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

[TD_washingtonredskins]

15 hours ago, rumplestilskin said:

I honestly would rather roll with Colt rather than Cutler or Kapernick. Its sad that we even have to discuss life after Kirk because it never should have come to this.  Dan will pay him eventually. He owes it to us all. 

 

If we find ourselves without Cousins, I think you have to roll with Sudfeld. I don't know anything about him and certainly don't expect him to be great, but at least you haven't already seen what he can do in an extended audition. We know what we have in Colt. At least with Sudfeld there would be the slight chance that he's a diamond in the rough. 

[bobandweave]

51 minutes ago, purbeast said:

I did not realize KC was playing every position on offense, defense, and special teams in those losses.  

 

Did he play every position in the wins he had last year too?

 

If all your money goes to one guy like this don't ya think that guy should be able to mask the failures of the team around him and lift them up? You would think he could do that if he's worth the highest paid contract of every teams QB in the league since money should equal performance and we've seen year after year the same elite guys - Brady example - of lifting the team to success despite having every aspect of his team in great shape like your alluding to. If a QB can't do this, then you shouldn't be making that guy the highest paid player in the league. Not all contracts make sense and giving him the highest contract in the NFL does not make sense

[bobandweave]

1 minute ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

 

If we find ourselves without Cousins, I think you have to roll with Sudfeld. I don't know anything about him and certainly don't expect him to be great, but at least you haven't already seen what he can do in an extended audition. We know what we have in Colt. At least with Sudfeld there would be the slight chance that he's a diamond in the rough. 

 

you can't hand the team over to someone who's never done anything in the league before. What you do is Draft someone, bring in another vet like Krapyourpants sorry don't like the guy but a camp arm makes sense for him and then the team holds an open competition at the position. That's how the Seahawks found Russell Wilson. They brought in a highly touted FA QB in 2012 they paid over 10 million for and drafted Wilson in the 3rd same offseason. Then they held an open competition and the drafted QB beat out two other vets and he never looked back. I wouldn't just give the job to Nate, we don't have enough on him to do that yet but he's worthy of being in a competition.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

41 minutes ago, WelshSkinsFan said:

 

The reason they are stalling is the deadline is in July.  There is no reason to come up with their best offer right now as the only people who really care at this point are diehard fans like us.  Things can happen to alter leverage between now and the deadline and both sides get that and are content to wait, it just sucks for the fans who want to know where we stand.

 

See - I don't agree. I don't see what could happen that would change the situation. July will bring the exact same set of circumstances as we have now. Either the Redskins will have to meet KC's asking price or they won't sign him long-term. 

[Morneblade]

18 minutes ago, bobandweave said:

 No. What will change between our feeling now and July? Nothing. It's an empass and the longer we wait to move him the more likely teams like Houston move on

 

 

I'll tell you what changes. The deadline. Both parties have 2 months. Bruce is going to be Bruce and have a lowball offer on the table, on hte oft change at some point Cousins gets tired of waiting and signs. He won't but Bruce has nothing to loose in doing so. Then, with about a week to go, and Bruce realizing that Kirk will not take a low ball offer, things will heat up in earnest. Deal will get one at the 11th hour. Just like it did for Von Miller.

 

4 minutes ago, bobandweave said:

 

First who the hell cares who is at fault here? Blaming the team does not fix this issue, blaming Kirk does not fix this issue either. Kirk holds the decision on what he will sign long term for and the team has a decision on what they can live with paying him. Two separate decisions are at play now and both sides are deciding not to work together.

 

Both sides are playing the waiting game right now, seeing who blinks first.

 

4 minutes ago, bobandweave said:

 

Is Kirk right his number is 25 million and won't sign for less? Based on what? The fact that the team tagged him? Teams tag players all the time for different reasons like they don't have a better answer that season, just because a guy gets tagged doesn't mean he's got to get that much for the next 5 years too. Tags are tools NFL teams use to buy time to negotiate and not all players who get tags get that as a base number for multiple years. Sometimes that happens (Dez Bryant) and sometimes that does not happen. It's not always the same for every player

 

He's a good QB, and he's being paid 25 million this year. That is the bar. Now, that does not mean he's going to get 25 million guaranteed every year, but right now BA is going in with a very low guarantee. That's going to have to come up, so it's more like 17-18 million per year.

 

4 minutes ago, bobandweave said:

Is the team wrong for wanting to pay someone 20 million a season instead of 25 million a season? Maybe maybe not. 

 

No, it's not. Is it wrong for Cousins to want a better deal? Is it possible they can get it done?

 

4 minutes ago, bobandweave said:

 

No QB in the league makes an average of 25 million a season in this league. Not one guy does that. If you knew you were breaking the bank at the highest paid position possible do you want to be known as the team that broke that financial glass ceiling and became the first to pay someone that much? If they had a Superbowl to show for it sure you can justify doing that. Kirk's been in the league for 5 years now, has led this team to one single playoff berth and it was 1 and done. They should have reservations about doing that with the teams reputation on contracts and the results on the field. 

 

The part you don't get is that it doesn't matter. Luck did it last year. Cousins this year. Whoever is a FA next year. See how it works? it's the way of the NFL now, you're just going ot have to get used to it.

 

4 minutes ago, bobandweave said:

Either way it does not matter. If the team is not budging then they should cut bait and find someone else. As for drafting someone else, why **** that? Because Kirk was someone they drafted!!!! How is someone so obtuse that they can't admit that we had success drafting a QB and then take a dump on the idea of drafting someone else? Doesn't make any sense to me 

 

 

Who says the team is not budging?

Also, when you look at the track record of drafting a franchise QB, as in it has been 80 years since the last one, you just think it's going to be all so easy. Kirk was a real lucky break. Remember who we bet the farm on RGIII, in the same ****ing draft, and we all know how that worked out? So, the reason people don't think it's going to get so easily is because it's likely, especially without a real draft guy, it's going to take a long time. You're the one that is not being realistic.

[bobandweave]

45 minutes ago, WelshSkinsFan said:

 

The reason they are stalling is the deadline is in July.  There is no reason to come up with their best offer right now as the only people who really care at this point are diehard fans like us.  Things can happen to alter leverage between now and the deadline and both sides get that and are content to wait, it just sucks for the fans who want to know where we stand.

 

Wrong approach considering that by then the draft and Free Agency have occurred so the only way if they can't sign him long term is to hope for another tragedy like Teddy Bridgewater this offseason which creates a market. By the time July rolls around the league won't be in the market for QBs like they are now. The time to get this done isn't July, that's for other positions like WR. With QBs you need your plans in place before OTAs even if the plan is a competition. Plus injuries like Teddy B do happen, if they happened to Kirk it's curtains for us with him. So your best move is not to wait until July but two weeks before the NFL draft so you have time to move on if it comes to that

[Tay]

3 minutes ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

 

See - I don't agree. I don't see what could happen that would change the situation. July will bring the exact same set of circumstances as we have now. Either the Redskins will have to meet KC's asking price or they won't sign him long-term. 

 

They may submit another offer prior to the draft, but it's very likely that they are waiting for July. I know it doesn't seem to make much sense, but it's typical in NFL negotiations.

[purbeast]

38 minutes ago, bobandweave said:

Then why prolong this? Rip the band aide off and surrender. If you can't get something done then move on and start over. Doing nothing does not solve this problem. There are reasons to doubt him being able to repeat his last two years here - New play caller, new offensive weapons - that this is an unwinnable situation for us. If he produces less, doesn't have a winning record, or struggles will we want to offer him the price he wants next off season? No. What will change between our feeling now and July? Nothing. It's an empass and the longer we wait to move him the more likely teams like Houston move on

 

Because the FO wants to feel they've "won" the negotiation and Bruce wants to keep his "cheap" ways of doing things intact.  They also seem to be pretty incompetent as past history has shown us.  They are just a poorly ran organization.

 

Of course there is a chance he can't repeat the past 2 years.  And if he succeeds this year, there will be a chance he won't repeat that the following year, and the following year, etc.  But there is also a chance he repeats himself, which is more likely, since he did it the past year. 

 

If you look at every hypothetical and look at every possible scenario, you are always going to find a way to doubt it.  The FO needs to just pony up and realize the QB price has risen and pay him market value.  I don't know about you guys but I'm not ready to be back in the QB carousel we've been in the past 2 decades with gambling picks away and gambling on QB's in the draft.  How has that worked out for us since SNyder took over?

[bobandweave]

1 minute ago, Tay said:

 

They may submit another offer prior to the draft, but it's very likely that they are waiting for July. I know it doesn't seem to make much sense, but it's typical in NFL negotiations.

 

For QBs? I agree it happens with other positions. I disagree that this happens with QBs and can't think of any that lasted until July.

 

That's like a team saying what they do between April and July doesn't matter. That's the OTAs, that's the mini camps, that's deep into training camp. Teams need to know what QB's they have so taking that long to decide what to do with one usually does not happen. The reason this happens with other positions is if your stud WR isn't there that's okay because teams sport another 6 of that position anyway. There is only one starting QB on a team.

 

And who wants that story distraction anyway? 

[purbeast]

22 minutes ago, bobandweave said:

 

If all your money goes to one guy like this don't ya think that guy should be able to mask the failures of the team around him and lift them up? You would think he could do that if he's worth the highest paid contract of every teams QB in the league since money should equal performance and we've seen year after year the same elite guys - Brady example - of lifting the team to success despite having every aspect of his team in great shape like your alluding to. If a QB can't do this, then you shouldn't be making that guy the highest paid player in the league. Not all contracts make sense and giving him the highest contract in the NFL does not make sense

But it's not "all your money" so the premise of your argument falls flat before your first sentence is even finished.  What the Redskins are already 100% guaranteed to pay him is $24 million which is about 14.5% of the estimated cap.  No matter if a LTD or not gets done, they are spending that on him for 1 year. 

 

And comparing Cousins to Brady?  Come on now don't even try to compare the Redskins to the Patriots.  That team is the best managed team from the ground up, there is no comparison.  It's dumb to compare the two teams, including QB's.  Nobody is arguing Cousins is better than Brady regardless of the salaries.

 

I guarantee you that I make more money now than senior software engineers did 10 years ago.  You know why?  Because they are in higher demand now and that is just how the market works with competition, with inflation, and other factors.  It's the same thing for QB's in the NFL.  It is very basic supply and demand.  There are so little starting caliber QB's out there so the value of them has gone up compared to what it was in the past, even a few years ago when Flacco and Luck got their deals.  It is economics 101.

 

Overpaying is what we did for Haynesworth.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

13 minutes ago, bobandweave said:

 

you can't hand the team over to someone who's never done anything in the league before. What you do is Draft someone, bring in another vet like Krapyourpants sorry don't like the guy but a camp arm makes sense for him and then the team holds an open competition at the position. That's how the Seahawks found Russell Wilson. They brought in a highly touted FA QB in 2012 they paid over 10 million for and drafted Wilson in the 3rd same offseason. Then they held an open competition and the drafted QB beat out two other vets and he never looked back. I wouldn't just give the job to Nate, we don't have enough on him to do that yet but he's worthy of being in a competition.

 

I'd prefer to hand it to him than Colt. Colt is a known quantity and he's proven he can be a decent backup but not a long-term solution. Even if Sudfeld is 95% likely to be worse, there's at least the chance he could be better. 

 

If there are other QBs to add, then that's different. I was only really comparing the scenarios of the two other guys on our roster. 

[Tsailand]

31 minutes ago, bobandweave said:

Is Kirk right his number is 25 million and won't sign for less? Based on what?

 

Based on Luck's deal of a year ago. Based on the extensions a few other top-10 QBs are about to sign. Based on over 9000 passing yards in two seasons.

 

Based on the deal he would get from someone if he were a free agent right now.

 

 

[bobandweave]

1 minute ago, purbeast said:

Because the FO wants to feel they've "won" the negotiation and Bruce wants to keep his "cheap" ways of doing things intact.  They also seem to be pretty incompetent as past history has shown us.  They are just a poorly ran organization. - Well ya completely agree with you here. If they knew what they hell they were doing many things would have been done differently this off season outside of Kirk Cousins. My point was that even if this came down to a flip of the coin and the reason they can't get a deal done was because that coin landed on heads it does not change the fact that they should make decisions now not wait

 

Of course there is a chance he can't repeat the past 2 years.  And if he succeeds this year, there will be a chance he won't repeat that the following year, and the following year, etc.  But there is also a chance he repeats himself, which is more likely, since he did it the past year. - You really think that we haven't seen the ceiling on Kirk Cousins yet? I mean last year he had DeSean Jackson (9th highest paid WR in the league now) and Pierre Garcon (17th highest paid receiver in the league now) and we replaced them with Terrell Pryor and Brian Quick. You really think that this year Kirk can surpass or even equal what he did with those two guys this year? The fact he repeated in 16 what he did in 15 means nothing. Same teams in 15 and 16. Brand new team in 17. I don't. I see regression occurring here.

 

If you look at every hypothetical and look at every possible scenario, you are always going to find a way to doubt it.  The FO needs to just pony up and realize the QB price has risen and pay him market value.  I don't know about you guys but I'm not ready to be back in the QB carousel we've been in the past 2 decades with gambling picks away and gambling on QB's in the draft.  How has that worked out for us since SNyder took over? - Market value is not the highest paid dude in the entire league. There is a huge difference in "market value" and what Kirk is wanting. 20 a year is market value. If that's his base it ranks 12th highest paid in the league today. Market value is not the top of the mark. You need to stop thinking that 25 a year is market value, it is a glass ceiling that no man ever has crossed in the NFL

 

[purbeast]

KC is already getting paid $24 a year from the Redskins.  His market value has been set by the fact that the Redskins signed him to the franchise tag, and valued him at $24 million dollars for 1 year. 

 

Basic math tells us that means over 5 years he would be valued at $120 million.

 

This is elementary school math here.  There is nothing else that can be simplified to spell this out.

 

I am getting that number from a hard number and offer that has already been put out there and has been accepted.  It's a fact.  

 

Where is your $20 million number coming from?

 

And just FYI, salaries in general are always on the rise.  They are never just stagnant unless you are talking like minimum wage and non-career positions.

[bobandweave]

5 minutes ago, purbeast said:

But it's not "all your money" so the premise of your argument falls flat before your first sentence is even finished - Sigh do this again to me and I will block you, Never liked people who had an issue with someone calling the team "us" or "we". If your that kinda guy then just tell me now and we are done. Get over these types of mistakes

 

What the Redskins are already 100% guaranteed to pay him is $24 million which is about 14.5% of the estimated cap.  No matter if a LTD or not gets done, they are spending that on him for 1 year. - Not true, they can trade him wiping the book of that money to be used elsewhere. That money does not 100% have to be paid. We can move him or we could release him outright like how we ended up with Norman. 

 

And comparing Cousins to Brady?  Come on now don't even try to compare the Redskins to the Patriots.  That team is the best managed team from the ground up, there is no comparison.  It's dumb to compare the two teams, including QB's.  Nobody is arguing Cousins is better than Brady regardless of the salaries. - So in other words hoping as a fan that the team I root for acts responsible and does what's best and follows the good examples other teams do is a bad thing for me to want? 

 

Overpaying is what we did for Haynesworth. - If we pay Kirk Cousins 25 million a season every writer and football fan outside of some homers will say we overpaid because we did that. Pretending that won't happen, pretending that we aren't seriously overpaying Kirk Cousins 25 million a season is denial. It's not just simply a marketplace. If that was the marketplace other QBs would be getting that money to. They aren't. 

 

[purbeast]

I mean it's not "all your money" because it is 14.5% of the Cap not because you were using "us" or "we" in context.  

 

If you think you are going to hurt my feelings by blocking me, maybe you should just do it right now then.  You seem to have thin skin.

 

You seem to not understand what overpaying and market values mean.  I'll just stop replying to you.

[bobandweave]

11 minutes ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

 

I'd prefer to hand it to him than Colt. Colt is a known quantity and he's proven he can be a decent backup but not a long-term solution. Even if Sudfeld is 95% likely to be worse, there's at least the chance he could be better. 

 

If there are other QBs to add, then that's different. I was only really comparing the scenarios of the two other guys on our roster. 

 

Good point, now I wonder something else. Why are QBs like Colt McCoy who possess such a low ceiling considered valuable backups? Is it only because no one wants them to start? I never understood that. He's maybe worth 4 wins in a 16 game season, but everyone talks about him like he's some valuable  asset. If a QB's best result is terrible how are they valuable? Is it only because they can understand a game plan and are a teacher for other QBs who may struggle with it? Never understood why a team would want to pay a guy a lot of money knowing as a starter he sucks

[Morneblade]

7 minutes ago, purbeast said:

I mean it's not "all your money" because it is 14.5% of the Cap not because you were using "us" or "we" in context.  

 

If you think you are going to hurt my feelings by blocking me, maybe you should just do it right now then.  You seem to have thin skin.

 

You seem to not understand what overpaying and market values mean.  I'll just stop replying to you.

 

Trust me, he's clueless. /ignore him.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

1 minute ago, bobandweave said:

 

Good point, now I wonder something else. Why are QBs like Colt McCoy who possess such a low ceiling considered valuable backups? Is it only because no one wants them to start? I never understood that. He's maybe worth 4 wins in a 16 game season, but everyone talks about him like he's some valuable  asset. If a QB's best result is terrible how are they valuable? Is it only because they can understand a game plan and are a teacher for other QBs who may struggle with it? Never understood why a team would want to pay a guy a lot of money knowing as a starter he sucks

 

See - I think it's more that he's proven a couple things in his career...

 

1) He's very capable in short stints

2) He likely is exposed in longer stints

 

To me, that's a perfect backup QB. 

[bobandweave]

21 minutes ago, Tsailand said:

 

Based on Luck's deal of a year ago. Based on the extensions a few other top-10 QBs are about to sign. Based on over 9000 passing yards in two seasons.

 

Based on the deal he would get from someone if he were a free agent right now.

 

Your talking to someone that thought we should have tagged him this year with the option for him to explore the market. I never bought into the idea that there were gobs and gobs of these imaginary teams dying to sign Kirk Cousins to a 25 million dollar a year long term deal out there like some of you always pretend to know, I would have preferred to have seen this for real. I know you think these clubs exist, I seriously doubt they do. Only way to find out would be to put this to the test. Since we choose not to do this we basically told the world if he's gone next year for nothing then so be it, we hold him hostage this season. I never agreed to that approach. Also never agreed that Kirk is on the same level as Andrew Luck. He is not, he doesn't have the pedigree that Luck has or his ability. But this is where I will agree to disagree, if there are gobs of teams out there dying for him then we should have explored that and we didn't. Front office mistake

3 minutes ago, Morneblade said:

 

Trust me, he's clueless. /ignore him.

 

I hope the mods see this personal attack on me and give you a warning. Don't speak about me again like this. It's breaking the rules and who the hell are you anyway to be allowed to do that? 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

7 minutes ago, bobandweave said:

 

Good point, now I wonder something else. Why are QBs like Colt McCoy who possess such a low ceiling considered valuable backups? Is it only because no one wants them to start? I never understood that. He's maybe worth 4 wins in a 16 game season, but everyone talks about him like he's some valuable  asset. If a QB's best result is terrible how are they valuable? Is it only because they can understand a game plan and are a teacher for other QBs who may struggle with it? Never understood why a team would want to pay a guy a lot of money knowing as a starter he sucks

 

Well, for starters it's damn near impossible to determine how many "wins" a player is worth, especially since wins are a team "stat"...but in terms of the discussion of backup QBs, usually the best you can hope for in a backup QB is one who can keep the ball rolling for short periods of time (half a game, 1 or 2 games here and there). They understand the scheme and can and have lead the team to victories when coming off the bench or when pressed to start. If you have a backup QB who plays like a starter, he won't be your backup QB for long. So unless the plan is to have a continuous rotation of starter-quality backups coming and going from the team every few years--which is pretty much impossible to do--if you get a guy like McCoy, a backup who knows his role and doesn't get the jitters whenever he's put into the game (and actually has really good field presence), AND can lead you to wins, especially on the road...that's considered a valuable commodity.

[bobandweave]

4 minutes ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

 

See - I think it's more that he's proven a couple things in his career...

 

1) He's very capable in short stints

2) He likely is exposed in longer stints

 

To me, that's a perfect backup QB. 

 

I don't disagree this is Colt in a nutshell but say Colt was on the Vikings last year when Teddy B was lost for the season. Would they have gone with him and kept that first round pick instead of targeting Bradford? To me teams place too much monetary value on backup QBs like this. The Eagles sank 6 million into one year of a QB like this - Chase Daniels - and when they moved Bradford never gave him a shot. It's wasted money to me. I always thought the way the Ravens treat backup QBs was the way I would go with it. They have Flacco, undisputed starter and for years the backup was Tyrod Taylor and that's it. They drafted him in the 6th round so he was cheap and never bothered to waste millions on someone else. They knew if the starter went down there were guys they could get to play unemployed they could sign if they had to. Plus when your starting QB is lost for the season 9/10 times so is your season anyway.

 

Never understood paying the price for a what if scenario. Its like in fantasy when some players covet rb handcuffs. Okay if the starter goes down your going to have the backup just in case and I get the concept, just think its capital better used elsewhere. 

[bobandweave]

29 minutes ago, purbeast said:

I mean it's not "all your money" because it is 14.5% of the Cap not because you were using "us" or "we" in context.  

 

If you think you are going to hurt my feelings by blocking me, maybe you should just do it right now then.  You seem to have thin skin.

 

You seem to not understand what overpaying and market values mean.  I'll just stop replying to you.

 

No Sir it's you that simply does not understand overpaying and market value. I understand it very well. Paying a guy the most money of all 32 teams starters is overpaying. That's not market value. If you want to talk market value and the baseline is Kirk is a top 10 QB in this league and not what you think - all top 10 QBs in the league should be paid the most money ever - then market value is 20 million a year. We are already overpaying Kirk now giving him 24 million a year. Market value by definition is "the amount for which something can be sold on a given market" So you mean to say that we are holding an asset that another team would gladly give him 25 million a year, making him the highest paid QB in NFL history let alone in the league today, and you know this how? How do you know what other teams would pay him? Is it only because he was tagged? Because I doubt the notion that any team besides us would be willing to pay that guy the highest amount ever signed by any team and if that's the sticking point I'd much rather just dump him to the Texans or Browns and start over.

 

When you invest wrongly into the QB position like you want us to do it's after effects are crushing to the entire organization and we have a long history of seeing other teams investing wrongly into a QB including ourselves and it make that team have losing records for multiple seasons. The mark of a failing team is screwing up at this very position and when we put him to the test last season he failed to deliver. I've yet to see outside of a game here or there that this guy can ever come through and win a big game. I hope he can. I want him to. But there is a lack of evidence that when he's against tougher opponents he can deliver.

 

His signature win last year came against the Packers and it was Rob Kelley and his three TDs that game that won it when the Packers were at the very worst of the season for them. When he went up against Carolina and the Giants to get in the playoffs he lost those games and looked very bad. When he was up against the terrible Bears he won that game. He can win games against bad teams but can he against the good ones? Anyone saying he can and they know he can do this is delusional. Show it. I dare you. That's why you don't just give this guy 25 million a year. That can ruin an NFL team

[WelshSkinsFan]

1 hour ago, TD_washingtonredskins said:

 

See - I don't agree. I don't see what could happen that would change the situation. July will bring the exact same set of circumstances as we have now. Either the Redskins will have to meet KC's asking price or they won't sign him long-term. 

 

If the 49ers draft a quarterback that changes the leverage Kirk believes he has.  If the Skins like Trubisky they could see if he falls to them and then deal Kirk accordingly and if he doesn't then they could up their offer.  A lot happens during the draft, many scenarios that tip the scales one way or the other and both sides seem content to let that part of the process play out.  I am not saying this makes sense for either side but it is what is happening right now and it is standard operating procedure for a situation like this.  You won't see the Redskins best offer until the week of the deadline and in that they are like the other 31 teams in the league.

[TD_washingtonredskins]

Just now, WelshSkinsFan said:

 

If the 49ers draft a quarterback that changes the leverage Kirk believes he has.  If the Skins like Trubisky they could see if he falls to them and then deal Kirk accordingly and if he doesn't then they could up their offer.  A lot happens during the draft, many scenarios that tip the scales one way or the other and both sides seem content to let that part of the process play out.  I am not saying this makes sense for either side but it is what is happening right now and it is standard operating procedure for a situation like this.  You won't see the Redskins best offer until the week of the deadline and in that they are like the other 31 teams in the league.

 

See I don't think any of that changes his market value. He's worth just about what he's worth and there will be a couple teams who will pay that when he hits the market.