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

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

52 minutes ago, bobandweave said:

Good post and I liked it, however if you and I could look into the future and we see that Cousins was never going to be that guy who could lead a team to the Superbowl or win playoff games and the Redskins were always be an 8-8 or 9-7 guy with him under center would you still feel as if signing him was a must we had to do and give him that much money and control over this teams future?

 

While there is no denying Kirk is the best thing we've had playing QB in 30 years, the question is if a record of 8-8 the goal every year? Our goal has to be winning playoff games/super bowls right? He's not looked good enough almost every time he's gone against the best in the league right?  

 

 

Looking back over the last 20 years of QBs to play in the Super Bowl, a few non-potential hall of famers stick out:

 

Drew Bledsoe

Chris Chandler

Kerry Collins

Rich Gannon

Trent Dilfer

Brad Johnson

Jake Delhomme

Matt Hasslebeck

Rex Grossman

Colin Kaepernick

 

Barring Dilfer and Brad Johnson, the one thing all these guys have in common is that they lost in the Super Bowl.  We all know they both had damn near all-world defenses.  I'd be interested to know the percentage of the salary cap dedicated to each of these players.  Perhaps one of our more studious folks that like researching this stuff would be kind enough to try and figure it out.

 

The percentage of cap is really what all this boils down to, not the blockbuster headline about $2X million dollars per year. 

[HTTRDynasty]

42 minutes ago, Wildbunny said:

I know I would take Cousins over two or three of those guys that are playing in the playoffs right now.

At least.

 

1. Aaron Rodgers
2. Tom Brady
3. Matt Ryan
4. Ben Roethlisberger
5. Russell Wilson
6. Dak Prescott
7. Alex Smith
8. Brock Oswieler

 

Yea, I'd take him over the last three.  Each of those guys are blessed with either really good defenses or great running games.  1-4 are the only guys you can really argue are carrying their teams. Wilson is somewhere in between.

 

Still, look at the QB contracts of the last three players.  All much lower APYs than what Kirk is apparently asking for.  It's going to put a much higher onus on the front office to draft well year after year, which is almost impossible, as the draft is such a crap-shoot.  Even the Seahawks have slowed down in their draft success.  Paying Cousins $25 million would cripple us going forward.  We'd be able to make it work this year, because of all our extra cap space, but how long would that last?  I don't want to be the Saints.

[wit33]

25 minutes ago, Warhead36 said:

The Browns game. They gashed us on the ground. We were fortunate to force some fumbles but the D was absolutely not average against a Browns team that is god awful offensively.

 

The Vikings game. The D was poor. You give up 20 points to the Vikings, thats poor.

 

The Packers game. We didn't stop Rodgers at all. Thankfully the offense put the game away with those TD bombs.

 

The Bears game. Yeah they got 5 picks but 4 of them were just god awful throws by Barkley right to someone. They also gave up over 400 yards and like 30 1st downs or something absurd.

 

The offense could have been better but the D was god awful for like 90% of the season, with the other 10% just relying on luck to get stops(Ravens attempting a fake FG, backup RBs fumbling, etc.).

 

The defense was amazing against the Packers. For almost 3 quarters the offense was underperforming before the awesome explosion. 

 

Vikings game they were solid and made the game changing plays to seal it. Shut them out in second half. 

 

Bears game, come on now, 5 pics is what it is. Defense showed up and provided many opportunities to the offense.

 

**I'll give you the browns game. The defense was bad and were fortunate on fumbles. Once again though, the defense showed up in the second half and held Browns to 3 points.

 

[onedrop]

6 minutes ago, bobandweave said:

 

Yet here I see articles like this

 

http://www.csnmidatlantic.com/washington-redskins/redskins-offense-was-historically-inefficient-2016

 

If you really take this at face value what does it say about this offense and especially the QB who wants a long term contract? Yards are one thing, points are another.

 

 

 

 

 

All that articles proves is that we must have ALWAYS started with crappy field position, were able to march a long way down the field and failed a lot in the red zone. Which says more about limited play calling abilities when there's no field left than any one players impact. 

 

 

[bobandweave]

4 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

The percentage of cap is really what all this boils down to, not the blockbuster headline about $2X million dollars per year. 

 

Agreed, just like saying the only dollars that make sense are the guaranteed ones.

 

Still have to consider, if you knew that Cousins would lead the team to no better then 9-7 or 8-8 records over the course of this contract would everyone saying he is a must sign still feel that way about the man getting 25 million a year? I don't think so.

 

Just posted in another thread how we technically had a historically bad offense with Kirk leading the show this season. All things glittering here are not gold

[onedrop]

3 minutes ago, bobandweave said:

 

Agreed, just like saying the only dollars that make sense are the guaranteed ones.

 

Still have to consider, if you knew that Cousins would lead the team to no better then 9-7 or 8-8 records over the course of this contract would everyone saying he is a must sign still feel that way about the man getting 25 million a year? I don't think so.

 

Just posted in another thread how we technically had a historically bad offense with Kirk leading the show this season. All things glittering here are not gold

What? If people knew they were going to get hit by a bus they'd stay inside. So no, that is in no way important to consider. I'm not trying to invalidate your stance but that is a nonsensical statement. 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

10 minutes ago, bobandweave said:

Still have to consider, if you knew that Cousins would lead the team to no better then 9-7 or 8-8 records over the course of this contract would everyone saying he is a must sign still feel that way about the man getting 25 million a year? I don't think so.

 

Of course, IF we knew he would never be better than 9-7 or 8-8, but we don't know that.  Nobody does, not Scott, not Jay, not Kirk, not God.

[Why am I Mr. Pink?]

13 minutes ago, onedrop said:

All that articles proves is that we must have ALWAYS started with crappy field position, were able to march a long way down the field and failed a lot in the red zone. Which says more about limited play calling abilities when there's no field left than any one players impact. 

 

 

 

Ive thought and it has been said by others that our offense seems to have fewer possessions. Combo of our D not getting off the field and our offense having to go on long drives. 

 

8th - in points per drive

 

https://www.sportingcharts.com/nfl/stats/team-points-per-drive-statistics/2016/

 

23rd - drives staring in opponents territory

 

https://www.sportingcharts.com/nfl/stats/team-drives-starting-in-opponent-territory-statistics/2016/

 

11th - drives starting in our own territory

 

https://www.sportingcharts.com/nfl/stats/team-drives-starting-in-own-territory-statistics/2016/

 

** where in the hell is the avg starting field position per drive stat? I feel like we had a bunch of 93 yard scoring drives but had few drives starting in our opponents side of the field. 

[skins island connection]

21 minutes ago, wit33 said:

 

The defense was amazing against the Packers. For almost 3 quarters the offense was underperforming before the awesome explosion. 

 

Vikings game they were solid and made the game changing plays to seal it. Shut them out in second half. 

 

Bears game, come on now, 5 pics is what it is. Defense showed up and provided many opportunities to the offense.

 

**I'll give you the browns game. The defense was bad and were fortunate on fumbles. Once again though, the defense showed up in the second half and held Browns to 3 points.

 

 

 The same Bears team that put up 20 pts before half? Defense was caught with their pants down, out of sync, and letting backs and TEs come out of the backfield with no one around them for 15 yds. 

 Now the Packers, they were in the midst of a slump; do you think we could even come close to slowing them down today? No way. They'd put up 40+ easily, if not 50+ just for the revenge factor.

[Riggo-toni]

47 minutes ago, Bang said:

he'/s better than Brad Johnson ever was. More accurate, better in the pocket, 

frankly, if we want to go back to the last Qb who he reminds ME of it's Joe Theismann, IMO.

 

~Bang

 

I agree he's better than Johnson, but Johnson was probably more accurate - he just couldn't throw beyond 15 yards. It's why it took the other Gruden's dink and dunk to make him a success.

 

The guy Cousins reminds me of - the last guy to break team season records, Jay Schroeder. Schroeder had a better arm and a much much worse attitude, but both have flashes of greatness followed by wilting under the spotlight...especially when the opponent is the Giants.

Cousins is solid at utilizing the talent around him, but doesn't seem capable (at least not yet) of lifting that talent the way elite QBs do. The question thus becomes, will we be able to fit enough talent to surround him with whatever cap space we have left.

[onedrop]

27 minutes ago, Why am I Mr. Pink? said:

* where in the hell is the avg starting field position per drive stat? I feel like we had a bunch of 93 yard scoring drives but had few drives starting in our opponents side of the field. 

Same here. Also, while it isn't true, I feel like we got more "half the distance to the goal" penalties than normal and I swear were the only team capable of getting one from the 50. 

[wit33]

29 minutes ago, skins island connection said:

 

 The same Bears team that put up 20 pts before half? Defense was caught with their pants down, out of sync, and letting backs and TEs come out of the backfield with no one around them for 15 yds. 

 Now the Packers, they were in the midst of a slump; do you think we could even come close to slowing them down today? No way. They'd put up 40+ easily, if not 50+ just for the revenge factor.

 

The defense was bad this year, no doubt. But the NFL is fickle and a week to week league, the defense in all the wins contributed is all I'm saying. Whether this was due to opponents ineptitude at times, most likely lol.

 

My main contention is the OFFENSE getting a pass for underperforming in games this year and not really ever dominating in a game, outside of the Packer and Bears game (the latter aided by 5 pics). Major responsibility for this years failures. 

 

Too many have tied themselves to Kirk and seem to be unable to give an honest assessment of the offense, due to feeling it directly makes them wrong about Kirk. 

 

My my guess is front office is more disappointed with the offense, as their ceiling was much higher going into the year. 

[Hooper]

1 hour ago, HTTRDynasty said:

 

Still, look at the QB contracts of the last three players.  All much lower APYs than what Kirk is apparently asking for.  It's going to put a much higher onus on the front office to draft well year after year, which is almost impossible, as the draft is such a crap-shoot.  Even the Seahawks have slowed down in their draft success.  Paying Cousins $25 million would cripple us going forward.  We'd be able to make it work this year, because of all our extra cap space, but how long would that last?  I don't want to be the Saints.

Cap is going up at a much faster rate than QB salaries. An NFL rosters are like fifty percent rookie contract deals. We can pay KC what he wants and still build a very good team around him. Agents knows this. In two years, paying KC 22 million a year won't seem so bad.

[Bang]

The article and it's topic.. i agree we were bad in the Red Zone, but i tuly think it's more scheme / playcalling related than anything else.

we were terribly dull inside the ten especially.  We never threatened the defense.. ignored the middle of the field for the most part.

They threw the fade how many times? I don't think you throw the fade if you're afraid of your QB, because it's a precision throw.. it has to be in one spot at the exact moment. As i said in another post or another thread.. who knows.. it's more a physics problem for the QB than an athletic play. Gage arc, time, speed..  
The fade doesn't have a second option, it's a snap and throw play.   
Unless you have Megatron, which we don't, it's a very low percentage throw.
we have big TEs who can catch (and who routinely turn and break tackles.). we have a very physical WR in garcon. we have speed and elusiveness with great hands in Jackson and Crowder, and we constantly choose low percentage plays pushed to the outside. Fades, little out patterns running parallel to the goal, making the sideline an effective defender and collapsing the area the receiver has to be able to turn it up and in. We consistently called plays that consistently didn't work. sometimes on consecutive downs. Our playbook turned into a playpamphlet with the number of plays they chose to run.

Now, i am only going by my own eye, but it seemed a lot of times we did not do what we had been consistently to get there once in the red zone. Granted, the condensed field changes strategy, but not so much that you become timid, and i think we did. Overall, I think we did not approach the red zone plays aggressively. We played not to lose.

Based on the plays called, i think that is more sideline than execution.

 

just my opinion on that particular problem. 

 

~Bang

[TheGreek1973]

2 hours ago, bobandweave said:

 

Falcons would not just "dump" Matt Ryan. First he was drafted 3rd overall in 2008, he's only missed playing two of those games in his career., he's on a good contract now:

7/25/2013: Signed a six-year, $103.75 million contract. The deal contains $59 million guaranteed, including a $28 million signing bonus. 2016-2017: $15.75 million, 2018: $19.25 million, 2019: Free Agent

 

So why would they do that? They wouldn't.

oh so because we drafted Cousins in the 4th round and because Scott made a huge mistake not signing him to a relatively friendly deal last year, lets dump him right?  is that your argument?  Because Cousins has not missed any games he was a starter, he gets sacked less than just about any QB not named Brady, he has 9000 yards 63 TD seasons added up.  And Ryan has someone called JJ.  And as much as I like Djax or Garcon, both of them together couldn't hold Julio's jack strap. 

And as far as the deal goes when Matt made his, remind me again how much was the CAP?  Right....well this year is projected to be over 160 million.

[Wildbunny]

5 minutes ago, Bang said:

i agree we were bad in the Red Zone, but i tuly think it's more scheme / playcalling related than anything else.

we were terribly dull inside the ten especially.  We never threatened the defense.. ignored the middle of the field for the most part.

I back up the thinking that our RZ problems are tied with playcalling duties, not players.

And I think that it's even more tied to the fact that we decided to go with no Fullback on the team this year.

[MartinC]

1 hour ago, Bang said:

he'/s better than Brad Johnson ever was. More accurate, better in the pocket, 

frankly, if we want to go back to the last Qb who he reminds ME of it's Joe Theismann, IMO.

 

~Bang

 

 

Interesting comparison. I can see where you are coming from.

 

Joey T was better at creating plays outside the scheme though, thats something Cousins has to improve if he to become a really top QB.

[TheGreek1973]

2 hours ago, Riggo-toni said:

Quite frankly, if Cousins were the next Brad Johnson, I wouldn't want to give him a monster contract. Johnson only had 2 good seasons his entire career (1999 & 2002). Trent Green was a franchise QB, or at least would have been had he stayed healthy longer. Honestly, I'm still pissed we let Stan Humphries go for a 4th round pick Casserly blew on a punter who got cut during training camp.

I think every rational person wants Cousins signed, but the question is how much in excess of $20m/yr (which is the likely floor at this point) are we willing to pay, which will come at the expense of other positions. Overpaying an average QB sent the Jets and the Bears into a tailspin, and will kill the Texans and the already down-spiraling Colts in another year or two.

I guess I can stomach 21/yr for 5 years with $55 guaranteed, but I bet he demands 24/yr with $65 guaranteed.

And what I am saying is and have been all season, you pay for your mistakes.  But you don't double down on your mistakes.  Scott rolled the dice on Cousins and he lost.  Will he admit he was wrong by signing him or will his ego take over and say Tag him again which IMO it will be very stupid or worse let him go.  And its funny how Trend Green's name came up.  We pulled a similar move there and look how that ended up.

 

No one knows how Cousins will grow from here.  This might be his ceiling and if 4,900 30 TDs (run plus pass) with 15 INTs is not good enough for you so be it.  But I don't think this is his ceiling.  I think with Callahan having one more year to solidify that OL, a decent running game and an top 15 D we are going deep into the playoffs.

 

Another thing no one mentions, Reed has been a problem because he has not had a full season without getting hurt.  We got to find a TE that can remain healthy to play with him and learn from him, and Davis.  If you want to point to the issue of Cousins regressing against Arizona and Carolina all you need to do is point to Reed.

[btfoom]

My vote for Franchise Tag is that I don't believe that Jay is a certainty to stay beyond next year at all.

 

If the Skins win 6, 7, or 8 games next year (or maybe even 9 and don't make the playoffs), I can easily see a scenario where he is let go.

 

If KC has been locked into a large contract, then the coaching options are limited to those who would play with a QB like KC.

 

Just considering KC, I'm not sold on his value overall (too many wins vs teams with losing records) and his tendency to panic and throw dumb interceptions over the middle.  As many here have stated, the 'problem' is that there really isn't another viable option.  Can't just let him go and pray that Colt can get it done.  A QB from college is a crap shoot.  I just want to remind many here that the Ravens way over-paid for Flacco (and he won a SB), and the team hasn't been the same since as they can't keep the depth that had been so good for them.

[HTTRDynasty]

17 minutes ago, Hooper said:

Cap is going up at a much faster rate than QB salaries. An NFL rosters are like fifty percent rookie contract deals. We can pay KC what he wants and still build a very good team around him. Agents knows this. In two years, paying KC 22 million a year won't seem so bad.

 

$22 million APY would make me happy.  $25 million APY wouldn't.  And yes, I know it's only the guaranteed portion that matters, and we can reduce the cap hit in early years, but I'm using the APY as a measuring stick for simplicity's sake.

[Why am I Mr. Pink?]

19 minutes ago, Hooper said:

Cap is going up at a much faster rate than QB salaries. An NFL rosters are like fifty percent rookie contract deals. We can pay KC what he wants and still build a very good team around him. Agents knows this. In two years, paying KC 22 million a year won't seem so bad.

But Cousins talk of percentage of salary cap scares me, he said this is what his agent told him, its about percent of cap not a number. That means he and his agent dont want 22 mil per for the next 5 years. Currently the cap is 1,555,270,00 and 15% of that is 23.3M ... but i dont think Kirk wants 23.3m per year but 15% of the cap per year.  Next years low estimate of cap is 163M (estimated 8-11 mil cap increase for next year)

 

2017 - $24,450,000 (163,000,000*.15)

2018 - $25,500,000 (170,000,000*.15) .... assuming a cap increase of 7M

2019 - etc etc etc

 

In essence, I think the days of paying long term contracts based on current cap numbers are long gone. Players arent going to take deals that pay them fairly now but will underpay them in future years. 

 

I think Cousins asking price will be staggering and Im not sure Scot will fold. 

 

High stakes. 

[Bang]

19 minutes ago, MartinC said:

 

Interesting comparison. I can see where you are coming from.

 

Joey T was better at creating plays outside the scheme though, thats something Cousins has to improve if he to become a really top QB.

Joey was always a scrambler, though, known for it at Notre Dame. known for it once he got in the NFL. 
What i see in comparing them is competitive fire, leadership, and the willingness to put it on their shoulders. Kirk's got a good arm, he's smart, typically makes the right read..  he doesn't have Joe's brashness and certainly not his off field persona, but those are part of Joe's personality, and they served him well as the QB of this team. Joe's brashness stemmed from confidence, which stemmed from a lifetime of results. Joe was bold because he could handle the pressure that came with speaking his mind, and it kept that pressure off his teammates.

Kirk is anything bUT brash, and at the state the team was in at the time he took over, it was exactly what we needed.. someone more quiet, humble, not going to grab the spotlight and hump it.
Joe was good for his Redskins as Kirk is good for these Redskins. Both have the leadership qualities I like, both are field generals. I don't see anyone in the locker room that doesn't respect him, and i think his teammates play hard for him, as Joe's did for him.

 

And for me personally, this is high praise, because Joe Thesmann IS my favorite Redskins QB of all time, and IMO, he exemplifies Redskins greatness.

 

~Bang

[Warhead36]

59 minutes ago, wit33 said:

 

The defense was bad this year, no doubt. But the NFL is fickle and a week to week league, the defense in all the wins contributed is all I'm saying. Whether this was due to opponents ineptitude at times, most likely lol.

 

Of course they contributed, but the % is like 90% offense 10% defense, and you're blaming the offense for not being 95 or 100%.

 

[PartyPosse]

31 minutes ago, TheGreek1973 said:

And what I am saying is and have been all season, you pay for your mistakes.  But you don't double down on your mistakes.  Scott rolled the dice on Cousins and he lost.  Will he admit he was wrong by signing him or will his ego take over and say Tag him again which IMO it will be very stupid or worse let him go.  And its funny how Trend Green's name came up.  We pulled a similar move there and look how that ended up.

I'm gonna have to disagree with the rolling the dice and lost. Everything Kirk did this year was exactly why Scott was skeptical. He put up all the stats that FF fans love to fawn over and use as a focal point for when to draft them, but when it came time to doing what a leader does and putting the team on his back, fair or unfair, he didn't get the job done. Those last three games, essentially the equivalent of championship rounds in boxing, He wasn't able to carry the team. Should he have to? Maybe, maybe not, but if he wants to act like he deserves to be a guy who can carry a team then he has to show it at key moments. Scott doesn't have the luxury of making excuses for why things didn't go his way when it comes to negotiating with Kirk and his agent. Scott's job is to determine that what he sees from Kirk warrants enough to give into his demands. Scott, when evaluating what Kirk is worth, doesn't have to look at the defense and use them as a reason why Kirk is worth what he is. Scott also wasn't going to roll the dice on a long term contract on a guy who had a good 8 game stretch. We've all seen guys turn 8 game stretches into monster deals that teams have immediately regretted and were subsequently crippled by for years. You say Scott rolled the dice and lost but the fact that even now we're still debating whether or not Kirk is worth giving the keys to a very expensive car to shows that he wasn't wrong. You can claim ego or this or that but frankly, I'll choose Scott's opinion on how things should go than a bunch of us sitting in front of computer, posting on a message board, pretending we know everything (and i'll include myself into that lump).

[TheGreek1973]

25 minutes ago, Why am I Mr. Pink? said:

But Cousins talk of percentage of salary cap scares me, he said this is what his agent told him, its about percent of cap not a number. That means he and his agent dont want 22 mil per for the next 5 years. Currently the cap is 1,555,270,00 and 15% of that is 23.3M ... but i dont think Kirk wants 23.3m per year but 15% of the cap per year.  Next years low estimate of cap is 163M (estimated 8-11 mil cap increase for next year)

 

2017 - $24,450,000 (163,000,000*.15)

2018 - $25,500,000 (170,000,000*.15) .... assuming a cap increase of 7M

2019 - etc etc etc

 

In essence, I think the days of paying long term contracts based on current cap numbers are long gone. Players arent going to take deals that pay them fairly now but will underpay them in future years. 

 

I think Cousins asking price will be staggering and Im not sure Scot will fold. 

 

High stakes. 

Agreed.

 

The more I think about it the more I feel that Scott will not pull the trigger.  This is not his guy, he didn't draft him.  Hell like someone else said, who is to say that he doesn't want Gruden gone also?  Again I didn't like at all what Gruden said about with our two number one picks we got a guard and a hurt WR.  That is telling IMO.