TK Posted July 17, 2017 Author Share Posted July 17, 2017 Just now, jschuck12001 said: What have we not heard of one solid push from another team to get Kirk through a trade? I believe it was the Browns that called during the Draft to inquire about a trade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HOF44 Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 1 minute ago, jschuck12001 said: Look your worth what someone will pay you, I tried to answer you in that I think the Skins were ok with that $44 mil guaranteed and they thought they could get a deal done but failed, I'm just guessing at this point but if you say Kirk has market value then show me. I assume he has market value because he was tagged. That's what the Skins tagging him tells me. They thought there was someone out there that would pay him more than they were willing to. Otherwise why franchise him??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSSkinz Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 Just now, HOF44 said: I assume he has market value because he was tagged. That's what the Skins tagging him tells me. They thought there was someone out there that would pay him more than they were willing to. Otherwise why franchise him??? If you don't franchise him he would have become a free agent, that's a pretty good reason. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HOF44 Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 Just now, jschuck12001 said: If you don't franchise him he would have become a free agent, that's a pretty good reason. If there is no market for him why would that matter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voice_of_Reason Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 1 minute ago, jschuck12001 said: If you don't franchise him he would have become a free agent, that's a pretty good reason. Yeah, I would have taken a different approach. I would have offered Kirk a market value contract, and then let him hit FA. If that means that the 49ers pay him 30 mil a year, so be it. At least you have your answer. That's what they're going to have to do next year anyway, because they can't franchise tag him again, and the transition tag is just stupid. (Guaranteed $28 mil, offer to match but no draft pick compensation if he signs elsewhere. Whatever. He's here for a year (baring a huge development in the next 2 hours), and then we get to do this all over again. My biggest disappointment is if these bozos use any tag on him again next year. I would prefer to see what the market is without a tag than set the market with the tag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSSkinz Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 Just now, HOF44 said: If there is no market for him why would that matter? I don't believe there was a market for Kirk over $20 mil per year. Of course he would get offers, but not Luck and Carr type, my point is concerning the big money not that Kirk cant an offer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HOF44 Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 Just now, jschuck12001 said: I don't believe there was a market for Kirk over $20 mil per year. Of course he would get offers, but not Luck and Carr type, my point is concerning the big money not that Kirk cant an offer. Why not a transition tag then? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Hangman- C_Hanburger Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 I'll look on the bright side!! Maybe Dan is cured of his Portis/RG3 type bromances that screwed this team over so bad. THIS all goes back to that stupidity. Better not happen again.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BatteredFanSyndrome Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 5 minutes ago, jschuck12001 said: Why have we not heard of one solid push from another team to get Kirk through a trade? Because he's been tagged and the Redskins have been adamant that they won't entertain any offers. You can't make a solid push to someone who won't pick up the phone. The only market for Kirk is the one dictated by the franchise tag the team put on him. He's scheduled to make 52M dollars at minimum in the next 2 seasons and potentially up to 58M if the Skins opt to franchise tag rather than transition. Anything less than 58M guaranteed is a joke and a waste of time for his camp. That's why they are 'fine' to just ride this out and let the market dictate his salary at a later date, where it will likely be much higher. This is precisely why people are up in arms about the lack of a market contract. The Redskins dug this hole and now they are burying themselves in it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartinC Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 3 hours ago, Audible_Red40 said: There are plenty of teams that will pay him for what he has done. May not be up to this teams' standards, but I can name 6 teams off the top of my head that would instantly be better with kirk and their standards. The Redskins ARE paying him for what he has done. $24M as I recall for this season. 4 minutes ago, jschuck12001 said: I don't believe there was a market for Kirk over $20 mil per year. Of course he would get offers, but not Luck and Carr type, my point is concerning the big money not that Kirk cant an offer. Well we are paying him $24M for this season - so that sets the market right now. Plus about 7,000 posts in this thread all pretty much discussing that central point/problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voice_of_Reason Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 4 minutes ago, HOF44 said: If there is no market for him why would that matter? There's definitely a market for him. This year, the 49ers would have made him a big offer. The Browns and Jets would have made offers. It's unclear who else might have. Maybe KC? Texans? Bears? All three of those teams spent multiple draft picks to get a QB in this year's draft. Maybe Arizona, if they think with a QB like Cousins, they can force Palmer's departure on him? I dunno. But there would have been a market. Next year's market might be different, though. That's why as a player you like long term deals with security, because the future is foggy. "Ever changing, the future is." (or something like that, quoteth Yoda). Next year, most likely the teams looking for a QB will be Browns, Jets, Jags. Possible maybes in Steelers, Arizona, Minnesota, Buffalo. Probably nots in Rams, 49ers (though if they finish ~6-10 or better they might be, otherwise they'll probably draft somebody younger and cheaper, which as much or more upside), Texans, KC, etc. I dunno. I am just a fan, but I think Kirk and his agent are mis-reading the market a little bit. Only time will tell. 5 minutes ago, HOF44 said: Why not a transition tag then? Because that sets a floor for negotiations, a team can fenangle a contract you have no desire to match, and you get no draft compensation. Transition Tag is absolutely the worst possible tag to use under any circumstance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markmills67 Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 I wouldn't let Snyder and Allen run me a bath, never mind a NFL Franchise. What an absolute joke we are . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HOF44 Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 1 minute ago, Voice_of_Reason said: There's definitely a market for him. I agree, was just pointing out why would you franchise him if there wasn't. There will ALWAYS be a market for QB's of KC's level. There are not many, certainly not 32. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
actorguy1 Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 Two hours until I either get out the Pitchfork or the Party Hat! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dissident2 Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 11 minutes ago, jschuck12001 said: I don't believe there was a market for Kirk over $20 mil per year. Of course he would get offers, but not Luck and Carr type, my point is concerning the big money not that Kirk cant an offer. Again, you've paid him $44 million for two years of work, but you can't get a LTD worked out. It's senseless and confusing, which is why (mantra time), it's NEVER HAPPENED BEFORE in the history of the NFL. I get why some don't think he's worth the money it's going to take to keep him here AT THIS POINT in the process. But again, that's what a franchise QB is going to cost you, period. If you don't think he's a franchise QB, you MOVE ON. If you think he's good enough to pay $44 million for two years, possibly $72 million for three (obscene when you think about it), that's saying you think he's good enough to be here longterm. In what world is it not? Oh, that's right. Crazy World. It's just nuts. And tiresome. Now's the time on Sprockets when we dance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voice_of_Reason Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 4 minutes ago, MartinC said: Well we are paying him $24M for this season - so that sets the market right now. Plus about 7,000 posts in this thread all pretty much discussing that central point/problem. But I think the point is that had the 'Skins NOT franchised him because they are afraid of the open market, other teams probably weren't going to be lining up to pay Krik $24 mil/year. I actually disagree with that sentiment THIS year because the 49ers would have. They have the cap space, and there wasn't as good a prospect in the draft. Ultimately, the reason that the 'Skins franchised Kirk is they believed they would lose him on the open market. Which is probably correct. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redskinss Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 9 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said: My biggest disappointment is if these bozos use any tag on him again next year. I would prefer to see what the market is without a tag than set the market with the tag. A million analogies are running through my head right now but i can't seem to articulate one so ill just say this. What's the point of trying to find his market value if he ends up signing with another team? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kleese Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 21 minutes ago, HTTRDynasty said: Why do people automatically assume Kirk would be stepping into a worse situation if he didn't re-sign with us in 2018? Sure, we hear about the Niners, Jets, and Browns as options, but he could also go to the Cardinals (Palmer retires) or the Broncos (Lynch is a bust). He might receive a little less in salary, but at least he'd go to a winning situation with a team that hasn't spurned him over and over. We are first assuming the Redskins and KC have a really good season in 2017. If he has a lousy year and the team stinks then this is all moot anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boss_Hogg Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 Only this team would lose their offensive coordinator, "GM" and franchise QB in back to back years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carex Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 looking back over some Redskins seasons. 9-7 and 8-8 were the Skins records in Jason Campbell's first two years as starter before dropping to 4-12. And when Guss Frerotte was here in the 90s we had a period with the exact same record as our last four years here with the exception of our 4-12 record being beaten by a 6-10 record. So maybe the FO has a decent reason for deciding 9-7 and 8-7-1 years aren't enough for a record deal Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HOF44 Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 Just now, Boss_Hogg said: Only this team would lose their offensive coordinator, "GM" and franchise QB in back to back years. And 2 starting wideouts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voice_of_Reason Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 Just now, redskinss said: A million analogies are running through my head right now but i can't seem to articulate one so ill just say this. What's the point of trying to find his market value if he ends up signing with another team? If you're in a good spot relationship wise, you go into an honest negotiation without having an artificial floor. If you're willing to pay him like Derek Carr, but somebody else wants to make him the highest paid player ever, so be it. With any tag, it STARTS the negotiation at the tag level, and then you go up from there. They don't seem to want to pay him long term what the value of the tag is. The only way to negate that possibility is not to negotiate while he is tagged. And then if he chooses to sign with the NYJ fo $30 million, eh, ok. You weren't going to sign him anyway, so there's no real issue. That's better than tagging him at $28 mil/year transition and then trying to negotiate a salary less than that. It won't happen. That's the problem. The 'Skins are trying to get him to take a lower value than the tag, and he won't. Because he's not stupid. The only way to remove that possibility is to remove the baseline of the tag and see what happens. personally, I would have offered him the Carr deal the day after Carr signed it, just to see if he would take it. If he did, great. If not, you know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BatteredFanSyndrome Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 3 minutes ago, carex said: looking back over some Redskins seasons. 9-7 and 8-8 were the Skins records in Jason Campbell's first two years as starter before dropping to 4-12. Those seasons we could actually run the ball and stop a nosebleed on D. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voice_of_Reason Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 3 minutes ago, HOF44 said: And 2 starting wideouts. 1 of those was replaced by somebody who might be better. I swear, however, if Ryan Grant lines up as a starting WR on day 1 for any reason, I am going to turn off the TV and take my daughter to the park. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carex Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 13 minutes ago, MartinC said: The Redskins ARE paying him for what he has done. $24M as I recall for this season. Well we are paying him $24M for this season - so that sets the market right now. Plus about 7,000 posts in this thread all pretty much discussing that central point/problem. Don't people who sign a long term deal from the franchise tag normally take a few million from the first year of the contract? The tag is not supposed to be the base of the negotiations Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.