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

[bobandweave]

50 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

But again...thats not the argument! Nobody is arguing if Cousins is a superstar or elite. The crux is: does he do well in clutch situations or big game spots. The facts say yes he does, more often then not.

 

This is false. He does not do this. I have no earthly idea why after the way the season just ended this year, and how the season ended last year when he didn't beat a single winning ball club why anyone would argue that Kirk wins clutch games when that is simply not true. Why push this false idea?

 

I've read what you posted here and it's nonsense.

 

You say

 

So, the clutch/big game count going into 2016 is 9-4(9 good 4 bad).

 

But you also say things like

 

@Cardinals-not really sure if big game. Cousins plays well enough to win, until the final drive over 250 yards and a TD, and rallies us to a lead in the 4th quarter. Unfortunately the D once again can't get a stop, and Cousins throws a pick on the final drive. Don't think its fair to say he "choked" here considering he put up a damn good game against I believe the top ranked D in the NFL on the road and generated 23 points of offense.

 

Your data is not honest, this is not held against him, 250 yards and one TD when he ends a one score game with another pick? Come on man. Not to mention no one in this league considers winning games against the #3 picking in the NFL draft this year team like the Bears the same as the Giants. Your pushing false ideas here, Kirk's not clutch and never has been

[TD_washingtonredskins]

10 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

You don't need a Rodgers/Brees type to win titles, but you need a good QB and you have to pay the big bucks to keep them once you have them. Cousins is a damn good QB who at times through stretches played elite.

Even worse, if you don't pay guys who are trending up you might be passing up someone who can approach being a Rodgers/Brees type. I'm sure it's been done, but if you compare KC's first two starting seasons with DB's and/or AR's you'll have evidence that he can match their output over the next 5-10 years. It's not a guarantee to happen, but there's evidence suggesting he could. What else can you really do at this position??

[Rattlesnake88]

10 minutes ago, Dont Taze Me Bro said:

 

If Kirk thinks the best offer is to play under the tag two years in a row and try to maximize his potential future earnings, so be it.  It was one of his options.  

Is equal to if the Redskins believe the best option is to let Kirk "show me the money" Cousins gimp somebody else's roster.

 

We can't be mad at our team for protecting their own interests just as Kirk. If we offer a fair market contract and he rejects, then he can go. 

[bobandweave]

18 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

There is no real differentiation between good money and elite money. QBs get paid, period

 

Wrong here as well. Jeez I just don't have the time to correct all the wrongs your saying here. Did Osweiler get the same money that Andrew Luck did? No of course not. QB quality equals what they get paid.

 

http://overthecap.com/position/quarterback

 

If all QBs got "paid, period" why is there differences in what they make? Oh wait they don't just do that do they lol

[Dont Taze Me Bro]

34 minutes ago, Rattlesnake88 said:

Is equal to if the Redskins believe the best option is to let Kirk "show me the money" Cousins gimp somebody else's roster.

 

We can't be mad at our team for protecting their own interests just as Kirk. If we offer a fair market contract and he rejects, then he can go. 

 

I'm not mad at the team or Kirk.  You're trying to imply that Kirk will be doing something wrong (shrewd and greasy as you put it) if he signs the FT two years in a row and basically forcing the team into giving him a huge contract offer or letting him walk.  That is not the case at all, not even close.  It can't be, because it's an option he has under the franchise tag rules approved by both the owners and players association in the CBA.

 

He doesn't have to sign a LTD if he doesn't want to, the team knows that and should not have any problem with that.  It's not like Kirk and his agent found loopholes in the CBA and are screwing over the team by him playing under the tag two years in a row.  It's set-up to protect both the team and player and it does both.  It allows the team to keep a player at least three more years (if a team would actually apply the third tag) in hopes of securing a LTD, or get possible compensation (draft picks - non-exclusive) or match other offers for a LTD.   

 

It gives the player some leverage and can allow them to negotiate with other teams and only can be applied three times in their career.  If you disagree with how its set-up to work, so be it, argue that.  But don't blame a player for taking options that the team gave him.

[Unbias]

Because this is a discussion board and there are many things that can happen maybe it's interesting to see how people would react to Washington trading Kirk to San Fran? Let's say we get the 2017 2nd overall pick and some conditional, later picks in 2018. It would ensure Washington would get either Myles Garrett or Jonathan Allen with that pick. 

 

After the trade San Fran signs Kirk for $25M/year with a guarantee that's 40% of the total deal (for numbers sake let's say he signs a 6 year, $150M deal with $60M guaranteed). 

 

How would you react?

[Cooleyfan1993]

If the skins actually trade Kirk to the 49ers next week during the combine, I'm done. I do not think it will happen, and I think it's fake, but just saying, IF it happens, I'm done. No matter what their plan is 

[spjunkies]

9 minutes ago, Unbias said:

Because this is a discussion board and there are many things that can happen maybe it's interesting to see how people would react to Washington trading Kirk to San Fran? Let's say we get the 2017 2nd overall pick and some conditional, later picks in 2018. It would ensure Washington would get either Myles Garrett or Jonathan Allen with that pick. 

 

After the trade San Fran signs Kirk for $25M/year with a guarantee that's 40% of the total deal (for numbers sake let's say he signs a 6 year, $150M deal with $60M guaranteed). 

 

How would you react?

 

I'd be ecstatic since that would be fair value.

[Momma There Goes That Man]

I said for awhile now that Cousins has no incentive to sign a long term deal this offseason. He's a unique cat in that he doesn't mind and embraces the tag.

 

So in his mind he can easily pocket $24-25 mil this season and then do this whole thing again and make even more next offseason when he has options and a market full of suitors.

 

And again there is no need for SF to trade for him if they know that's wher cousins wants to be. Just get word to him not to sign long term and they can have him in 12 months plus their picks 

[Unbias]

2 minutes ago, spjunkies said:

 

I'd be ecstatic since that would be fair value.

Completely fair. Remember how valuable the #2 pick was when Washington moved up for RG3 (just to speak value, not to rehash the trade). 

 

The one thing that makes that scenario tough is you then have Colt McCoy manning the most important position in football for a team with a recent history of poor defensive and special teams play. The counter would be that the $25M/year they have 'saved' could go towards more Josh Norman type talent on that side of the ball, but I'm still uneasy about Colt as the guy. 

[Rattlesnake88]

7 minutes ago, Dont Taze Me Bro said:

 

I'm not mad at the team or Kirk.  You're trying to imply that Kirk will be doing something wrong (shrewd and greasy as you put it) if he signs the FT two years in a row and basically forcing the team into giving him a huge contract offer or letting him walk.  That is not the case at all, not even close.  It can't be, because it's an option he has under the franchise tag rules approved by both the owners and players association in the CBA.

 

He doesn't have to sign a LTD if he doesn't want to, the team knows that and should not have any problem with that.  

Yea but he's still choosing to push. His agent could reach out to Redskins park and make a LTD happen at any time. But as you said he's trying to "get a huge payday". It's no longer market value, it's become inflation and strong arming within the CBA rules. Him pretending to have no hand in the matter only further adds to his greasiness. Dude is as passive aggressive as I have ever seen and he coats it in a shield of Jesus. He is a money first, me first guy just like any other run of the mill NFL athlete. However there are special players that are winners, leaders and deserve to get paid with their play and not with the leverage they have obtained...

 

Had he actually won one of those two games this year or the WC game last year I would feel a lot different. He's little in the big game and big at the negotiation table. If you want to stand on the table for the guy so be it. I'll be happy with or without the guy at this point.

[markmills67]

5 minutes ago, Cooleyfan1993 said:

If the skins actually trade Kirk to the 49ers next week during the combine, I'm done. I do not think it will happen, and I think it's fake, but just saying, IF it happens, I'm done. No matter what their plan is 

If you were a betting man do you think Cousins will sign a LTD with the Skins?

[TD_washingtonredskins]

If we unload Cousins and he's signed for 6 years with only $60M in guarantees, I would be devastated. 

[Momma There Goes That Man]

1 minute ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

If we unload Cousins and he's signed for 6 years with only $60M in guarantees, I would be devastated. 

 

That would be the Redskins way 

[Rattlesnake88]

7 minutes ago, Momma There Goes That Man said:

 

That would be the Redskins way 

If anything Kirk is the physical embodiment of the Redskins way. Win in the offseason. 

[CTskin]

If Kirk's traded before the draft, it tells me one thing- the front office got a firm read that he wants crazy money and won't budge. Our nightmare scenario is that Kirk plays under the tag this year and then we're left extra screwed next off-season. If he's traded for a high round pick or two, I'll be content.

 

I keep seeing this "$23.9M/yr" number thrown around in regard to Kirk's LTD. I guarantee Kirk's camp is starting negotiations much higher, $25M+; they'll hang up the phone if the Skins FO mentions "fair market value." 

 

Anyone here whose in business and has negotiated terms should be able to understand my reasoning. Think about having every bit of the upper hand against someone who wronged you in the past...

[Commander -JB-]

8 hours ago, Bang said:

 

If you understood that was my point, why the rest?

 

Apparently I'm not following. Sure seemed to me like you weren't tracking with why I brought up Brady.

i mean, when you state that if cousins could have avoided the pick vs the Giants he would have... it seems to me as if you believe he should be above making any mistakes.

 

What am i missing?

 

~Bang

It is what it is.  If you haven't made the big play in the big game what makes me want to say you "could" make the play, you just "didn't" this time?? 

[Taylor 36]

34 minutes ago, Rattlesnake88 said:

Yea but he's still choosing to push. His agent could reach out to Redskins park and make a LTD happen at any time. But as you said he's trying to "get a huge payday". It's no longer market value, it's become inflation and strong arming within the CBA rules. Him pretending to have no hand in the matter only further adds to his greasiness. Dude is as passive aggressive as I have ever seen and he coats it in a shield of Jesus. He is a money first, me first guy just like any other run of the mill NFL athlete. However there are special players that are winners, leaders and deserve to get paid with their play and not with the leverage they have obtained...

 

Had he actually won one of those two games this year or the WC game last year I would feel a lot different. He's little in the big game and big at the negotiation table. If you want to stand on the table for the guy so be it. I'll be happy with or without the guy at this point.

How do any of us know that his agent hasn't reached out to the Redskins?  it seems that Kirk isn't the only one in this limbo with our team (Garcon, Jackson, Baker), so I would have to guess, if anything, it's the team not working much with agents at this time rather than multiple agents refusing to reach out.

[Thirtyfive2seven]

Sign him. Pay him.  There isn't a better option that is readily available unless you want to sign Tony Romo and hope he doesn't get injured for the hope that he could lead a team to the Super Bowl (which he hasn't ever done before).  There isn't a Peyton Manning available in the offseason that can take a team from average to greatness.  Out of the available QB's I'd argue that Kirk tops the list of most teams outside of Romo.  Pay him.

[Rattlesnake88]

5 minutes ago, Taylor 36 said:

How do any of us know that his agent hasn't reached out to the Redskins?  it seems that Kirk isn't the only one in this limbo with our team (Garcon, Jackson, Baker), so I would have to guess, if anything, it's the team not working much with agents at this time rather than multiple agents refusing to reach out.

My point was that Kirk playing the "if the powers that be allow for it" card is bs. Kind of proving how full of **** he is. It's all politics really. I guess it's nothing to get worked up over. It's just unfortunate that the leverage he has is setting his market and not necessarily what he brings to the team. Sigh

[HOF44]

2 minutes ago, Rattlesnake88 said:

It's just unfortunate that the leverage he has is setting his market and not necessarily what he brings to the team. Sigh

But isn't his leverage that someone will pay him more than the Skins want to? 

[TD_washingtonredskins]

22 minutes ago, -JB- said:

It is what it is.  If you haven't made the big play in the big game what makes me want to say you "could" make the play, you just "didn't" this time?? 

 

I would completely agree with you if Cousins hadn't ever made a "big play in a big game" before. But just because he has failed (last drive vs. New York in 2016, for example) doesn't mean he can't do it. Just from my memory alone, he's thrown a game-winning TD in the final minute of must-win games a couple times (vs. Philly in 2015, vs. Tampa in 2015) and scored on a keeper in a similar spot (at Detroit in 2016). That's not even to point out the times he's just kept scoring in key games to extend leads (at Philly in 2015 to win the division, vs. Green Bay in 2016). 

 

The reason people are confident that he CAN win games like the Giants game and just didn't this time is because he's won those types of games many times before in the past two years. 

[Rattlesnake88]

@HOF44 that and the team doesn't want to be embarrassed by losing him.

 

My point is that he wont be worth whatever he gets paid, that's the market as it's been stated over and over. Yet the Redskins are being hammered by the same media who can't wait to hammer us for overpaying for him. It's a ****ty situation and I hate it for all of us. But hey at least Kirk will get paid. The same cat who **** his pants comes out smelling rosey while the organization gets hammered because of skeletons in the closet. It's bull**** honestly. 

[Hooper]

On 2/17/2017 at 1:40 PM, drowland said:

 

Cousins is doing exactly what I would be doing if I was in his shoes.

 

He doesn't trust the organization going forward and how could he? 

 

SM is under Brucey's thumb.

 

Jay might be a lame duck, which is nuts, considering the mess he's inherited. In any other city coming off two decades of losing, he would already have an extension.

 

Danny is Danny.

 

The local media stirs the pot like no other.

 

Why shouldn't he sign the tag and refuse a LTD? Even if has a mediocre year, he knows Kyle or possibly McVay will be waiting. 

 

The Skins -- as usual -- have taken something good and botched it.

 

 

 

 

[Taylor 36]

1 hour ago, bobandweave said:

 

Wrong here as well. Jeez I just don't have the time to correct all the wrongs your saying here. Did Osweiler get the same money that Andrew Luck did? No of course not. QB quality equals what they get paid.

 

http://overthecap.com/position/quarterback

 

If all QBs got "paid, period" why is there differences in what they make? Oh wait they don't just do that do they lol

Maybe you should just stop, because you are embarrassing yourself. It's not like this hasn't been pointed out to multiple times by multiple posters in multiple threads. I honestly can't tell if you're just trying to play thick here and trolling, or if you really just can't comprehend it.

 

All good QB's do get paid, because QB is the highest paid position in the NFL.  If you want a good QB, you are going to have to pay to get/keep him.  There is a reason why the tag number for a QB is so much higher than any other position: because they get paid more than any other position.  The market is set by how much the average QB salary is, and the tag is set by the average of the top five salaries (not the top five players at the position, but the top five salaries at the position).  This is not Cousins' or any other player's fault.  This is the way the CBA was set up, which the owners had more of a say than the players thanks to their horrible leadership. You can kick and scream until the cows come home that Cousins isn't worth 25 million a year or that he is asking for too much, but the fact is that in this market in 2017 he is worth that much.