TK Posted July 17, 2017 Author Share Posted July 17, 2017 5 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said: That was a terrible offer given the circumstances. To make matters worse, Bruce who has a reputation for saving his own ass, puts out a statement carefully worded to satisfy the dummies and make his starting QB look greedy prior to the season. He couldn't even take it on the chin for a few months and spill the beans later. Here's the thing about Bruce. As the guy in charge, have you EVER seen him take any blame for anything onto himself whether deserved or not? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgundy Yoda Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 1 minute ago, PartyPosse said: The point is he has enough confidence in himself to play year by year and take the max dollar value but not enough confidence in himself to be productive enough to see the duration of the contract which, the way so many see it, would be an absolute bargain in 4 years so why would we even entertain the notion of cutting him? I think it's obvious it's not all about the money, the relationship is clearly damaged so it goes deeper than just dollar signs. Also, you don't cut a quarterback like Kirk, that would be a catastrophic PR move and the front office is at least smart enough to know that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Momma There Goes That Man Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 56 minutes ago, returnofthefunbunch said: Here's a crazy idea...why don't we wait to see how Kirk plays this year. If he plays great, shows progress, and we make the playoffs, then lets open up Snyder's bank account to sign him. If, however, he puts up big yards, but we don't win many games, then it proves we need much more than a qb, so paying him big money wouldn't really be justified. I don't have a problem with how things were handled through all this. so if the team sucks around a prolific passer your solution is to let the prolific passer go instead of building the rest of the team up? When the rest of the team is improved but they can't win because there is no QB I guess means you need more than a good defense and running game. So you advise burning it to the ground so you can start over with a good QB? What? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gibbit Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 Kirk isn't going to sign a ltd until all this guaranteed tag money is over and done with. If we tag him next year, LTD will probably happen the following year. You can say its all about the money, but hes probably just going on the advice of his agent handling this for him. Its why teams don't Tag QBs....Long term security? Give me 20 mil and I will be secure for a long long time Bruce's memo was dumb unless he ok'd it with Kirks side....which maybe he was implying with the face to face weekend part? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fjblair Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 Over time it has become clear this is as much about Cousins and his agent as it is about the Redskins front office. I don't have an issue with either side, it is what it is. Lots on the line this season. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riggo'sRangers Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 9 minutes ago, clskinsfan said: I am actually happy about this. I was one of the few who wasnt ecstatic about the prospect of making Cousins the highest paid player in NFL history. Lets see how Cousins does this year against a MUCH tougher schedule and with new weapons. If he can improve his TD%, INT% and actually make a play in the red zone I will be onboard for paying the man a monster deal next year. You are not alone in these thoughts, trust me. Hail Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BatteredFanSyndrome Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 Just now, TK said: Here's the thing about Bruce. As the guy in charge, have you EVER seen him take any blame for anything onto himself whether deserved or not? Exactly. His reputation is that of a guy only out to make himself look good. One would think he would be self aware enough to not prove everyone right promptly at 4:01. It's really sad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carex Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 7 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said: Dude, he has no choice but to take our money. Just stop already. you don't have to sign the tender. Norman never signed his with Carolina Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peregrine Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 4 minutes ago, clskinsfan said: 53 million at signng and 72 Million injury guarantee and Cousins turned it down. You all can say it is Bruce or whoever. But for Cousins it most certainly WAS ALL ABOUT THE MONEY. So, making 53 million over the next 2 years instead of 53 million the next 2 years means its all about the money? That makes NO sense! You JUST said, the Redskins offered him a huge amount of money, but THEN you contradicted yourself 10 words later by saying Cousins turned it down because it was all about the money. Either you have to admit the Redskins made a low offer, or, its NOT about the money. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clskinsfan Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 Just now, BatteredFanSyndrome said: No, I'm sure it has more to do with getting yanked around by this douchebag you worship. And then maybe it has to do with the offer not being market, like every knowledgeable person has indicated. So I worship a douchebag because he offered your beloved middle of the league starting QB THE MOST GUARANTEED MONEY AT SIGNING IN NFL HISTORY? Yet that isnt market value? Number one i worship no man. Number two. Suck it up. Or dont and find another team to follow. The rest of us will be better off not having to listen to you whine for the next 7 months. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TK Posted July 17, 2017 Author Share Posted July 17, 2017 8 minutes ago, Peregrine said: You know the other very interesting thing it shows us? A good franchise, a good negotiator, a good president makes employees feel valued and creates an environment where they dont WANT to be somewhere else. They paint a vision of a future that others WANT to be a part of. You just described Scot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wildbunny Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 Now I know why I needed some time off this site. I can clearly see the oint in circular arguments from TK here as well... But it's interesting to note in the old thread that people are getting eager to know the numbers the Redskins have thrown to Kirk. And then blame Bruce for giving them... Honestly, I really doubt how will that play in 2018 as it probably won't have much impact. FO time is done, now it's up to Jay's show. Which is the only one that really matters in the NFL. I've come ut with this idea back in 2016 that maybe Kirk was trying to play with the system, and I hardly can blame him for playing within the rules. What's wrong it going with the tag for 3 years and sign the LTD right after when you have no other options? Kirk is just betting on himself once again and his non injury history in the league. (Honestly who expects him to be hit by a CEI or a season long injury? almost nobody thanks, he's not Romo or Manning, he's quite tough.) We're the ones starting dramas when there's nothing like it really. Both parts are playing, one his winning, for now, the other is losing. And Bruce giving nubers isn't really like throwing Kirk under the bus, more of a statement, that he acknowledged that Kirk wants to beat the system. It will be interesting to see how this is seen throughout the other NFL players in the upcoming years and how the NFL and NFLPA will deal with such kind of things when they'll have to renegotiate. Move on guys. He's our QB, and there's nothing wrong in what happened. On both side of the negotiations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Momma There Goes That Man Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 Just now, Burgundy Yoda said: I think it's obvious it's not all about the money, the relationship is clearly damaged so it goes deeper than just dollar signs. Also, you don't cut a quarterback like Kirk, that would be a catastrophic PR move and the front office is at least smart enough to know that. Yes, relationships are real. Kirk should feel insulted because we stretched this BS out for 2 years and made it clear we don't believe he is the guy. This is why we should have locked him up after 2015 because it would have signaled we believed in him but instead we chose to hand him our nuts in jar and spent two years asking politely if we could have them back Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dont Taze Me Bro Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 Just now, Peregrine said: What a load of bull. That release was pathetic. First, rather than just saying "We tried to make a LTD work out, we couldnt, but hes a valued player and we look forward to a great season and to try hard for a LTD next year!", he tried to throw Kirk under the bus. Do you think he appreciates the attempt to make him look greedy? No, Bruce just burned the best bridge we've had in decades. Second, 53 million guaranteed is good? Hes going to make that the next 2 years because of the tags! Its a 0% increase. If your boss says "You hold all the cards, Option AL:You can make $100k this year, and $100k next year, and then chose whether you want to keep working with us, OR a better company. Option B, what we are offering you, is you can make $100k this year, and $100k next year, and then after that we might just cut you, or keep you, but you dont have any choices of other companies." Third, the Redskins did NOT make ANY second efforts in over 2 MONTHS! So, you really want a guy, and you give a horrible first offer, and he says no, and you dont think to come back with a better offer? What is this, amateur hour? I sell houses for a living. I cant imagine how stupid an agent would have to be to really want a house and say "Well, they said no on that lowball offer on that house you really want, rather than improving our offer, lets just wait 2 months and then blame them, and not get the house". Again, because I sell houses for a living, Ive done EXACTLY what Kirks agent did, because its the RIGHT thing to do. I had someone lowball a house. We told them no thanks, and never responded. Because we held the cards, and it was a lowball offer. They came back and offered higher, then we went to work, and they got the house. Kirk would be an absolute idiot to take the deal, and I dont want an idiot as our QB. I prefer the smart ones. First, before you have a stroke, calm down. I think you and others are looking into this way more than it is. I don't see it as making Kirk look greedy, Kirk didn't want the deal, he wants to maximize his earnings, nothing wrong with that. Second, yes $53 million guaranteed is great, considering it's the most in NFL history offered to a QB. I never said I expected Kirk to sign the contract or that he was doing the wrong thing. I called it last year when he was so eager to sign the FT and was making it out to be a great thing that it wouldn't surprise me if he did it again next year (this season) and maximize his total revenue. That still doesn't mean that long term, the contract was a **** contract, cause it wasn't. Third, Kirk's side never even counter offered or made any single effort since May 2nd. Stop acting like this is one sided, it's not. They obviously had no intentions of signing a LTD and didn't even bother with a counter offer or any negotiations. Fourth, you sell houses.............we get it and where did I say Kirk was anywhere at fault? I didn't. But neither side is imo. Why should the front office offer any more than what they did this year? Why offer him say $28 million/yr average annual salary instead of the $24.5 mil/yr (between Palmer and Lucks) they did? There is a cap and it will increase next year. Kirk is happy with his FT earnings. They save 3.5 mil this year and offer him or match next year and start paying then, why pay now? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clskinsfan Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 1 minute ago, Peregrine said: So, making 53 million over the next 2 years instead of 53 million the next 2 years means its all about the money? That makes NO sense! You JUST said, the Redskins offered him a huge amount of money, but THEN you contradicted yourself 10 words later by saying Cousins turned it down because it was all about the money. Either you have to admit the Redskins made a low offer, or, its NOT about the money. He just turned down THE MOST GUARANTEED MONEY IN NFL HISTORY at signing. Call it whatever you want. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbias Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 14 minutes ago, PartyPosse said: Soooo basically it's all about money for him. Why wouldn't it be about the money? Think about it. The only form of Job security in the NFL is guaranteed money. Coaches, schemes and supporting cast can all change within an season. The only absolute job stability for a player is guaranteed money. That's why players hate the Franchise tag so much. There's no commitment/stability in those deals. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conn Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 8 minutes ago, clskinsfan said: 53 million at signng and 72 Million injury guarantee and Cousins turned it down. You all can say it is Bruce or whoever. But for Cousins it most certainly WAS ALL ABOUT THE MONEY. You're contradicting yourself. If that is a great offer, then it's not about the money, its about not signing with this team, period. If it's not a good offer, then why would he sign it anyways? But at least then you could argue it's all about the money. But you can't have it both ways. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbias Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 1 minute ago, clskinsfan said: He just turned down THE MOST GUARANTEED MONEY IN NFL HISTORY at signing. Call it whatever you want. With the franchise tag already signed he was already guaranteed $24M, so technically he turned down an extension that guaranteed him an additional $29M. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PartyPosse Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 4 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said: Dude, he has no choice but to take our money. Just stop already. What are you talking about?? He didn't have to sign the tag. If he didn't want to be here he could have not signed and forced the team to either rescind the tag, trade him or let him rot at home for the year. It would have been stupid to turn down that kind of dough though, I get that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Est.1974 Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 Just now, Unbias said: That's why players hate the Franchise tag so much. There's no commitment/stability in those deals. Not Kirk, he would prefer to be contracted on a year by year basis Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinsinparadise Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 As for the contract, the fully guaranteed sum is similar to what he'd get anyway in the next two years on the tags and the exit ramp is plain as day. Guaranteed for injury figures don't preclude that exit ramp, the injury sums are almost meaningless. The Redskins bragging about their last offer was in May. Really? If i were Kirk's agent id ignore that exit ramp offer, too. Kirks side has the leverage they dont have to negotiate against themselves. According to some who have covered this, Kirk's agent has made it clear they dont want an exit ramp driven deal. The Redskins had 2.5 months to present a new offer and by their own admission they didnt do it. But the real kicker to me is this. Their whole narrative about 2018 is driven by all the good will they were supposedly building with kirk and his agent. So Bruce just goes and stomps on that with a press release that i take as...kirk and his agent are greedy, we the front office are the good guys. So fans please rally behind us and call out Kirk this season for his "greed". The saddest part for me is they clearly thought it was a smart move. Talk about showcasing in front of us what they have been accused of behind the scenes which is aggravating Kirk and his agent 2 years in a row where they have built little if any good will. Keim basically in an article said Kirk was done with the FO right until the Spring and at that point the FO started to turn the tide with showing some love. Well, i guess the FO is back to their old ways with Kirk and this latest gambit might be the coup de gras to lose him. If the narrative that some put forward has merit that kirk wants out because the FO doesnt believe in him enough and have his back. Then this move basically helps shove him out the door. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Burgundy Yoda Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 2 minutes ago, Momma There Goes That Man said: Yes, relationships are real. Kirk should feel insulted because we stretched this BS out for 2 years and made it clear we don't believe he is the guy. This is why we should have locked him up after 2015 because it would have signaled we believed in him but instead we chose to hand him our nuts in jar and spent two years asking politely if we could have them back Man, the contract we could have signed him for in 2015 would have looked beautiful today. This is why total football minds need to be at the top and not just rich guys in suits. I knew Kirk was good after the 2015 season, Mike Shanahan and Kyle Shanahan knew it before even then, but we are stuck in an unfortunate situation where we have a contract guy who works with numbers trying to determine this guys worth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BoFriedmanJr Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 Quote Grant PaulsenVerified account @granthpaulsen Remember when the #Redskins said they would pay Kirk Cousins in 2016 if he played well in 2015. It's 2017 now. ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unbias Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 Just now, UK SKINS FAN '74 said: Not Kirk, he would prefer to be contracted on a year by year basis No doubt Kirk has approached the cap differently than any player. He's constantly bet on himself and it's paid off. Aside from Revis I've never seen a guy max. his earnings quite like this in the NFL. Good for him. He's taken the risk and deserves the rewards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
clskinsfan Posted July 17, 2017 Share Posted July 17, 2017 Just now, Unbias said: With the franchise tag already signed he was already guaranteed $24M, so technically he turned down an extension that guaranteed him an additional $29M. No. He turned down 48 Million in case of injury. I am fine with it. Lets see how it plays out. If Kirk plays great then we transition him and match any offer. If Kirk just signs the transition than we trade him next year for a good package. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.