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

[elkabong82]

15 hours ago, UK SKINS FAN '74 said:

 

Cutlers is kinda that way. 7 year 126mil in 2014. They've had 3 seasons out of it and he's getting ditched some time soon with what looks like a dead cap figure of only 2mil in 2017.

 

We've got enough near term cap space to push a good 60-70mil through 2017-2019 with relative 'ease' for a cap perspective. That will land at about 12% of cap available to be utilised over that period.

 

Not saying we should do it, buy think we could do it from a numbers side quite easily.

 

 

 

Cutler signed a 7 year deal back in 2014 with an average of $18.5 mil per year and dead cap obviously front loaded like the others. He didn't have a signing bonus and his guaranteed money was $54 mil., not even half of his total. Because of that, Bears were able to make it so his last 2 years there is no penalty for release, but these other 2 it toals just $3 mil. This contract was likely the last significant one for Cutler. 

 

Kirk on the other hand is much earlier in his starting career. He is signing his contract as a hot commodity, and he doesn't have the injury history like Cutler who could wind up retiring in a couple seasons. 

 

Cutler's first big contract, an extension with the Bears when he was traded to them from the Broncos in 2009, that paid him an average of $15 mil a yaer, which put him with Rivers and Eli among highest paid, which obviously would have had bigger ramifications if released than what we see now, which is again the last significant deal for him after a middling career. 

 

Just as a guess, last year Kirk likely would have signed for $20-21 mil a year over 5 years, at least $60 mil guaranteed, at least $25 mil signing bonus. That would made for a double-digit dead cap in the last 2 years, whereas Cutler signed for 7 years, $18.5 mil per year with no signing bonus and less than half guaranteed, hence a small impact only if released now. 

 

 

[PartyPosse]

1 hour ago, XtremeFan55 said:

Another way of looking at things.  Kirk saw the Redskins give RG3 $16 million for one year where he didn't even suit up for a single game.  Wasn't even the backup.  Everyone in Redskins Park... besides Snyder... probably knew RG3 didn't know how to play quarterback at the pro level....yet he got paid.   If Snyder was willing to waste $16 million on a player who had zero impact....

No they didn't. They picked up the option with the intention of cutting him before that option was to be paid. This was actually a sign of trust in Cousins in that the option was picked up and it would have been fully guaranteed if he got injured. By signing up the 5th year, it all but guaranteed he wouldn't be playing. But RG3 didn't get a dime of that money.

[Tsailand]

10 minutes ago, Taylor 36 said:

https://www.numberfire.com/nfl/lists/11705/re-drafting-the-quarterbacks-from-the-2012-nfl-draft-using-advanced-analytics 

 

These metrics are totals, rather than per-play or per-game.  So Kirk is getting a big fat zero for about two and a half of his first five seasons, because RG3 or Colt was the QB for those games..

[Veryoldschool]

They paid 75M for 5 years to Norman with 50M guaranteed.  I don't begrudge Norman his contract but is there anyone here who doesn't think Kirk is worth 25M a year if Norman is worth 15M?  In my mind a QB is easily worth more than 1.67 times a CB,  probably at least twice as important.  A team can also take an opponents best CB out of the game by running the ball or throwing to the other side of the field.  How do you take a Pro Bowl QB like Kirk who can slice and dice a team whenever he has the ball?  The only way to take Cousins out of it is to hog the ball.   A CB is an important position but the QB spot is easily the most important. 

 

Another thing, they pick Norman off of another roster give him a monster deal for a QB in a day and keep Cousins waiting and their fans stewing?  If this was the Packers, Patriots, Steeler's or one of the other soundly run franchises I would be thinking they must know what they are doing but this is the Redskins so it looks like that are just being stupid.

 

[Taylor703]

1 hour ago, XtremeFan55 said:

Another way of looking at things.  Kirk saw the Redskins give RG3 $16 million for one year where he didn't even suit up for a single game.  Wasn't even the backup.  Everyone in Redskins Park... besides Snyder... probably knew RG3 didn't know how to play quarterback at the pro level....yet he got paid.   If Snyder was willing to waste $16 million on a player who had zero impact....why not open the wallet and pay $24 million a year long term for a proven quarterback who played light years better than RG3 and was the single brightest player on the team for the last two years.  Losing Kirk won't just mean losing a franchise quarterback...it will damage the reputation of the team so that players will only come to get paid.  Redskins have no choice....but the longer this drags on the more this becomes a matter of 'winning' the contract battle and both sides dig in.  Again...I really believe Kirk wants to play somewhere else.

 

Yeah, this is wrong. RG never saw a dime of that $16M. They picked up his option but cut him long before it went into affect. 

 

And Kirk shouldn't complain. He got $19M for a half season of solid football. If he's still upset over RG3 than he has serious mental problems. The team cut Robert and gave Kirk a ton of weapons and an OL. At this point him feeling slighted by this organization is a complete joke. 

1 minute ago, Veryoldschool said:

They paid 75M for 5 years to Norman with 50M guaranteed.  I don't begrudge Norman his contract but is there anyone here who doesn't think Kirk is worth 25M a year if Norman is worth 15M?  In my mind a QB is easily worth more than 1.67 times a CB,  probably at least twice as important.  A team can also take an opponents best CB out of the game by running the ball or throwing to the other side of the field.  How do you take a Pro Bowl QB like Kirk who can slice and dice a team whenever he has the ball?  The only way to take Cousins out of it is to hog the ball.   A CB is an important position but the QB spot is easily the most important. 

 

Another thing, they pick Norman off of another roster give him a monster deal for a QB in a day and keep Cousins waiting and their fans stewing?  If this was the Packers, Patriots, Steeler's or one of the other soundly run franchises I would be thinking they must know what they are doing but this is the Redskins so it looks like that are just being stupid.

 

 

Norman is a better player. Yes, I understand one plays a more demanding position but Norman is without a doubt better at his position than Kirk is at his. And no, I don't think Kirk is worth $10M more a year than a guy that is a better player than him. 

[PartyPosse]

6 hours 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.

Who was the last non-elite QB to win without an elite defense? Probably Mark Rypien. Point is, you do need a Brees/Rogers type.

[bobandweave]

1 hour ago, markmills67 said:

If we do trade Cousins would we get 2 1st round picks?

 

Not certain we do have the right to accept less in a trade and I don't think the landscape of the NFL today lends itself to a trade of two first round picks.

 

There are only so many teams that need QBs out there. The ones that do are picking top 10, and it's likely with Kirk they are picking top 10 next year as well. Two top 10 picks are way more then anyone including the 49ers are going to pay for him imo

 

i would be happy with a top 10 second this year and a first next year for him. I think that could happen. Before trading Kirk I would prefer to see a multi year extension given to the coach though. He's shown enough to me to know that the front office already knows if they want him back and is the long term answer at coach. Idk if Jay would sign another five year deal but he deserves it and with the pressure to win now regardless of if Kirk is the answer he won't sign off on a trade I'm thinking without that in hand. Otherwise you might as well blow it all up now because he won't be back for year five if he isn't winning

 

Now I personally think the answer here is simple, transition tag. Let the NFL show us what Kirks actually worth. The 49er business I think is mostly bs, the coaches were given six year deals to fix that team. They arent in a win at all cost now mode anymore. If the best Kirk can get is a 20 million a year deal elsewhere then match it and move on. Save money on that deal if it must be made

[KokoMike]

Cousins should make more money from some other team.  That is the way it works in America.  You want to make more money?  Go to work for a competitor.  If Cousins wants to work for a competitor, it is time to let him hit the road.  If he signs the tag, he will just be taking advantage of our beloved Redskins, and playing some fans for the dupes they will be.  The tag is a great idea in that it gives the right to match, get compensation, or make a solid trade.  

[Taylor703]

1 minute ago, KokoMike said:

Cousins should make more money from some other team.  That is the way it works in America.  You want to make more money?  Go to work for a competitor.  If Cousins wants to work for a competitor, it is time to let him hit the road.  If he signs the tag, he will just be taking advantage of our beloved Redskins, and playing some fans for the dupes they will be.  The tag is a great idea in that it gives the right to match, get compensation, or make a solid trade.  

And this is where I disagree. If Kirk is going to leave this team better get compensation. Letting him walk for nothing would be a monumental failure on this organizations part. You either come to terms on an agreement or you tag him and trade him. There really should be no other moves made. Put up or shut up. 

[bobandweave]

10 minutes ago, Taylor703 said:

 

Yeah, this is wrong. RG never saw a dime of that $16M. They picked up his option but cut him long before it went into affect. 

 

And Kirk shouldn't complain. He got $19M for a half season of solid football. If he's still upset over RG3 than he has serious mental problems. The team cut Robert and gave Kirk a ton of weapons and an OL. At this point him feeling slighted by this organization is a complete joke. 

 

Thank you for this was going to say that myself, Griffin never got that money mentioned in the quote. He would have if he was still on the team or injured so we didn't play him and cut him before it was due.

 

Also why all of a sudden is it okay for us to be dealing with a player like this? If he's disgruntled kick him to the curb. Obviously he only wants to pinch every dime off us he possibly can and isn't showing team spirit like other players in the league have done for other teams and making a team froendly deal. If he believed in us he would sign a deal like that so we could keep our receivers and just make up the money diff off endourcements. He's not doing that, he's not even complaining about last years tag. He's just relishing in the fact he knows that to him he's got us by the balls money wise and going to squeeze that lemon until there is nothing left. Not the type of guys you build around

[KokoMike]

2 minutes ago, Taylor703 said:

And this is where I disagree. If Kirk is going to leave this team better get compensation. Letting him walk for nothing would be a monumental failure on this organizations part. You either come to terms on an agreement or you tag him and trade him. There really should be no other moves made. Put up or shut up. 

I agree.

[bobandweave]

10 minutes ago, Taylor703 said:

And this is where I disagree. If Kirk is going to leave this team better get compensation. Letting him walk for nothing would be a monumental failure on this organizations part. You either come to terms on an agreement or you tag him and trade him. There really should be no other moves made. Put up or shut up. 

 

Remember Josh Norman last year when he was threatened with the tag and he said hell no I will not sign it. Or the year before when Von Miller said the same thing or even the year before that when Demaryius Thomas and Dez Bryant said the same? Well they got paid big for rejecting the tags and in Norman's case he was cut. 

 

Reason I bring them up is to point out how different Cousins has been about the tag and this whole situation. He's nothing like that, last year the first chance he got to sign the tag he did. To me that's telling because those other guys were the best in the league at what they did. So the best players hate the tag and Cousins loves it? Idk what this means, he may be flipping nuts or he may know he's not that good and the money is off the chains for what the rest of the league would pay him.

 

Please Scot transition tag him. Make his agent go out there and make another team a year after the Osweiler disaster pay him. If the other guys think he's great and worth a mint that's cool we get picks if we don't match. We deserve compensation if we lose him.

 

I don't think the market is anywhere near as high for him that others here do. I think Kirk would get a lesson in fair market value if we did this and be shocked by how little others value him. And we get picks this way

 

Kirk is entering free agency with the draft coming up where other teams will find QBs there and in a market place of Tony Romo and Jimmy G and McCarron and Cutler and even a Tygod. This ain't the only rodeo ride in this NFL circus this year or our only option

[ncr2h]

1 hour ago, XtremeFan55 said:

Another way of looking at things.  Kirk saw the Redskins give RG3 $16 million for one year where he didn't even suit up for a single game.  Wasn't even the backup.  Everyone in Redskins Park... besides Snyder... probably knew RG3 didn't know how to play quarterback at the pro level....yet he got paid.   If Snyder was willing to waste $16 million on a player who had zero impact....why not open the wallet and pay $24 million a year long term for a proven quarterback who played light years better than RG3 and was the single brightest player on the team for the last two years.  Losing Kirk won't just mean losing a franchise quarterback...it will damage the reputation of the team so that players will only come to get paid.  Redskins have no choice....but the longer this drags on the more this becomes a matter of 'winning' the contract battle and both sides dig in.  Again...I really believe Kirk wants to play somewhere else.

People will nitpick the fact that we didn't end up paying RG3 the $16M while overlooking the fact that our FO thought the $16M option was actually worth picking up.  Meaning, they envisioned some far-fetched scenario in which a guy coming off one of the all-time worst seasons by a day 1 Redskins starter could be worth so much more than $16M the following year, that it was worth locking in an option just in case.  Meanwhile, Kirk Cousins?  Let's offer him $16M per year after he breaks several all-time Redskins passing records.

 

The fact that they ultimately didn't pay Griffin is true, but misleading.  The fact that they could envision a scenario in which Griffin might be a value at $16M was quite troublesome.

[purbeast]

4 minutes ago, bobandweave said:

Reason I bring them up is to point out how different Cousins has been about the tag and this whole situation. He's nothing like that, last year the first chance he got to sign the tag he did. To me that's telling because those other guys were the best in the league at what they did. So the best players hate the tag and Cousins loves it? Idk what this means, he may be flipping nuts or he may know he's not that good and the money is off the chains for what the rest of the league would pay him.

I can give you 24 million reasons what it means lol.

[ncr2h]

Just now, bobandweave said:

 

Remember Josh Norman last year when he was threatened with the tag and he said he'll no I don't not sign it. Or the year before when Von Miller said the same or the year before that when Demaryius Thomas and Dez Bryant said the same? Well they got paid big for rejecting the tags and in Norman's case he was cut. 

 

Reason I bring them up is to point out how different Cousins has been about the tag and this whole situation. He's nothing like that, last year the first chance he got to sign the tag he did. To me that's telling because those other guys were the best in the league at what they did. So the best players hate the tag and Cousins loves it? Idk what this means, he may be flipping nuts or he may know he's not that good and the money is off the chains for what the rest of the league would pay him.

This sounds smart until you think about it.  The players you mentioned play positions where season-ending injuries are common.  As a CB/LB/WR, if you get a season-ending injury on a one-year contract you will have cost yourself huge chunks of pay.  As a QB, the risk of a season-ending injury is very low, the gap between Cousins' skill level and any viable replacement option's skill level is so enormous, and the salary inflation is so high, that Cousins' signing of the tag was very unlikely to hurt him financially and in most scenarios would have helped him.  For example, if he gets tagged again this offseason, he will enter next offseason with a fresh set of QB contract comps - Derek Carr, Matt Ryan, Matt Stafford - all of whom Kirk is very competitive with and all of whom will likely surpass any deals signed this offseason.

[Dirt]

13 minutes ago, bobandweave said:

 

 

Also why all of a sudden is it okay for us to be dealing with a player like this? If he's disgruntled kick him to the curb. Obviously he only wants to pinch every dime off us he possibly can and isn't showing team spirit like other players in the league 

What makes you think he's disgruntled?   He said he'd love to be back.  And yeah I guess you could call negotiating a fair market deal "pinching every dime he possibly can", but if you put it that way, it makes it sound like you just don't like the guy.

 

Plus the freaking combine hasn't even started.  Some of yall need to slow down.  ****, considering the qb misery we've been through, I wouldn't care if he was disgruntled if he played like he has been lol.

[bobandweave]

3 minutes ago, ncr2h said:

People will nitpick the fact that we didn't end up paying RG3 the $16M while overlooking the fact that our FO thought the $16M option was actually worth picking up.  Meaning, they envisioned some far-fetched scenario in which a guy coming off one of the all-time worst seasons by a day 1 Redskins starter could be worth so much more than $16M the following year, that it was worth locking in an option just in case.  Meanwhile, Kirk Cousins?  Let's offer him $16M per year after he breaks several all-time Redskins passing records.

 

The fact that they ultimately didn't pay Griffin is true, but misleading.  The fact that they could envision a scenario in which Griffin might be a value at $16M was quite troublesome.

 

About Griffin what did we lose doing that? We all wanted him to be the same guy who blew us all away in 2012 and gave him a chance to show he could catch up to NFL speed. By the time the third preseason game ended we all knew he wasn't that guy and cut him. Had the opposite happened and it clicked paying Griffin 16 million would have looked cheap but he never progressed to overcoming his dependence on his legs in this league and is about to wash out. We invested so much in him we owed it to ourselves to see if he could get it

 

As for records you know that all records don't mean the same right? Timmy Smiths still standing Super Bowl record for us means more then messily passing yardage records. Even knowing that Smith played one game and was never heard from again because that record gave us our second NFL championship. What did we get from Kirks record? Not all records are created equal

[bobandweave]

4 minutes ago, Dirt said:

What makes you think he's disgruntled?   He said he'd love to be back.  And yeah I guess you could call negotiating a fair market deal "pinching every dime he possibly can", but if you put it that way, it makes it sound like you just don't like the guy.

 

For the record it's not that I dislike Kirk it's that this is the first time I can remember our player being what's called "gangsta" towards the club. 

 

Ive been a fan of this team for 40 years and this isn't our first contract dispute, remember the year Riggins sat out to drink and fish because he didn't like the deal he was given? I do

 

I am a team first guy and always will be. Do I think giving Kirk a huge money deal is in the teams best interest? No I do not.  Do I think that Kirks peaked and won't get better then what we've seen? I do and here's why

 

We all saw his numbers decrease this year because Reed missed games. Reeds had six now documented concussions. We saw Kirk the past two years with field stretching receivers not produce enough when it mattered to do anything significant. Now we are likely losing both of those receivers. Why wouldn't I believe if he couldn't do it with a healthy Reed and Garçon and Desean that he can do it without them? I don't think he can could I be wrong? Absolutely but time is not on our side here for reasons I've already said. Other teams that need QBs will be filling those roles soon enough limiting our market. 

 

If i didn't like him my wish that he would come to his senses and sign a friendly deal making it possible to sign those receivers back and leaving some money on the table to sign some defensive players wouldn't be that. I am resigned to know that's not an option for him and I'm armed with the knowledge that losing those players will hurt us more then it will help us keeping Kirk and his huge contract  will help us for a single year.

 

i don't dislike Kirk but I really dislike the way he's handled this

[ncr2h]

16 minutes ago, bobandweave said:

 

About Griffin what did we lose doing that? We all wanted him to be the same guy who blew us all away in 2012 and gave him a chance to show he could catch up to NFL speed. By the time the third preseason game ended we all knew he wasn't that guy and cut him. Had the opposite happened and it clicked paying Griffin 16 million would have looked cheap but he never progressed to overcoming his dependence on his legs in this league and is about to wash out. We invested so much in him we owed it to ourselves to see if he could get it

 

As for records you know that all records don't mean the same right? Timmy Smiths still standing Super Bowl record for us means more then messily passing yardage records. Even knowing that Smith played one game and was never heard from again because that record gave us our second NFL championship. What did we get from Kirks record? Not all records are created equal

Committing to an injury-guaranteed option of $16M was foolish, considering RG3 was arguably the most often-injured QB in the league at that point (2 ACLs, 2 concussions, and a dislocated ankle in his past 5 seasons).  Even if RG3 had a clean bill of health to that point in his career, I have a hard time envisioning a 2015 campaign that would erase the stink of 2013 and 2014.  2012 wasn't particularly impressive from a passing standpoint (very few pass attempts; struggled to win games in which we passed frequently).

[jphilly]

If kirk is playing hardball and FO has doubts .

 

At this point I think Foles would be a good option , Keep PG and DJ with money saved .  He can play at a high level and be able to get at a sub 18 million .  Id think more like 12-15 .  I still think Kirk is best option for the Redskins as long as it does not hurt being able to build a strong supporting cast which Kirk needs as he is not yet a QB to be able to carry a team like Rodgers / Brady 

[Jericho]

1 hour ago, ncr2h said:

 People will nitpick the fact that we didn't end up paying RG3 the $16M while overlooking the fact that our FO thought the $16M option was actually worth picking up.  Meaning, they envisioned some far-fetched scenario in which a guy coming off one of the all-time worst seasons by a day 1 Redskins starter could be worth so much more than $16M the following year, that it was worth locking in an option just in case.  Meanwhile, Kirk Cousins?  Let's offer him $16M per year after he breaks several all-time Redskins passing records.

 

The fact that they ultimately didn't pay Griffin is true, but misleading.  The fact that they could envision a scenario in which Griffin might be a value at $16M was quite troublesome.

 

 

Why? A bona fide NFL starting QB is worth $16 million (the figure was pre-set based on draft position). Griffin had already made one Pro Bowl already. It was essentially a way to hedge your bets. If he's good, you keep him at a reasonable price. If he sucks, you cut him at no penalty. You can sign Cousins to a completely non-guaranteed contract and hedge your bets too (Cousins would never agree, but its the best equivalent scenario)

[Commander -JB-]

6 hours ago, Bang said:

He's made big plays before in big games. The Packers game was full of them. Maybe not 'do or die' situations, but he hasn't been in many of those either.

 

Single moments do not make a season or a clear picture of a player, nor do single games, good or bad. That just isn't realistic.

The guy was still a second year starter, which is not an excuse, but a fact of reality. 

 

I think given the clear evidence that he has taken negatives and worked them either out of his game or down to manageable levels, there's no reason to believe  he won't be able to step back up after a bad performance in a big spot. It's part of the growth process.

Skepticism is expected, but i don't see anything to say this is his ceiling, or he is always going to be a choker. 

 

Now, same things happen next year, and maybe I'll nod along with you, but as of now, i can't see any definitive trends except that he continues to get better.

 

~Bang

 

 

 

I hope you are right.  That's for sure.

[CapsSkins]

Packers game was against a **** secondary.

 

I don't frankly care if Kirk is a "good guy" or an asshole. It's about risk. If Kirk is playing hardball after signing the tag and you don't think you can get a deal done by the draft, I say you ship him to SF and pick up that #2 overall.

[Veryoldschool]

55 minutes ago, ncr2h said:

Committing to an injury-guaranteed option of $16M was foolish, considering RG3 was arguably the most often-injured QB in the league at that point (2 ACLs, 2 concussions, and a dislocated ankle in his past 5 seasons).  Even if RG3 had a clean bill of health to that point in his career, I have a hard time envisioning a 2015 campaign that would erase the stink of 2013 and 2014.  2012 wasn't particularly impressive from a passing standpoint (very few pass attempts; struggled to win games in which we passed frequently).

 

It was brilliant.  I remember thinking when the option was excercised it was a brilliant move.  I was glad at the time because I thought it was the kiss of death to Griffin.

 

I never believed in him, I've seen a lot of running QBs get crushed in the NFL, and I thought Griffin was a hinderance to Cousins getting the opportunity to blossom and thought it was Scot's master stroke to ensure that Snyder let him go forward with Cousins.  With 16M at risk I didn't think Gruden would have to throw the whole season away on Griffin if Robert was getting pummeled again.  As unfortunate as the Detroit pre season game was for Griffin i thought it probably helped the Skins owner to finally face up to the painful truth, that and a 4 hour talk with Scot.

[carex]

Kyle couldn't get his  own father to commit to Kirk over and injured RG3.  All Mike would have had to do was say "we just don't think Robert is ready until he can get that brace off, not at game speeds" and then Kirk could have maybe held onto the job.  So I'm not sure I buy this whole Kyle believed in him so much thing, and I'm not sure I believe Kyle would have the authority to pull this trade off

 

Meanwhile I'm not seeing any basis for all this talk except the idea the Redskins have to be chaotic