc. and know it's the price of doing business in the NFL today and we won.

[zCommander]

33 minutes ago, bobandweave said:

2. Understanding from the player how this all works. The more money Kirk takes away from the cap, the less money there is for the 51 other men. The less money there is for the 51 other guys, the harder it will be to win games because with no money you aren't re-signing anyone (See New Orleans as to why it's bad for one guy to eat too much of a teams cap over the last five seasons). When the teams winning that's better for the player signing the contract as he will get more endorsement deals as a winner then a loser  (See Tom Brady and know the only reason he isn't the top paid guy is because he wants to win and understands this). So with that understanding placed completely in Kirk's head I want to see the player agree to not demand the absolute most money he can squeeze out of the team and instead make a team friendly deal for himself and the team.

Get rid of Djax and Garcon. Problem solved. 

[bobandweave]

5 hours ago, zskins said:

Get rid of Djax and Garcon. Problem solved. 

 

I saw someone here suggest that we franchise tag Garcon, I tried to ignore that but since you quoted me I'll go on the record saying that idea is ludicrous and will never happen and never should happen. Neither are worth top 10 money and neither are anywhere close to top 25 at the position. With that said I'd be fine with them both returning on team friendly deals and that's what I am hoping but not expecting to happen. 30 year old WRs can be replaced and honestly should be replaced. If they want a pay decrease and want to stay I'm fine with that as they are both good players but both we can live without. For them 5 a year on 3 year deals is about what I'd offer them and they can probably get more elsewhere, I think they are both gone this year because of the market for free agent WRs. 

The problem you said is solved I was talking about is not solved by us not signing those two men. Sure the contracts are off the books but so what? Those contracts are not counted on the book now looking at 2017 salary cap anyway. And the point I am making is if 20-25% of your franchise money is locked into a single player the 52 other guys who are on the team need to paid too or they will leave or not come here,

And when those two receivers leave you have to replace them anyway. How do you do that? Its not easy to replace the #1 targeted WR on our team (Garcon if anyone's wondering). 

Ideally you replace them in the draft. Part of the issue with that idea is draft picks do not always work out. I am still high on Josh Doctson's NFL prospect but look at him, highly regarded by the experts as this years best WR  and he caught what? 3 passes this season? Relying solely on the draft to find receivers who can produce right away is asking a whole lot. Not to mention drafting them uses our valuable picks which even when we have 10 draft picks never seems as if we ever have enough. The draft is where we need to go to fix this position, we just might need to take more then one guy to feel good about that (Quantity and Quality approach) if we tried to do that this off season. 

Now if those two WRs did move on we should all realize that they could be replaced in Free agency but that is a very bad place to go looking for WRs (see the big money deals guys like Mohammed Sanu and Marvin Jones just signed which were way too much for what they have done this year). And if you weren't already aware usually once WRs get paid big bucks off a rookie deal their production almost always decreases (Dez got paid, production went down. Demaryius got paid, same thing. It happens with nearly all of them). So going to look in Free Agency to replace the WRs means your going to overspend. We had to overpay to get Garcon and Jackson to even come here in the first place and honestly they are both incredibly overpaid now.

In FA we could go cheap hoping to land some guys who will play over the value of the contracts which I think we can do (Vernon Davis example) but its easier said then done. And if Cousins is eating too much of the cap, well we might not be able to even sign those cheap guys (Review what the Saints went through when they paid Brees).

We might if we are forced in a non team friendly deal for Cousins to be like the Patriots who had a great QB and some pretty average to below average receivers (Randy Moss excluded) catching the ball in the 2000's decade going forward. Time will tell but its a domino effect. Team friendly QB deal equals having money to keep our own players and gives us flexibility, not having a QB team friendly deal means we lose that. Garcon and Jackson don't play into that since they already on essentially one year deals now but it definitely decreases the odds of them signing with us if Cousins forces us into a bad deal

[zCommander]

1 hour ago, bobandweave said:

I saw someone here suggest that we franchise tag Garcon, I tried to ignore that but since you quoted me I'll go on the record saying that idea is ludicrous and will never happen and never should happen. Neither are worth top 10 money and neither are anywhere close to top 25 at the position. With that said I'd be fine with them both returning on team friendly deals and that's what I am hoping but not expecting to happen. 30 year old WRs can be replaced and honestly should be replaced. If they want a pay decrease and want to stay I'm fine with that as they are both good players but both we can live without. For them 5 a year on 3 year deals is about what I'd offer them and they can probably get more elsewhere, I think they are both gone this year because of the market for free agent WRs. 

I am all for a friendly deal. 

1 hour ago, bobandweave said:

The problem you said is solved I was talking about is not solved by us not signing those two men. Sure the contracts are off the books but so what? Those contracts are not counted on the book now looking at 2017 salary cap anyway. And the point I am making is if 20-25% of your franchise money is locked into a single player the 52 other guys who are on the team need to paid too or they will leave or not come here,

And when those two receivers leave you have to replace them anyway. How do you do that? Its not easy to replace the #1 targeted WR on our team (Garcon if anyone's wondering). 

Not a contract expert but I am sure you can give Kirk and others more money in later years that you just saved. 

As of right now, Garcon is not your so called #1 targeted WR. After Reed it is Crowder and then Garcon. So that is how you find your WR. With Doctson back next year and I am sure Vernon Davis will too we wouldn't miss Garcon or Djax. 

Quote

Ideally you replace them in the draft. Part of the issue with that idea is draft picks do not always work out. I am still high on Josh Doctson's NFL prospect but look at him, highly regarded by the experts as this years best WR  and he caught what? 3 passes this season? Relying solely on the draft to find receivers who can produce right away is asking a whole lot. Not to mention drafting them uses our valuable picks which even when we have 10 draft picks never seems as if we ever have enough. The draft is where we need to go to fix this position, we just might need to take more then one guy to feel good about that (Quantity and Quality approach) if we tried to do that this off season. 

He might still be the best. Let's see how he fares out after he heals up. He should have not even been on the field this year if he wasn't 100%.  You can also pickup someone up during the free agency as well that you don't have to pay Djax type of money. If one is not there then you move on to the DL position - we need that more - and then back to the draft and get your BPA even if that is a WR. 

Quote

Now if those two WRs did move on we should all realize that they could be replaced in Free agency but that is a very bad place to go looking for WRs (see the big money deals guys like Mohammed Sanu and Marvin Jones just signed which were way too much for what they have done this year). And if you weren't already aware usually once WRs get paid big bucks off a rookie deal their production almost always decreases (Dez got paid, production went down. Demaryius got paid, same thing. It happens with nearly all of them). So going to look in Free Agency to replace the WRs means your going to overspend. We had to overpay to get Garcon and Jackson to even come here in the first place and honestly they are both incredibly overpaid now.

In FA we could go cheap hoping to land some guys who will play over the value of the contracts which I think we can do (Vernon Davis example) but its easier said then done. And if Cousins is eating too much of the cap, well we might not be able to even sign those cheap guys (Review what the Saints went through when they paid Brees).

We might if we are forced in a non team friendly deal for Cousins to be like the Patriots who had a great QB and some pretty average to below average receivers (Randy Moss excluded) catching the ball in the 2000's decade going forward. Time will tell but its a domino effect. Team friendly QB deal equals having money to keep our own players and gives us flexibility, not having a QB team friendly deal means we lose that. Garcon and Jackson don't play into that since they already on essentially one year deals now but it definitely decreases the odds of them signing with us if Cousins forces us into a bad deal

Everything you said above can be fixed by a damn good QB. He can make even a scrub look like an MVP. You don't have to get or have a name brand WR. Regardless, in Scot we must trust at this point and lock up Kirk at any cost. 

[bobandweave]

8 hours ago, zskins said:

Not a contract expert but I am sure you can give Kirk and others more money in later years that you just saved. - Sir your missing the point I'm making, neither player is counting one dime against next years cap as both are in the final year of there deals. We can't save money on these guys because they are not on the books next year. Also we must not get back into mortgaging our future caps for the now, it didn't work before and it won't work later (Saints tried that recently because of this exact situation and it has kept them out of the playoffs since 2013), that does not work. 

As of right now, Garcon is not your so called #1 targeted WR. After Reed it is Crowder and then Garcon - Not according to ESPN, or any other stats places you look. Garcon leads all wide receivers in targets so far this year. I know it's hard to accept but its true which is why I pointed that out

http://www.espn.com/nfl/team/stats/_/name/wsh/washington-redskins

Everything you said above can be fixed by a damn good QB. He can make even a scrub look like an MVP. You don't have to get or have a name brand WR. Regardless, in Scot we must trust at this point and lock up Kirk at any cost. - Completely agree and just want to point out that we have a damn good QB leading our offense now doing this exact thing you speak of.

We are second only to New Orleans in passing yards per game, we are top ten in points scored per game and overall points scored, Kirk is the second leading passer in the league, top 4 in yards gained per pass attempt, top 10 in passing TDs, he has taken the second least amount of sacks for all QBs, he is top 6 in passer rating, and has a 20 to 7 TD to INT ratio.

And we have two of the NFLs top 35 pass receiver yardage leaders (Crowder and Garcon) on this team now.  Not saying those guys are scrubs, just re-enforcing your point that a damn good QB can make superstars out of anyone and he's doing that.

 

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

He's going to get Flacco money. And then we are going to be crippled because he got Flacco money. That makes us no difference than all the good-ish teams in the league.

[bird_1972]

30 minutes ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

He's going to get Flacco money. And then we are going to be crippled because he got Flacco money. That makes us no difference than all the good-ish teams in the league.

What choice do we have, honestly?

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

14 minutes ago, bird_1972 said:

What choice do we have, honestly?

There is none.

 

Give him his 5 years and $120 million and then hang yourself when he is the 10th best QB in football over the next half decade and you can't afford good linemen any longer.

The NFL salary system is totally screwed up these days.

[bobandweave]

16 minutes ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

There is none.

 

Give him his 5 years and $120 million and then hang yourself when he is the 10th best QB in football over the next half decade and you can't afford good linemen any longer.

The NFL salary system is totally screwed up these days.

 

He will get Flacco money, and we should be totally okay with that. He deserves that. However chill brother, no one knows the future so don't write the ending before it happens. If the contracts team friendly we will be fine and try not to forget that we have the NFL Draft to get those good linemen your saying we can't afford to get and honestly I hate to mention this but I mean FA linemen hack cough Hanesworth no thanks, keeping our own drafted linemen could become an issue but at least we would have them for four years right? It could be fine no one knows yet

[TheGreek1973]

2 hours ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

He's going to get Flacco money. And then we are going to be crippled because he got Flacco money. That makes us no difference than all the good-ish teams in the league.

How did you figure that one?  After their SB the Ravens lost some huge pieces to their D including Ray Lewis. Maybe he was not top ILB at the time he retired but he was their heart and sole and you can't replace players like that.

Also as great as their GM is, or we think he is, he has had some huge misses with very high picks.  Also last year that team was decimated by injuries.  it wasn't the money they paid Flacco it was a combo of what I outlined.  BTW how many OC has Flacco been thru since their SB?  You see where I am getting at? 

 

its not the final number, but the % of the CAP we need to watch.  Hell just look at Norman's contract, very reasonable this year and next but it explodes in 2018 when the cap is an additional 15% to 20%.

 

We have our top corner locked up, our top OL guy, our top OLB, and our TE.  We have a number one WR that has not even played yet, Crowder is costing us peanuts, Reed is locked up, Davis should be very reasonable and just the two salaries we are paying DJax and Garcon add to close to 20 million .  Even if we sign one of these two, I can't see a CAP hit more than 6 million if that.  Cap wise we are fine, especially with Scottie being a huge proponent of building thru the draft.  And honestly who exactly will become a FA this offseason that we would want to sign badly.  I don't want to do what the Giants did, that's for sure.

[Lombardi's_kid_brother]

10 minutes ago, TheGreek1973 said:

How did you figure that one?  After their SB the Ravens lost some huge pieces to their D including Ray Lewis. Maybe he was not top ILB at the time he retired but he was their heart and sole and you can't replace players like that.

Also as great as their GM is, or we think he is, he has had some huge misses with very high picks.  Also last year that team was decimated by injuries.  it wasn't the money they paid Flacco it was a combo of what I outlined.  BTW how many OC has Flacco been thru since their SB?  You see where I am getting at?

 

its not the final number, but the % of the CAP we need to watch.  Hell just look at Norman's contract, very reasonable this year and next but it explodes in 2018 when the cap is an additional 15% to 20%.

 

We have our top corner locked up, our top OL guy, our top OLB, and our TE.  We have a number one WR that has not even played yet, Crowder is costing us peanuts, Reed is locked up, Davis should be very reasonable and just the two salaries we are paying DJax and Garcon add to close to 20 million .  Even if we sign one of these two, I can't see a CAP hit more than 6 million if that.  Cap wise we are fine, especially with Scottie being a huge proponent of building thru the draft.  And honestly who exactly will become a FA this offseason that we would want to sign badly.  I don't want to do what the Giants did, that's for sure.

 

Too boring. Didn't read.

[TheGreek1973]

4 minutes ago, Lombardi's_kid_brother said:

 

Too boring. Didn't read.

Your loss in being educated. 

 

[zCommander]

5 hours ago, bobandweave said:

.................

NFL.com will disagree with ESPN as to who our #1 is in receiving yards. But I see you are talking about how many times each was targeted. You can still target someone less who can run more after the catch. In that case Crowder wins and we as fan win and Kirk wins.

 

So let get this straight Djax and Garcon will not be on the books next year. In another words you don't have to resign them. In another words they can leave after this season or next? If they do then you will have two open spots for someone else who will be younger and cheaper to fill those spots? Sorry, again not a contract guy but maybe someone else can help me out here. Thx!

[goskins10]

1 minute ago, zskins said:

NFL.com will disagree with ESPN as to who our #1 is in receiving yards. But I see you are talking about how many times each was targeted. You can still target someone less who can run more after the catch. In that case Crowder wins and we as fan win and Kirk wins.

 

So let get this straight Djax and Garcon will not be on the books next year. In another words you don't have to resign them. In another words they can leave after this season or next? If they do then you will have two open spots for someone else who will be younger and cheaper to fill those spots? Sorry, again not a contract guy but maybe someone else can help me out here. Thx!

 

Both contracts are over at the end of this season. Based on their years in the NFL both will be Unrestricted Free Agents - meaning they are free to sign with anyone they want. So when looking at a web site like overthecap.com, there is no salary listed for Jackson or Garcon for next year.

[zCommander]

Just now, goskins10 said:

 

Both contracts are over at the end of this season. Based on their years in the NFL both will be Unrestricted Free Agents - meaning they are free to sign with anyone they want. So when looking at a web site like overthecap.com, there is no salary listed for Jackson or Garcon for next year.

Ok so losing those two will not increase the cap space but it will open up two spots. That is also money!

[Ashburn Dave]

Should have signed him last year and better get er done this off season.  Don't screw around when negotiating and try to make him feel wanted.

[Stefanskins]

Thought this looked interesting 

 

"For the first — and possibly last — time in their NFL careers, Cousins and Griffin now have the same number of NFL starts. Cousins has started 27 straight games, giving him 36 total starts and drawing him even with his former teammate. Griffin started just one game this season, and while he’s been cleared for contact, it’s unclear when he might start again, and whether he’ll hold onto a starting job in Cleveland or elsewhere.

And so, because one (1) reader asked, here is a quick rundown on how the two men compare through those 36 NFL starts. (Their stats coming on in relief are not included here.)"

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/dc-sports-bog/wp/2016/11/29/kirk-cousins-and-rgiii-have-now-started-the-same-number-of-nfl-games/

 

 

 

[bobandweave]

42 minutes ago, zskins said:

So let get this straight Djax and Garcon will not be on the books next year. In another words you don't have to resign them. In another words they can leave after this season or next? If they do then you will have two open spots for someone else who will be younger and cheaper to fill those spots? Sorry, again not a contract guy but maybe someone else can help me out here. Thx!

 

For the record, both Garcon and Jackson are in the final year of there contracts. This means that we do not owe them any money after the 2016 season ends unless we choose to sign them to new deals. When we talk about the salary cap for 2017 neither man at this time is costing us a dime, we could sign them or we could treat them like we did Pot Roast this off season and watch them leave. Either way they cost us nothing at this point. They become unrestricted free agents when free agency starts just like Cousins.

 

We will have two open spots if they both leave. Questioned above in my stream of conscience our options for replacing them. I am of the belief that provided they will be willing to take a 5 million a year contract I believe we are better off keeping them then moving on, but I don't think either are worth more then that and in free agency WRs will get paid more then we think. Problem with using draft picks is we only have so many picks to use and you really can only count on the top 3 rounds for early production. Will be interesting to see what we end up doing

58 minutes ago, zskins said:

Ok so losing those two will not increase the cap space but it will open up two spots. That is also money!

 

Correct no change to the cap space at all, but two less players on the team and a lot of production to replace

[Stefanskins]