ESPN.com: Kirk Cousins contract talks with Redskins on positive track

[Morneblade]

13 hours ago, Califan007 said:

What Casserly would offer Cousins:

 

 

 

 

 

Annnnd, cound Dan Graziano among those who believe Cousins would easily get $30+ mil a year if he his free agency next year:

 

"Knowing Washington would have to pay about $35 million to franchise him for a third year in a row in 2018 (or about $28.8 million to use the transition tag on him), Cousins probably needs to see at least $50 million more in guaranteed money over and above what he's already got coming to him before he'd consider signing. If he gets to the market in March, and quarterback-starved, cap-rich teams such as San Francisco and Cleveland get to take their shots at him, his new contract is going to sail past the $30 million-a-year mark."

 

http://www.espn.com/nfl/story/_/id/19704704/derek-carr-extension-oakland-raiders-works-carr-do-much-other-league-quarterbacks

 

 

 

****shaking my damn head****

 

 

The Casserly Contract IMO looks to be something that would get this done in no time. It's fair and it's market value.

[CommanderDOOM]

I know a lot of you ain't trying to hear this but Kirk has already proved "reasonable " is out the window. "Reasonable" for a person with his talent who has already been paid 20mill for one year would be 23ish.

Imo, Kc is who I thought he was. Our F.O would have to be complete idiots to not realize that He wants to be the highest paid player in the league. If we want him long term it makes no sense to keep letting better Qb's reset the market. 

 

Also @ConnSKINS26 next tears tag ain't guaranteed. He might as well say since Arod'll get 26 next year that he wants 27. 

[DC Lumber Co.]

20 minutes ago, Morneblade said:

The Casserly Contract IMO looks to be something that would get this done in no time. It's fair and it's market value.

 

In a perfect world. Fingers crossed until July 17th

[Morneblade]

7 minutes ago, DC Lumber Co. said:

 

In a perfect world. Fingers crossed until July 17th

 

Well, I've been on record as saying I don't expect anything until July 17 for months now, as I don't expect Bruce to actually put up a deal like that until the 11th hour. He's going to try to win the deal for as long as he can, and when it comes down to it, he'll drop it at the last minute.

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

55 minutes ago, TheShredSkinz said:

I know a lot of you ain't trying to hear this but Kirk has already proved "reasonable " is out the window. "Reasonable" for a person with his talent who has already been paid 20mill for one year would be 23ish.

 

Also @ConnSKINS26 next tears tag ain't guaranteed. He might as well say since Arod'll get 26 next year that he wants 27. 

The Redskins had plenty of time to get Kirk signed long term but opted to go with the franchise tag two years in a row.  That's on them, not Kirk.  The Redskins set his market by the actions they chose to take.  One could say the Redskins weren't "reasonable" from the beginning which is why we sit here today talking about this.  The 3rd tag is not guaranteed but might as well be.  Outside of a one in a million catastrophic injury or a downright complete disaster statistically in 2017, he's getting paid the big bucks by somebody next season.

[CommanderDOOM]

10 hours ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

 

The thing is that Kirk has so much guaranteed money coming his way via this year's tag and next year's potential tag that it sets the acceptable floor for guaranteed money in his contract higher than Carr's most likely, regardless of the average per year salary it works out to. He'd be an idiot not to use those tags as a starting point for guaranteed money in the first two years, since if he doesn't sign a LTD he's guaranteed, what, over $52M in just the next two years via the tags if we want to keep him? That's your starting point, not the $40-45M Carr was guaranteed over the first two years, or whatever it was. 

 

As everyone, including Cousins and his agent, keeps saying: every time we used the tag on Cousins we set his expectations, and set the floor for his contract for them. 

He's the one turning down these offers that everyone else in the league is laughing at us about even offering him. He's turned down 19 and now 24 a year. But keep faulting  the team over this dude.

[goskins10]

11 minutes ago, TheShredSkinz said:

He's the one turning down these offers that everyone else in the league is laughing at us about even offering him. He's turned down 19 and now 24 a year. But keep faulting  the team over this dude.

 

Not sure either of those offers have been confirmed. In fact, I believe it was Kirks team that made the $19M offer last year. The team was at $16M - made that offer almost immediately and both sides agreed to let him play on the tag.

 

Not disagreeing with the overall premise that it takes two to get a deal done. But not sure the numbers you have are correct.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

10 hours ago, markmills67 said:

If you were put on the spot and asked if cousins signs a LTD with the Redskins before July deadline day, what would be you answer buddy.

 

HTTR 

 

Yep...I'm sticking to my 85% gut feeling til the end lol...

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

23 minutes ago, TheShredSkinz said:

He's the one turning down these offers that everyone else in the league is laughing at us about even offering him. He's turned down 19 and now 24 a year. But keep faulting  the team over this dude.

 

I'm curious about your sources on both fronts: The amounts we've offered and turned down & that anyone else is laughing about these alleged offers.

 

I won't hold my breath waiting on them.

[ILikeBilly]

43 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

The Redskins had plenty of time to get Kirk signed long term but opted to go with the franchise tag two years in a row.  That's on them, not Kirk. 

Just to be clear - the Redskins did not opt to "go with the franchise tag two years in a row."  You are distorting reality.  If the 'Skins were not in anyway trying to get a LTD done, then yes, you would be correct.  But, they are trying to sign Kirk, so the franchise tag is an insurance policy if they can't get the LTD.  It is not the first choice of the team. 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

22 minutes ago, ILikeBilly said:

Just to be clear - the Redskins did not opt to "go with the franchise tag two years in a row."  You are distorting reality.  If the 'Skins were not in anyway trying to get a LTD done, then yes, you would be correct.  But, they are trying to sign Kirk, so the franchise tag is an insurance policy if they can't get the LTD.  It is not the first choice of the team. 

 

Did Kirk place the franchise tag on himself two years in a row?  No.  Therefore the Redskins did opt to go with the franchise tag two years in a row.  I'm not distorting anything.

 

Neither you nor I, or anyone else on this board for that matter, knows what legitimate steps the team has taken to get Kirk signed long term or what Kirk's expectations are.  You are creating your own reality that fits what you want to believe is happening.

 

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure that the moment the Redskins placed the tag on Kirk a second time, his asking price was going to go up, based on simple math.  I'd imagine even the guys in the front office making the decision can acknowledge they should have handled this situation differently because it surely would have been cheaper to cut the check pre-2nd franchise tag.

[Califan007 The Constipated]

Ok, well Sheehan (and I guess Graziano as well) are of the belief that:

 

1) The Skins are one million percent guaranteed to at least transition tag Cousins next year and pay him $28M for the year

2) That at least 2 or 3 teams will one million percent be more than happy to start the bidding at that price for Cousins and keep topping each other based on next  year's cap space alone

 

There's a ****load wrong with that logic.

[SkinInsite]

If they don't get a LTD done are the Skins really going to let KC walk for nothing.

[Rattlesnake88]

The deadline at this point is the only way we will be able to see and real transparency on what the "Cousins camp" is thinking...

 

Our front office WILL offer a fair market contract (something similar to Carr's or slightly better), and say "Kirk we want you to be a Redskin, this is what we can offer without hurting our chances at a Super Bowl".

 

If Kirk chooses to say "no thanks" and hit the market to chase 30 million. Nobody can blame this team for being railroaded by a greedy man. I won't be told otherwise.

[bowhunter]

13 minutes ago, SkinInsite said:

If they don't get a LTD done are the Skins really going to let KC walk for nothing.

IMO, they should. And I LOVE Kirk and want him to be on our roster for a long time. But, IF he refuses a reasonable 5yr/$125M (60 guaranteed) type deal, it would have to be in our best interest to let him walk, this drama cannot continue for going on 3 years. In fact, if he refuses such an offer, I'd shut him down. No sense in letting him build his FA resume at our expense. Put Sudfeld in and see our growing pains. If he pleasantly surprises, then YAY! If he fails miserably then we'll be drafting low enough to pick our next starter. Either way, this drama can NOT continue for 2 more seasons. Sometimes you have to realize that you're fighting a losing battle and limit your losses. I'd hate to see KC go, but the team is greater than any one player.

[Taylor 36]

6 minutes ago, Rattlesnake88 said:

The deadline at this point is the only way we will be able to see and real transparency on what the "Cousins camp" is thinking...

 

Our front office WILL offer a fair market contract (something similar to Carr's or slightly better), and say "Kirk we want you to be a Redskin, this is what we can offer without hurting our chances at a Super Bowl".

 

If Kirk chooses to say "no thanks" and hit the market to chase 30 million. Nobody can blame this team for being railroaded by a greedy man. I won't be told otherwise.

Considering the other reported offers the team has made in the past, there is no way to say that they WILL offer him a fair market contract.  If Snyder is getting involved like has been reported, I would say we have a much better chance that they offer him a fair market contract over Bruce's frugality. The Redskins set the market on Kirk and pushed the floor up with their tags; it is not fair to blame the player's agent for doing everything in his poser to get his client the best deal.  I don't know where all of this 30 million stuff came from.  Not one single legitimate report has even hinted that Cousins's camp is seeking anything in that ball park. As a matter of fact, only a few people speculating have said Kirk wants to be the highest paid player.

[Veryoldschool]

I don't have any idea how Cousins feels but I think if I was him I'd think the Carr 125M for 5 years sounds fair but I would be wanting the Skins to pay something extra because of his TT leverage and I'd want get something in the way of you jerked me around for 3 year before letting me win the job I would've won in 2013 or 2014 if allowed to compete tax.  His career was held hostage to Snyder's RGIII fantasy and maybe it is small minded on my part to want something for at least 2 years of frustration having ride the pine behind a miscast Griffin but I'm sure I'd want something for it.

 

Then there is the issue of 2015 and the Skins posture and public statements to the effect of "we aren't ready to really commit to you now but if you can do again in 2016 we will be happy to overpay.  The going rate for a guy like Cousins is 125M now I'd want to add something substantial to sweeten it to make amends, they need to overpay as they promised.  I think a much bigger guarantee would do it because it would demonstrate the faith and confidence in Cousins they are overdue in showing.  I think a 75M would be appropriate guarantee and if it wasn't forthcoming promptly now I would cut off discussions and prepare to audition throughout the 2017 season for a future employer.  

 

It would be 125M 75 guaranteed or bust if I was Kirk.

[bowhunter]

6 minutes ago, Veryoldschool said:

 I would cut off discussions and prepare to audition throughout the 2017 season for a future employer.  

 

It would be 125M 75 guaranteed or bust if I was Kirk.

In that case, Washingtons best move would be to bench him. At that point, KC would have demonstrated no interest in being a member of this team and the Sudfeld experiment should begin ASAP. Such a refusal would demonstrate ill will by Kirks camp, and theres no sense in letting him pad his resume at our expense, and again, I LOVE Kirk and want him here

[Conn]

1 hour ago, TheShredSkinz said:

He's the one turning down these offers that everyone else in the league is laughing at us about even offering him. He's turned down 19 and now 24 a year. But keep faulting  the team over this dude.

 

19 was a bad joke when we offered it. There's been no report that he's turned down 24. 

 

I don't know what you mean by "laughing at us for even offering". The entire league thinks we're idiots for not doing whatever it takes to keep our QB and stay competitive. 

[Rattlesnake88]

21 minutes ago, Taylor 36 said:

Considering the other reported offers the team has made in the past, there is no way to say that they WILL offer him a fair market contract.  

You will see. We will talk then.

 

i will have no problem admitting I was wrong.

 

i just feel like the organization almost has to offer market value or there will be lots of angry fans (including me).

 

i just have a good feeling they will (offer fair contract) due to the circumstances. I also think it's a high probability Kirk will chase the open market. Time will tell.

[clskinsfan]

2 hours ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

The Redskins had plenty of time to get Kirk signed long term but opted to go with the franchise tag two years in a row.  That's on them, not Kirk

 

In fairness there were not a whole lot people in the league or in the media that would have given Cousins a long term deal after 8 good games. Lets not forget Cousins struggled in the first half of 2015.  I was fine with the franchise before last season. And obviously after Kirk playing well last season the franchise tag was a necessity this year to keep him off of the market. I really wish Kirk would have played well the entire 2015 season because most likely we would have signed him at that point to a team friendly long term deal.

[Conn]

2 minutes ago, bowhunter said:

In that case, Washingtons best move would be to bench him. At that point, KC would have demonstrated no interest in being a member of this team and the Sudfeld experiment should begin ASAP. Such a refusal would demonstrate ill will by Kirks camp, and theres no sense in letting him pad his resume at our expense, and again, I LOVE Kirk and want him here

 

This is ****ing idiotic. We'd be the biggest circus on the NFL and right back to our old ways. This would make the Haynesworth, McNabb, and Griffin sagas look like nothing. Even if Cousins doesn't want to sign here, you don't bench your starting QB because he wants to hit FA. He has no obligation to sign whatever you think is a fair deal, or even an unfair deal. A player's second contract is basically the only time he can count on having a say in his own career. He doesn't owe you anything just because you're a butthurt fan of a team too cheap or lacking the foresight to already get this deal done. Bench him if he doesn't sign. What a ****ing joke.

[clskinsfan]

3 minutes ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

 

This is ****ing idiotic. We'd be the biggest circus on the NFL and right back to our old ways. This would make the Haynesworth, McNabb, and Griffin sagas look like nothing. Even if Cousins doesn't want to sign here, you don't bench your starting QB because he wants to hit FA. He has no obligation to sign whatever you think is a fair deal, or even an unfair deal. A player's second contract is basically the only time he can count on having a say in his own career. He doesn't owe you anything just because you're a butthurt fan of a team too cheap or lacking the foresight to already get this deal done. Bench him if he doesn't sign. What a ****ing joke.

Agreed. Especially since we can technically still control his rights after this season. I am starting to think that we just transition him after this season and let him see what his real market value is. Then match whatever offer he gets. In all honesty IF he doesnt want to sign here and we confirm this by him turning down a fair market deal. I would trade him before this season started. But I agree you cant bench him.

[Conn]

2 minutes ago, Rattlesnake88 said:

You will see. We will talk then.

 

i will have no problem admitting I was wrong.

 

i just feel like the organization almost has to offer market value or there will be lots of angry fans (including me).

 

i just have a good feeling they will (offer fair contract) due to the circumstances. I also think it's a high probability Kirk will chase the open market. Time will tell.

 

For the record, I also think this. I don't think they've offered market value yet but I think they're prepared to at the deadline, because they basically have to. That's why nothing has really mattered until we hit the deadline.

[bowhunter]

9 minutes ago, ConnSKINS26 said:

 

This is ****ing idiotic. We'd be the biggest circus on the NFL and right back to our old ways. This would make the Haynesworth, McNabb, and Griffin sagas look like nothing. Even if Cousins doesn't want to sign here, you don't bench your starting QB because he wants to hit FA. He has no obligation to sign whatever you think is a fair deal, or even an unfair deal. A player's second contract is basically the only time he can count on having a say in his own career. He doesn't owe you anything just because you're a butthurt fan of a team too cheap or lacking the foresight to already get this deal done. Bench him if he doesn't sign. What a ****ing joke.

I'm unsure of how you feel about this.lol.

In fact, maybe it's just the pissy mood I've been in lately, but I'm wanting this saga to end. I've grown tired of it in fact. As I posted in 2015 and again in 2016. Pay the man. I suggested that last year we offer him a $21M deal when most on the board thought $19 was fair. But..If KC turns down a real fair market value offer in line with what Carr just received, then he has shown his hand. At that point it would be time to just proceed to Plan B IMO. Yes, I'll be saddened, but if KC harbors ill-will toward the team we have to remember that a salary cap does exist.