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

[Jumbo]

 

That's like snooky giving kanye lessons on public speaking.

 

(gegpeck to 2012)

[Skinsinparadise]

2 hours ago, Califan007 said:

 

I think everyone he's resigned while here has been "paid up", though...I guess I don't see "frugal" and "lowballing" as interchangeable. Trent, Kerrigan, Moses weren't lowballed as far as I can remember, and they all got good $$...same with Garcon, Hatcher, Jackson and Norman. The only lowball offers I can remember being offered Skins players were the ones the team seemed fine to move on from (players on the wrong side of 30 for the most part). So to me, I guess I see his pattern as doesn't like to spend a lot of money on free agents, unless they are viewed as serious upgrades at a position of great need. And IS willing to pay good $$ for drafted Skins players who have proven themselves as starters. Cousins seems to be the exception that proves the rule, though...

 

The low-balling idea was the term used by Cooley for what he believes is Bruce's negotiation style and cited his own contract experience with him. It's a term or a variation of that term which beat reports have used relating to the Kirk negotiations.  But lets kill that term and stick to frugal.  If you believe that calling Bruce Allen frugal is a mischaracterization of Bruce's style -- cool.  To each their own.     I am looking at it through the lense of signings here and Tampa.  He's mostly conservative.  That's not a shot, that's mostly a complement.  I'd bet money if you asked him about this directly -- he'd proudly agree. 

[Wyndorf25]

2 hours ago, trueskins2012 said:

lol sorry to be so negative, maybe its time to give up on rg3 and embrace cousins, except i feel like were gonna have another wildcard exit again this year but im down for it. httr win or lose dont mean to make all you cousins fans so mad. the offseason additions have been nice, despite releasing djax and pierre at least we signed brian quick and terrelle pryor, i think pryor should have a big impact w crowder and j reed. plus jon allen w kerrigan. looking for a good year, hope our qb is worth as much as aaron rodgers is like you guys say he is. should be a fun year going deep in the playoffs w cousins,,, (sarcasm) lol but hey if it happens thatd be great. 

im not rg3 lmao, but he was one of my fav players not gonna lie. 

 

I don't think too many people are saying that Cousins is worth as much as Aaron Rodgers. Competent QB play is what is setting Cousins' market, that and the FO's liberal use of the franchise tag. The Redskins have backed themselves into a corner with this by not locking Cousins up last year on a $20 mil deal when they had the chance. Now the only way out is for the Redskins to either pay up based on Cousins' current market or do what I think Allen is going to do and just stand pat, use the non-exclusive tag on Cousins in 2018, wait to see if a team like the 49ers offers Cousins a contract close to the $28 mil tag and then make the decision at that point to either match or let him walk.

[BleedBNG]

On 5/6/2017 at 8:35 AM, Taylor 36 said:

What the hell does his draft position five years ago have to do with the price of tea in China?  I guess Brady doesn't deserve to be paid the current QB market value whenever his contract is up because he was a 6th round pick?  I guess Ryan Leaf should have been given top three money if he stuck around for his first reup because he was a first round, second overall pick?  That line of reasoning is absurd. Draft position has no bearing on future contracts, only the rookie deal.

 

On 5/6/2017 at 11:00 AM, ThomasRoane said:

 

So, with that kind of logic, players like Joe Montana (3rd round), Tom Brady (6th round), and Kurt Warner (undrafted) should have never been paid market value but players like Ryan Leaf (2nd player picked), Demarcus Russell (1st player picked), and Vince Young (3rd player picked) all deserved big contracts?

 

For crying out loud, would you KC bandwagoners take it easy for a change. It was a tongue in cheek joke for crap sake. I knew you would bring up Brady and so on and was going to address it but thought, no keep it short they'll get it. I guess not, jeeez.

[Conn]

1 minute ago, BleedBNG said:

 

 

For crying out loud, would you KC bandwagoners take it easy for a change. It was a tongue in cheek joke for crap sake. I knew you would bring up Brady and so on and was going to address it but thought, no keep it short they'll get it. I guess not, jeeez.

 

Where was the joke though? Not hard to see why they responded that way.

[BleedBNG]

1 minute ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

 

Where was the joke though? Not hard to see why they responded that way.

 

See what I mean?

[Veryoldschool]

8 hours ago, purbeast said:

The only problem is that what you are saying makes 100% sense and is the complete logical thing to do and it just seems sooooo easy.

 

And we're talking about the Redskins here.  So that is what scares me.

 

This!  Snyder's success governor triggers when ever they bob above .500 and the wheel turns to self-destruction mode.  When Scot got run off my Skins fan psyche went full duck and cover....  

[Gregpeck99]

3 hours ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

The position might be more popular if anyone who supported it could make a cogent argument in its favor. 

"cogent argument" and "critical thinkers" = code words for "elite snob." 

 

 

[Conn]

9 minutes ago, Gregpeck99 said:

"cogent argument" and "critical thinkers" = code words for "elite snob." 

 

 

 

I'm sorry that you don't value effective communication or rational dialogue on a message board...a place where exactly 100% of our interaction comes through the written word.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

2 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

The low-balling idea was the term used by Cooley for what he believes is Bruce's negotiation style and cited his own contract experience with him. It's a term or a variation of that term which beat reports have used relating to the Kirk negotiations.  But lets kill that term and stick to frugal.  If you believe that calling Bruce Allen frugal is a mischaracterization of Bruce's style -- cool.  To each their own.     I am looking at it through the lense of signings here and Tampa.  He's mostly conservative.  That's not a shot, that's mostly a complement.  I'd bet money if you asked him about this directly -- he'd proudly agree. 

 

For the record, I never said the part in bold lol...I know you said "if", so I get that you weren't necessarily saying I did. I was just referring to Allen having a history of "lowballing" players. Lowballing is a negotiating tactic. Frugal is a budgetary approach. I have zero problem with saying Allen is frugal lol...

[Taylor 36]

55 minutes ago, BleedBNG said:

 

 

For crying out loud, would you KC bandwagoners take it easy for a change. It was a tongue in cheek joke for crap sake. I knew you would bring up Brady and so on and was going to address it but thought, no keep it short they'll get it. I guess not, jeeez.

You can try to back peddle now that you've been called on your ridicules post, but it was not tongue in cheek and this post is clearly you trying to cover for being called out. Brady wasn't the only one mentioned, so it wouldn't have mattered if you addressed him or not (which you wouldn't have, because he alone proves your point to be BS).  Your post was just a whole lot of fail. Just own it.  

 

And, for the record, you need to get over the immature "KC bandwagoners" crap.  Kirk is legit, and this is about the Redskins winning and what is best for the team.  No bandwagoning about that.

[BleedBNG]

12 minutes ago, Taylor 36 said:

You can try to back peddle now that you've been called on your ridicules post, but it was not tongue in cheek and this post is clearly you trying to cover for being called out. Brady wasn't the only one mentioned, so it wouldn't have mattered if you addressed him or not (which you wouldn't have, because he alone proves your point to be BS).  Your post was just a whole lot of fail. Just own it.  

 

And, for the record, you need to get over the immature "KC bandwagoners" crap.  Kirk is legit, and this is about the Redskins winning and what is best for the team.  No bandwagoning about that.

 

I said $120M for 5 years instead of $125M as most of you KC bandwagoners would like. I threw in the 4th round jest for not going with another $5M. Take it easy and get a grip.

[wit33]

Time for the league to make a stand against second and third tier QBs. 

 

Return of the middle class football player. 

[HogsVa7]

6 hours ago, trueskins2012 said:

thank you for that reply man, all in good conversation

 

ok the skins were 10-6 w rg3, best with cousins 9-7 i believe. had a 5 game winning streak heading into playoffs def would have beat seattle barring the injury, but rg3 was already wearing a brace. Idk why we played him and risked our franchise qb maybe cause shanny knew he was leaving and we had cousins i guess?   i really wanted to drop this until you responded. do you not think that perhaps gruden having a personal affiliation towards cousins might have played a small part in his rise including prolific stats?  The reason im pissed is cause rg3 was a heisman talent, and gruden was hired to tutor him. By trashing rg3 Gruden essentially NEEDS cousins to look great or he will be out of a job.

 

 ok so cousins had more rushing tds than rg3 did in2012 does that mean hes a better rusher than rg3 too?  im not trolling but i want to hear what the argument for cousins is. I truly believe the skins oline including scherf scott mccloughan is more solid w kirk cousins, which results in him looking better & better numbers. Trent williams best year of his career 0 pressures, what qb doesnt look good with absolutely no pressure from their blindside? 

 

rob kelly is maybe not a trucker but hes a tough runner. All nfl runners pretty much are lol. kelley is one of the toughest ive seen though. 

 

the reason I htink colt is as good as kirk is that kirk was benched for colt at one point a year or so ago. Do we know for a fact that colt wouldn't perform similarly in this current offfense, no I have never seen kirk leave the game. so theres no way to be absolutely sure kirk is the common denominator. 

The injury to RG3 is what made him decline. If it didn't happen I think he's still our QB doing great things, but that injury hurt him mostly mentally. The two main things between him and Cousins is Kirk gets rid of the ball quick. RG3 held on to the ball way to long in the pocket and taking sacks. Kirk throwing quick off the play action or whatever play makes you take less sacks. Another thing too is Kirk is only been starting for two seasons and he's still learning but what he has done so far is a sign of great things to come. Remember two years ago he was named the starter right before the season started. He didn't get first team reps at all. He learned as the season went on and gotten better every game. He did great last year so it's no fluke. The guy is going to get even better this year and years to come cause of experience. He got benched three years ago cause of the ints, but remember he didn't play much at that time. Look at Kirk now he doesn't throw many ints, stats don't lie. We're lucky to have him and one more thing Kirk is more valuable than RG3 is Kirk doesn't get hurt or miss games knock on wood. 

[ncr2h]

6 hours ago, trueskins2012 said:

 

 

the reason I htink colt is as good as kirk is that kirk was benched for colt at one point a year or so ago. Do we know for a fact that colt wouldn't perform similarly in this current offfense, no I have never seen kirk leave the game. so theres no way to be absolutely sure kirk is the common denominator. 

 

Not only was Kirk significantly better than Colt in 2014 (in terms of yards, TDs, points scored by our team, lack of sacks, lack of fumbles, etc.), Colt also subbed in for Cousins in week 17 of the 2015 season against Dallas after Kirk threw 3 TDs and 177 yards in the first 1.5 quarters  In that game, Kirk had more yards and 3x as many TDs in one quarter than Colt did in the remaining 3 quarters, with the Redskins scoring on all 4 of Cousins' drives but only 2 of their 6 drives with McCoy.  In fact, Kirk racked up 117 DYAR (footballoutsiders' efficiency metric) in his brief stint on the field, but McCoy accumulated just 22 DYAR in the three quarters that he played.  Colt's traditional stat line was actually quite similar to Kirk's (similar YPA, comp. %), but as usual Colt took more sacks and fumbled the ball.  75% of Colt's yardage came off just two plays - a 71 yard bomb to Ross on a blown coverage (no defenders within 15 yards of Ross) and a 24 yard screen pass to Crowder.  The rest of the day, he struggled.  As usual, the offense sputtered with McCoy on the field, generating just 10 points (should actually subtract 2 points for the safety).

 

In 2014, the offense similarly sputtered with McCoy under center.  The 14 points per game we put up with McCoy as our QB would have been worst in the league by a large margin.  Despite Cousins' famed issues with turnovers that year, McCoy was far more turnover prone than Cousins, with 3 INTs and 6 fumbles in just 3.5 games, offset by just 4 passing TDs.  Cousins had 9 INTs and 2 fumbles in 5.5 games.  On any given dropback, McCoy was about half as likely as Cousins to throw an INT.  But McCoy was 3x as likely to take a sack and 4.5x as likely to fumble.  All of this should be taken in the context that McCoy was a veteran QB at this point in his career, with 21 starts on his resume compared to Cousins' 4.

[Gregpeck99]

2 hours ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

 

I'm sorry that you don't value effective communication or rational dialogue on a message board...a place where exactly 100% of our interaction comes through the written word.

Communication is never effective if it is "snarky" ... especially when in written word format.

 

And dialogue is less than rational if is camouflaged by personal attack or criticism merely of style.

 

Let's stick to the subject:  the reasons Kirk has not been signed to an LTD.

 

Trueskin2012 "effectively communicated" several reasons:

 

1. He doesn't take Team deep into playoffs

2. He doesn't win enough to get paid the same $$$ as Rodgers

3. He hasn't already been signed by FO.

 

All of which seem quite rational to me.

 

So what's the beef Conn?  ... other than Trueskin doesn't buy into your narrative.

 

 

 

 

[Morneblade]

45 minutes ago, RedskinsVa7 said:

The injury to RG3 is what made him decline. If it didn't happen I think he's still our QB doing great things, but that injury hurt him mostly mentally. The two main things between him and Cousins is Kirk gets rid of the ball quick. RG3 held on to the ball way to long in the pocket and taking sacks. Kirk throwing quick off the play action or whatever play makes you take less sacks. Another thing too is Kirk is only been starting for two seasons and he's still learning but what he has done so far is a sign of great things to come. Remember two years ago he was named the starter right before the season started. He didn't get first team reps at all. He learned as the season went on and gotten better every game. He did great last year so it's no fluke. The guy is going to get even better this year and years to come cause of experience. He got benched three years ago cause of the ints, but remember he didn't play much at that time. Look at Kirk now he doesn't throw many ints, stats don't lie. We're lucky to have him and one more thing Kirk is more valuable than RG3 is Kirk doesn't get hurt or miss games knock on wood. 

 

 

RG3 can not read a NFL defense, go through progressions or throw to a spot. He was going to be exposed sooner or later. It just happened to be sooner. The fact we drafted Kirk in the same draft ended up being the best thing we could have done.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

11 minutes ago, Gregpeck99 said:

Let's stick to the subject:  the reasons Kirk has not been signed to an LTD.
 

3. He hasn't already been signed by FO.

 

 

The reason Kirk has not been signed to a LTD is because he hasn't already been signed to a LTD?

[Morneblade]

Just now, Gregpeck99 said:

Communication is never effective if it is "snarky" ... especially when in written word format.

 

And dialogue is less than rational if is camouflaged by personal attack or criticism merely of style.

 

Let's stick to the subject:  the reasons Kirk has not been signed to an LTD.

 

Trueskin2012 "effectively communicated" several reasons:

 

1. He doesn't take Team deep into playoffs

2. He doesn't win enough to get paid the same $$$ as Rodgers

3. He hasn't already been signed by FO.

 

All of which seem quite rational to me.

 

So what's the beef Conn?  ... other than Trueskin doesn't buy into your narrative.

 

 

 

 

 

Mostly because it's not accurate. Another, lesser QB has us at 4 and 12 again. this Quarterback, with a terrible defense and a running game that is at best suspect and used less than any other team, put the entire outcome on one man's shoulders. A guys that happens to be a 2nd year starter that didn't even get any reps in the offseason his first year starting, and has make big improvements.

 

But, that's not good enough for you. It's completely unrealistic and to be honest, ignoring almost every fact out there thinking we could get away with Colt McCoy running the show. Or some rookie from this class that all of them have serious issues. But but all means, tell us how bad Kirk Cousins is.

 

And how play calling, a terrible defense, and running game that sucked in the Red Zone gets a pass.

 

Just don't be surprised when it's not really taken all that seriously.

[trueskins2012]

kirk is decent, but if kirk is traded, would it be viable to actually resign rg3 to a cheaper contract and start him over mccoy since he kinda knows the offense? 

[Califan007 The Constipated]

7 minutes ago, trueskins2012 said:

kirk is decent, but if kirk is traded, would it be viable to actually resign rg3 to a cheaper contract and start him over mccoy since he kinda knows the offense? 

 

There's no way you believe anything in any of your posts lol...

[zCommander]

28 minutes ago, Califan007 said:

 

The reason Kirk has not been signed to a LTD is because he hasn't already been signed to a LTD?

 

Are you sure?....lol

11 minutes ago, trueskins2012 said:

kirk is decent, but if kirk is traded, would it be viable to actually resign rg3 to a cheaper contract and start him over mccoy since he kinda knows the offense? 

 

Not sure if serious. 

[Spearfeather]

3 hours ago, trueskins2012 said:

kirk is decent, but if kirk is traded, would it be viable to actually resign rg3 to a cheaper contract and start him over mccoy since he kinda knows the offense? 

 

You can't be serious.

[Riggo'sRangers]

6 minutes ago, trueskins2012 said:

kirk is decent, but if kirk is traded, would it be viable to actually resign rg3 to a cheaper contract and start him over mccoy since he kinda knows the offense? 

Good grief.....that's JUST what we need.  Do you really think he is a NFL caliber QB?  This is just silly.  HTTR

[BleedBNG]

18 minutes ago, trueskins2012 said:

kirk is decent, but if kirk is traded, would it be viable to actually resign rg3 to a cheaper contract and start him over mccoy since he kinda knows the offense? 

 

 

Kinda