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

[Tarpon75]

19 minutes ago, XtremeFan55 said:

I think the team and the fans have to accept the fact that Kirk wants to play somewhere else.  Having Kyle now HC at San Francisco just makes it even more obvious that Kirk will not sign a LT contract.   Can you blame him after what he had to deal with during the first 3 years of his career here?  Snyder's infatuation with RG3....the drama with the Shanahans....the snub when he filled in and won games...etc...  Kirk knows he is better off somewhere else.   I don't blame him one bit.  Signing a long term contract and becoming one of the highest paid players in the game will only work against him if he ever has a bad year.  I can picture Snyder standing at the locker room door after losing games and glaring at him and then sending his minions out to leak false stories that his teammates have given up on him...etc.. Who in his right mind would sign up for that?  Too much bad history in this franchise to have any confidence that things will be different.  

How do you think things will workout with that stalwart franchise that is San Francisco for Kirk?There is probably every bit the disfunction there with way less talent on the field. Personally don't believe Kyle will be a great HC. KC could be headed to a worse situation if he lands there. Wherever you play if you're getting paid that kind of money you will deal with tons of pressure.Who knows maybe he will end up in Cleveland.

[XtremeFan55]

Kyle Shanahan made a comment this past week about being patient for the right quarterback and not going after a stop gap like Romo.  My thinking when I heard this was that he gave out a signal that he would be willing to wait for Cousins to be free next year so that Kirk won't sign a LT term and also so that he wouldn't be accused of tampering.   This is getting interesting.  I think Kirk signs the franchise tag and gets traded to San Francisco for the number 2 pick.  Also Kirk will get paid but give a slight discount to the 49ers. 

[Taylor 36]

35 minutes ago, XtremeFan55 said:

I think the team and the fans have to accept the fact that Kirk wants to play somewhere else.  Having Kyle now HC at San Francisco just makes it even more obvious that Kirk will not sign a LT contract.   Can you blame him after what he had to deal with during the first 3 years of his career here?  Snyder's infatuation with RG3....the drama with the Shanahans....the snub when he filled in and won games...etc...  Kirk knows he is better off somewhere else.   I don't blame him one bit.  Signing a long term contract and becoming one of the highest paid players in the game will only work against him if he ever has a bad year.  I can picture Snyder standing at the locker room door after losing games and glaring at him and then sending his minions out to leak false stories that his teammates have given up on him...etc.. Who in his right mind would sign up for that?  Too much bad history in this franchise to have any confidence that things will be different.  

Can you please provide the evidence of the "fact" and "obvious" things you have claimed above?

[onedrop]

the one thing that most "hes not worth X amount"...."go ahead and get rid of him" folks agree on is that we damn well better get extremely high and favorable trade value for Cousins. logically speaking this is a self defeating argument. if our starting QB is worth so much in trade to someone else, or to us for that matter, he is by definition worth current market value. 

[Boss_Hogg]

Who in the hell is Daniel Jeremiah? He's saying Kirk could be traded to the 49ers as soon as next week?

 

how is that even possible when he's a Free Agent? Plus we will tag him and get more than just the 2nd overall pick. 

 

Link to his interview: http://www.knbr.com/2017/02/22/daniel-jeremiah-49ers-could-trade-for-kirk-cousins-at-nfl-combine/

[The Consigliere]

I don't see it that way, I see it as being patient in terms of development of a young player, and/or getting a player with a lot of years left. Tony Romo is the ultimate kind of Donovan McNabb type idiotic trade, trying to bandaid over a problem with a player whose way past it, and will not be a part of the end game in your rebuild. Basically like us trading for Mark Boonell's last couple of years, rather than rebuilding with a player in his prime, or a developmental QB. 

 

Could be wrong of course. Secondly I just have a really, really, really hard time believing teams would be willing to risk losing out on a player in FA that they could trade for, especially if they think they somewhat have us over a barrell in terms of value. I just think there are way too many teams in need of a QB, and SF and Kyle have to know that other than the bay being a top 2-3 city in America, there are no other selling points to go there. Horrible FO, Horrible FO, Horrible Roster, Horrible Defense, Horrible weapons, and a poor OL as well. It's a worst case scenario landing spot other than Kyle being the coach. So why is SF so confident that Kirk would willingly spend his age 30+ seasons with a team that is in the process of completely a complete nose dive from the peak of NFL competitiveness a couple of years ago, to a complete dumpster fire, s show today? I just don't see it. If they're smart, they'd try to trade for him. 

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

23 minutes ago, Rattlesnake88 said:

Not at all. You just took a minority opinion and called them stragglers, as if they are wrong for leaving the correct path. Minority opinion doesn't mean wrong. Just found it bold considering he could end up elsewhere and those "stragglers" may have been onto something.

 

I tend to use the word straggler to being off the beaten path.  I've used it to define myself on some positions.  But yeah you are right taking the definition literally it means correct path -- sorry, I didn't mean it that way.   Regardless, it wasn't really the thrust of my point.   The point of the post wasn't that people with minority opinions are wrong (people can think whatever makes sense to them, no rights or wrongs until it plays out) -- the point was playing off of Rosenthal's point which was letting a good QB go isn't how teams typically do business so if they do it here and it doesn't work out then it might cost people their jobs.

28 minutes ago, ILikeBilly said:

I agree with what you said in your post, but I think a blockbuster trade would also be a winning PR move.  Let's say we get the SF 1st rounder this year and next and we give them Kirk and our 2nd rounder.  We now have 2 first rounders 2 years in a row.  We can build the defense this year, and if needed, target a QB with our 2 first rounders next year.  It could be sold as a bold, winning move.  I don't want this to happen, but I would be super excited to see how we used our two first rounders come April. 

 

No doubt a trade for draft picks would get attention but IMO it would be at best mixed from a PR stand point and I'd guess more likely a PR loser than winner.  From what I've observed most fans believe you need a good QB to be a winner in the NFL.  Most believe fishing for one in the draft is a crap shoot.  Most remember that this team has given up 5 first round picks and two third rounders over the years and still failed to land a franchise guy.  Their one lucky find was Kirk.  So getting the fans jazzed about lets go shopping for a QB again I don't think is a PR winner.  But I get your point -- lots of attention would come of the trade and lots of attention would come from who would the Redskins go shopping for.  That part I agree. 

[HOF44]

50 minutes ago, Rattlesnake88 said:

Sign him if we can, pay him 25 mil a year if that's what it takes. But if he acts like a pig, I would take what I could get and build a bully in the trenches and front 7.

 That's not unreasonable.  If it turns out he is asking 27-28 plus you can't really fault the skins if they balk at that.  But if he's wanting say 25 and we walk away I'd be pissed.  Only time will really tell that. 

[lavar1156]

Mike Jones just said the idea of swapping 1's is nonsense. 

 

I think trade starts start with the #2 pick and then some.

[bowhunter]

7 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

No doubt a trade for draft picks would get attention but IMO it would be at best mixed from a PR stand point and I'd guess more likely a PR loser than winner.  From what I've observed most fans believe you need a good QB to be a winner in the NFL.  Most believe fishing for one in the draft is a crap shoot.  Most remember that this team has given up 5 first round picks and two third rounders over the years and still failed to land a franchise guy.  Their one lucky find was Kirk.  So getting the fans jazzed about lets go shopping for a QB again I don't think is a PR winner.  But I get your point -- lots of attention would come of the trade and lots of attention would come from who would the Redskins go shopping for.  That part I agree. 

Plus, Scotty McGem has the reputation of being  the type of guy who likes to reward his own. If he gives you a "prove it" deal and perform, then he will reward you. If that premise is exposed as being false, it may very well decrease our attractiveness to future free agents and  our ability to re-sign our own.. There's a LOT of reasons that I think the Redskins are motivated to get this deal done.

[dahibachi]

4 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

No doubt a trade for draft picks would get attention but IMO it would be at best mixed from a PR stand point and I'd guess more likely a PR loser than winner.  From what I've observed most fans believe you need a good QB to be a winner in the NFL.  Most believe fishing for one in the draft is a crap shoot.  Most remember that this team has given up 5 first round picks and two third rounders over the years and still failed to land a franchise guy.  Their one lucky find was Kirk.  So getting the fans jazzed about lets go shopping for a QB again I don't think is a PR winner.  But I get your point -- lots of attention would come of the trade and lots of attention would come from who would the Redskins go shopping for.  That part I agree. 

 

Yeah, from my conversations with friends and speaking with plenty of Skins fans, even if we get the 2nd overall pick back for Cousins, this would cause a mostly upset fan base. if we traded Kirk, I would certainly be among the most displeased. I didn't believe in Kirk at first but I feel he's proven himself, and to now enter this offseason to read these reports is angering to me. Given our history with QBs over the past 20 years, you'd think the Skins would have jumped on Cousins. I would be highly upset if he was traded. 

[Dont Taze Me Bro]

2 hours 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.

 

I said even if he wants to get a huge payday, who cares.  It's not any shady business practice or unethical for him to maximize his worth and use the increase in his market value as a bargaining chip.  It's not strong arming, imo, if done within the rules of the CBA.  Both the owners and players association agreed on those terms.  Meaning they knew it was set up in a way where this could happen.  

 

Also, him saying the right things when he does speak (wants to be here, just wants a fair contract, etc.) is expected from a professional, whether they mean it or not.  It's possible that he would love to stay in DC and sign a LTD that he think represents his value/worth (because he knows he will get paid).  It's also possible that he really would love to stay, but doesn't receive the offer he wants and goes elsewhere.  Or he could not really want to be here and is maximizing his earnings in hopes to be gone after this season or be traded, etc.  

 

That doesn't make him greasy and sketchy.  Or a bad person, or an asshole, or any other negative/derogatory description you want to label him with.  You're complaining about him trying to maximize his earnings, in his profession.  You don't think he's worth 24 million/yr, thats fine.  It really doesn't matter what you think, what I think or any other fan thinks.  It matters what the Redskins think, what Kirk thinks and what other teams think.  

 

If he knows that he would get 24 million/yr from another team and the Redskins aren't willing to offer him that, then why in the **** should he sign a LTD for less money?  Why shouldn't he sign the tag, get his 24 million this year and most likely sign a LTD next season getting an offer he wants (whether it be from another team or us matching an offer, etc.)?

 

I want him here on a LTD, but if he's traded or gone after this season, there is nothing I can do about it.  I'm not taking up for him or the team.  I'm trying to point out how ridiculous you sound in claiming like he is some sketchy used car salesman trying to backdoor the franchise because he will sign and play under the FT two years in a row (if no LTD happens) in hopes of maximizing his earnings, well within the rules that the players and teams signed off on.

[Momma There Goes That Man]

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

He said they'd really be sticking their neck out big and people just don't put their jobs on the line like that.  So he thinks Kirk is going nowhere.

 

I agree with that mindset but after they botched it last offseason, it's not up to the Redskins anymore. 

 

Kirk can do what he wants. It makes more financial sense for him anyway to now pocket $24 million for one year and then sign a long term deal. 

 

Im not sure we have much say in the matter anymore, outside of a Don Corleone offer 

[purbeast]

I heard on the radio on the way home that the Redskins aren't big on resigning Baker either - like wtf is their plan?  I know this is all speculation/rumors, but if this is true, they are going to have MASSIVE holes on offense and defense at this rate that they need to fill.  

[dahibachi]

3 minutes ago, bowhunter said:

Plus, Scotty McGem has the reputation of being  the type of guy who likes to reward his own. If he gives you a "prove it" deal and perform, then he will reward you. If that premise is exposed as being false, it may very well decrease our attractiveness to future free agents and  our ability to re-sign our own.. There's a LOT of reasons that I think the Redskins are motivated to get this deal done.

 

Indeed, I stated earlier I'm getting real sour on Scot McCloughan. He and Dan Snyder rolled out the red carpet and trapped Josh Norman at redskins park, a player who only had one all pro year and was an outsider. But Kirk, drafted by the Skins, played on a prove it deal, and from my POV, is being jerked around. If SM doesn't take care of Kirk, he's a flat out liar and unlike the other Cousins that got traded in the NBA, he can't attempt to hide behind "culture" and "winning". I wonder what his excuse will be for not following through on his word.

[JSSkinz]

There's no way KC plays this season on the tag, it doesn't make sense for the team or the player.

 

He's either gone or its a long term deal.

[Veryoldschool]

51 minutes ago, XtremeFan55 said:

I think the team and the fans have to accept the fact that Kirk wants to play somewhere else.  Having Kyle now HC at San Francisco just makes it even more obvious that Kirk will not sign a LT contract.   Can you blame him after what he had to deal with during the first 3 years of his career here?  Snyder's infatuation with RG3....the drama with the Shanahans....the snub when he filled in and won games...etc...  Kirk knows he is better off somewhere else.   I don't blame him one bit.  Signing a long term contract and becoming one of the highest paid players in the game will only work against him if he ever has a bad year.  I can picture Snyder standing at the locker room door after losing games and glaring at him and then sending his minions out to leak false stories that his teammates have given up on him...etc.. Who in his right mind would sign up for that?  Too much bad history in this franchise to have any confidence that things will be different.  

 

I agree with your summary of the annoyances Cousins has endured in the past, but those things are in the past.  To his great credit Kirk kept focused on worked through all of those things to overcome and succeed.  Let's also remember that along the way he has had very supportive coaches and teammates who helped and encouraged him so I find it just as easy to believe he would like to continue with Skins and surmount the hurdles ahead with his friends.  

 

I think if the Skins give him the top offer he has earned he'll be thrilled to sign and feel he can finally put down roots in the community.  If  the Skins fail to embrace him this time and I think their deadline is March 1 not July 15 in part because of the first 3 years but more importantly the end of last year.  He was told he would be "overpaid" by the GM last season if he sustained his high level of play.  Kirk more than sustained in my viewed he significantly improved in 2016, so the Skins need to pay.  After March 1I think you are right, alternatives like SF are going to look good so he'll sign the FT and prepare to play well in 2017 so he can pick his 2018 team.

[wit33]

@Dont Taze Me Bro

 

Whomever is responsible for this situation reaching point is unknown, but this isn't some kind of norm of how a QB and organization make a contract happen. 

 

If Kirk is using the CBA agreement to its maximum earning potential, he's an outlier as there aren't many examples to compare his decision making to. Generally guys openly share wanting a long term deal. 

 

Maybe Kirk's a trailblazer and these kind negotiations will become the norm throughout the NFL.  Get that guaranteed salary when your value is at its max (i.e. Darrel Revis). 

[50yrSKINSfan]

Just now, Taylor 36 said:

He's come close to a 5,000 yard season (4917 last season against the toughest defensive schedule in the league) and well ahead of Brees' pace.  Again, Brees has 12 years as a starter on him; Kirk has only 2 years as a starter, and you want to knock him for not having as many years as Brees doing blah, blah, blah?  At this rate, Kirk will have a chance to have more championships and more 5,000 yard seasons than Brees when he has 14 years as a starter under his belt.  Compare their first two seasons as a starter.  Kirk is ahead of Drew after two years of starting.

I don't know how you can compare KC to Brees. KC was a 4th rd pick and Brees was a high 2nd I believe, after a great big 10 career. KC sat the bench for 3 years after a not so good college career, and when he played he was not that good and he was even benched in his 3rd year while Brees was a starter right out of school. So now you want to compare KC 2 years as a starter, when in fact he is in his 5th year and you do not want to use his first 3 years in the league, and you want to use DB 1st 2 years as a starter when in fact he was a starter in his rookie year while KC was a bench warmer his first 3 years. Brees doing blah blah? Do you mean having more passing yards and more TDs than any other qb in that amount of time? Brees is a first ballot HOF player do you think KC is even close to a HOF player? If KC was that good then how come the Redskins did not lock him up after last year?

[Dont Taze Me Bro]

Just now, dahibachi said:

 

Indeed, I stated earlier I'm getting real sour on Scot McCloughan. He and Dan Snyder rolled out the red carpet and trapped Josh Norman at redskins park, a player who only had one all pro year and was an outsider. But Kirk, drafted by the Skins, played on a prove it deal, and from my POV, is being jerked around. If SM doesn't take care of Kirk, he's a flat out liar and unlike the other Cousins that got traded in the NBA, he can't attempt to hide behind "culture" and "winning". I wonder what his excuse will be for not following through on his word.

 

Well, unless a LTD is signed, we most likely will not ever know the real details of what Kirk asked for versus what the team was willing to pay.  If Kirk asks for 25 million/yr with a $50 million signing bonus and 100% of his contract being fully guaranteed, with no trade clauses, etc. would you expect the Redskins to make that offer?  

 

Cause that could very well happen, Kirks side wanting too much where the deal is not both team and player friendly, just player friendly.  There are two sides to a negotiation and everyone needs to take both sides into consideration before assigning blame or blasting one side or the other.  

 

 

[Est.1974]

9 minutes ago, jschuck12001 said:

There's no way KC plays this season on the tag, it doesn't make sense for the team or the player.

 

He's either gone or its a long term deal.

 

Im with you on this.

[Dont Taze Me Bro]

1 minute ago, wit33 said:

@Dont Taze Me Bro

 

Whomever is responsible for this situation reaching point is unknown, but this isn't some kind of norm of how a QB and organization make a contract happen. 

 

If Kirk is using the CBA agreement to its maximum earning potential, he's an outlier as there aren't many examples to compare his decision making to. Generally guys openly share wanting a long term deal. 

 

Maybe Kirk's a trailblazer and these kind negotiations will become the norm throughout the NFL.  Get that guaranteed salary when your value is at its max (i.e. Darrel Revis). 

 

It's definitely not the norm.  But just because he is the first to possibly go down that path and use the system in place to his advantage doesn't mean he's wrong in doing so or that he is a scumbag.  That's the point I was trying to get across to Rattlesnake.  

[clskinsfan]

9 minutes ago, wit33 said:

@Dont Taze Me Bro

 

Whomever is responsible for this situation reaching point is unknown, but this isn't some kind of norm of how a QB and organization make a contract happen. 

 

If Kirk is using the CBA agreement to its maximum earning potential, he's an outlier as there aren't many examples to compare his decision making to. Generally guys openly share wanting a long term deal. 

 

Maybe Kirk's a trailblazer and these kind negotiations will become the norm throughout the NFL.  Get that guaranteed salary when your value is at its max (i.e. Darrel Revis). 

The position is what allows this though. Playing on a 24 million dollar tag is hell of lot better than playing on the 9 million dollar tag someone like Eric Berry did last year. The value is in the position more than the player in this case. But I agree that it was/is a smart way for Cousins to play it.

[Momma There Goes That Man]

14 minutes ago, jschuck12001 said:

There's no way KC plays this season on the tag, it doesn't make sense for the team or the player.

 

He's either gone or its a long term deal.

 

Why doesn't it make sense? 

[Cliffmark1]

25 minutes ago, Momma There Goes That Man said:

 

Im not sure we have much say in the matter anymore, outside of a Don Corleone offer