Will Cousins Play For The Skins In 2018

[bowhunter]

39 minutes ago, markmills67 said:

I have been saying that the Redskins FO should have given cousin's an offer by now, is there any reason at all why both parties can't get a LTD signed now. Why would the powers that be at the Redskins not want this sorted so that we can make plan's for the rest of the team. 

 

HTTR 

I asked a similar question earlier about why we haven't Zach Brown yet, was told that we would have to wait until the 2018 league year because bonuses would also count against 2017 dollars. I don't know if the same rules apply to tagged players. 

[Voice_of_Reason]

13 hours ago, SkinsFTW said:

 

Cousins had Brees beat in his stadium with nowhere near the talent Brees has on offense, until our defense lost the game and the refs and Grudens playcalling assisted.

 

By the way, Brees was 7 and 9 the past 3 years until actual talent was added to the roster.

 

And Brees threw 2 Ints today. If this was the Redskins the story wouldn't be that Cousins brought the Redskins back and should have won. It would be about those 2 picks.

This is very true. Brees could not over-come a ridiculously bad defense for a couple of years. And Gruden really screwed the pooch in that game at the end.  You don't give Brees another opportunity.  You just don't.  Period.  He's too good, and he's done it at the end of games too consistently over a long period of time.  He's just so good at it.  

 

Brees thew 2 INTs yesterday.

 

BUT.  When it mattered most, he did what HOF QBs do.  He drove the team the length of the field, and got the points they needed to win the game. And he, cool as a cucumber, threw a PERFECT pass on 4th and 10 to a guy who had 6 catches all year (or something like that) for the most critical first down of the game. 

 

Then the defense blew it in one of the most remarkable "blew its" I've ever seen.  

 

Cousins isn't Brees.  He just isn't.  And that's fine.  The guy is a sure-fire, first ballot HOF, SB winning QB.  And, FWIW, that team is going to be BETTER next year.  He'll have a few more shots at another SB.  

 

Cousins is really good.  He's not Brees.  

 

The question is, are the 'Skins better of with Cousins or without Cousins?  I say better off with Cousins.  Because you can win with competent QB play and a good team.  

 

In order to overcome Bortles, you have to have the #1/#2 defense in the league.  If you are going to have that, then you can win with anybody.  Just ask Baltimore.  They won a SB with Trent freaking Dilfer.  

 

The 'Skins don't have that defense.  So you need a very good QB, good offensive skill position players, and a good defense.  You need all of it or you are going to end up 8-8 every year.

[wit33]

I thought even Hall of Fame QBs needed great defense and supporting cast? This discussion dominated the thread a few weeks ago. Which is it people?

 

***Now maybe this Is  different people discussing various topics within this thread (most likely)

 

With that said, I do believe the NFL is changing and there are 20 (random number, but a good amount) or so QBs that can play positive role in a team advancing to the playoffs and in the playoffs. 

 

***A franchises goal should be “at bats” in the post season. Let a little bit of luck, health, scheme and play take you all the way. 

 

— The truly elite QBs are excused from the table

 

Side Note—- the Skins defense if Jags place would’ve been blamed for blowing a big lead versus the Steelers in this thread. The stat monsters would’ve pointed to Big Ben throwing for 5Tds and nearly 500 yards, all the while giving up 42 points. The DVOA system crashing as a result. 

 

Each game is its own entity. 

[goskins10]

19 hours ago, KDawg said:

So..

 

I don’t think he’s saying Bortles is as good as Kirk. Just not  bad as many here make him out to be.

 

I mean, even watching them play I don’t see the difference between them from the high opinion most here have of Kirk (for the most part deserved) and a bottom of the barrel QB as some here believe Bortles is.

 

Im not sure if that’s encouraging for Bortles or damning for Kirk.

 

But I don’t love that comparison myself. I’m more apt to Cousins = Romo without injuries comparisons.

 

The words used that I was responding to were that Kirk is "marginally better." Sorry, but that's just not true. Even the most basic review of statistics and results show that.

 

I tend to agree with the Romo reference. He was a better QB than he got credit for as dallast never really gave him the tools he needed to really be successful - sound familiar? And the moniker of choke artist was also undeserved. He had 30 game winning drives in his career. That's good for 18th all time. Again, sound familiar? Overall, Kirk is a very good, but not at this time great QB. That's exactly where Romo was most of his career. 

 

18 hours ago, jschuck12001 said:

 

Kirk Has

385 more passing yards per year than Bortles since 2015

.66 more passing TD's per year than Bortles since 2015

3.67 less INT's per year than Bortles since 2015

 

Kirks numbers are better but it's not night and day as you make it seem.

 

Now if Kirk threw for 700 or more yards per year on avg then I would say that's quite a margin.

If he threw for 5+ more TD's per year then I would say that moves the needle.

If he threw 5 less INT's per year I would also say that's a solid gap.

 

I'm using basic stats, If you have to go to secondary stats to prove your case then maybe there's no case.

 

 

 

So comp %, and QBR are secondary stats?? TDs, yds, and Int are the same you used. Are they now secondary?  Also, you don't think 3.67 Ints less is not a big difference? That's almost 4 more ints a years! 

 

More importantly, the stats you posted were out of context ignoring that they were for entire 8 games or 1/2 season more playing time which was the biggest part of the point. You took one guy who started 41 games and made a direct comparison against the statistics from someone who played 49 games during that same time. Hard to add to your stats sitting on the bench. 

 

[Skins199021]

What makes no sense to me is that many in favor of Kirk admit he isn't really good enough to carry a team, but then want to sign him to a ridiculous contract to keep him, making it impossible to build the team around him to try and win.

 

Don't kid yourselves, Cousins is only signing a 36 mil tag or something of at least 23+ mill per season..... Not worth it, he is simply not an elite QB don't pay him like one. He is Andy Dalton, with a worse record.

 

 

[bowhunter]

7 minutes ago, Skins199021 said:

What makes no sense to me is that many in favor of Kirk admit he isn't really good enough to carry a team, but then want to sign him to a ridiculous contract to keep him, making it impossible to build the team around him to try and win.

 

Don't kid yourselves, Cousins is only signing a 36 mil tag or something of at least 23+ mill per season..... Not worth it, he is simply not an elite QB don't pay him like one. He is Andy Dalton, with a worse record.

 

 

I agree with your points wholeheartedly, but I'd sign him pretty quickly if his price tag is "only" $23m/yr. He's good, and $23 is a fair price for what he brings. That figure will allow plenty of room to sign a few key free agents and keep our #1 pick to spend on a guy like Vita.

[Skinsinparadise]

2 hours ago, bobandweave said:

 

So we aren't going to get the expected results of the playoffs even if he comes back. Which leaves the team building formula to me saying they need to move on from Cousins only because of the contract not because he isn't good but they aren't ready for him yet, and for this off season build the rest of the team up and take a shot at a QB in the draft. Well two of them actually. Hope that the drafted QB becomes good and the rest of the team becomes good around the same time. 

 

 

 

I'd feel much more comfortable with this if they had the first pick or 2nd pick in the draft.  The guy they take at 13, Rudolph or whomever is more likely to fail than succeed. 

 

Yeah they can patiently keep throwing arrows at the draft board and over time maybe they finally get it right.  But if Dan-Bruce are potentially panicky now about people not showing up to games and TV ratings at all time lows -- if that's so, its tough for me to imagine that they are going to try to sell the fan base on a rebuild and they stay patient with it. 

 

The sad-ironic part of that for an organization that supposedly cares about PR -- they are at the mercy of their own typical ho hum front office structures that many fans scoff at let alone trust a rebuild from scratch brought to us by Doug and Bruce. 

 

My point is you've been pushing letting Kirk go.  You might get you wish on that.  I doubt though you are going to get the Plan B scenario you outlined.  I bet if Kirk is gone -- some splashy replacement is in store, trade for a veteran or maybe sign Bradford.  And the cap savings isn't ultimately going to be that great.  Bradford I bet gets over 20.  Alex Smith is a FA the following season --  I think it was Joel Cory who said if Smith is traded it likely comes with a contract extension -- Smith, too will likely be over 20 million. 

 

I found it interesting that Albert Breer said recently that the Redskins fallback in 2017 was Mike Glennon.  Glennon was arguably the top QB FA available.  So at least in 2017 they were toying with replacing Kirk if he left with another FA -- if Breer is correct. 

[Fat Stupid Loser]

3 minutes ago, bowhunter said:

I agree with your points wholeheartedly, but I'd sign him pretty quickly if his price tag is "only" $23m/yr. He's good, and $23 is a fair price for what he brings. That figure will allow plenty of room to sign a few key free agents and keep our #1 pick to spend on a guy like Vita.

The part I don't get is 23 will allow plenty of room but 27 won't?  We really think 4 million a year in the NFL will hamstring a team?

[CommanderDOOM]

5 hours ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

And to date he has done nothing to show that he is more than an average head coach. 

Except turn KC into a good qb. Before injuries on D, we were a team to be feared. His scheme has guys running wide open. We were right there with some pretty good teams.

4 hours ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

Again nobody wants to address the terrible situation Kirk finds himself in.

What's that, the same system for the past 5 years with probowlers protecting him.

2 hours ago, Fat Stupid Loser said:

But haven't we been trying to do this with just some guy at QB since 1992?  

Up until a few years ago we were the off-season champs, trading away picks for jags, going thru HC's every other year.

2 hours ago, markmills67 said:

...why....

Takes 2 to tango and cash will probably not be an issue lest KC asks for 27+.  But KC wouldn't do that right? He knows as well as us fans do that the FO would be incapable of putting a championship level team around him.

2 hours ago, KDawg said:

 

Franchising him would frustrate me more than seeing him walk. 

 

Gotta talk. Ask him what it will take. He will say he wants to see what FA holds. Would a man who wanted to be here say this??? If the FO is like some of us and willing to pay anything, you transition. If he doesn't want to be here he plays it like he has the last 2 years and we have another year with him. We are in a **** situation as I believe KC has been trying to get a Ltd from us. Maybe we could play Elway against Coughlin and get a 2nd or 1st.

 

2 hours ago, Fat Stupid Loser said:

Yep. Can't win the big game...yada.....

2010

[purbeast]

29 minutes ago, Fat Stupid Loser said:

The part I don't get is 23 will allow plenty of room but 27 won't?  We really think 4 million a year in the NFL will hamstring a team?

I've just started completely ignoring posts where people compare what he is going to get paid to where he ranks as a QB in the NFL.  It's made browsing and posting in this thread a lot more enjoyable lol.

[JSSkinz]

32 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

 

The words used that I was responding to were that Kirk is "marginally better." Sorry, but that's just not true. Even the most basic review of statistics and results show that.

 

I tend to agree with the Romo reference. He was a better QB than he got credit for as dallast never really gave him the tools he needed to really be successful - sound familiar? And the moniker of choke artist was also undeserved. He had 30 game winning drives in his career. That's good for 18th all time. Again, sound familiar? Overall, Kirk is a very good, but not at this time great QB. That's exactly where Romo was most of his career. 

 

 

 

So comp %, and QBR are secondary stats?? TDs, yds, and Int are the same you used. Are they now secondary?  Also, you don't think 3.67 Ints less is not a big difference? That's almost 4 more ints a years! 

 

More importantly, the stats you posted were out of context ignoring that they were for entire 8 games or 1/2 season more playing time which was the biggest part of the point. You took one guy who started 41 games and made a direct comparison against the statistics from someone who played 49 games during that same time. Hard to add to your stats sitting on the bench. 

 

 

My last response was using your stats from 2015 - 2017 so its apples to apples, and no I still do not see the separation in statistics that you see.

 

A QB that throws for 4500 yards and one who throws for 4200 is marginal separation.

 

A QB that throws 10 INT's instead of 13 is marginal separation.

 

The TD's are about the same so no need to even go there.

 

 

I really don't want to go back and forth on this, I will never see those margins as being anything substantial and I don't know how anyone could.

 

 

 

 

[bowhunter]

26 minutes ago, purbeast said:

I've just started completely ignoring posts where people compare what he is going to get paid to where he ranks as a QB in the NFL.  It's made browsing and posting in this thread a lot more enjoyable lol.

Sorry @purbeast I quoted the wrong post. Please ignore

56 minutes ago, Fat Stupid Loser said:

The part I don't get is 23 will allow plenty of room but 27 won't?  We really think 4 million a year in the NFL will hamstring a team?

What was Zach Browns salary this year? Was he a significant part of any improvements to our D?

[bobandweave]

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I'd feel much more comfortable with this if they had the first pick or 2nd pick in the draft.  The guy they take at 13, Rudolph or whomever is more likely to fail than succeed. 

 

The QB class seems deep this year. I don't think anyone should be thinking that at 13 we can't find ourselves a QB. The teams picking before us in this random goofy draft prediction post

 

https://www.landof10.com/big-ten/nfl-mock-draft-2018-first-round-projections-top-players-2018-nfl-draft-order-january-15

 

Shows 3 QBs - Darnold, Mayfield, Nelson 

 

Taken before our turn.

 

Now you figure if either the Browns or Broncos or Jets pick up Cousins which is likely if he leaves us then to me it would be asinine for that team to draft a QB with a top 12 pick the same year. I'm a huge fan of drafting two QBs if you draft one but a team that locks up Cousins and takes a top 12 pick QB in the draft would be epic in the level of stupid to me and almost guaranteed not to happen.

 

So considering all of that the Redskins should be looking at the 3rd QB pick off the board if one team drops out of the market in a year that many are saying that 5 or 6 QBs will go first round. To me if 5 or 6 QBs are worthy of a first round pick it's a very deep QB class. Not on par with 83 but definitely not 2013.

 

This is not to turn into a discussion about what you or I or anyone thinks about these college guys and their abilities or worthiness of a first round pick. I point this out since you said we needed to be the top pick or the second pick to feel comfortable drafting a QB which I don't agree with because it's happening this year. Other years sure you may be right, not this year. 

 

Quote

 

Yeah they can patiently keep throwing arrows at the draft board and over time maybe they finally get it right.  But if Dan-Bruce are potentially panicky now about people not showing up to games and TV ratings at all time lows -- if that's so, its tough for me to imagine that they are going to try to sell the fan base on a rebuild and they stay patient with it. 

 

What's so difficult to sell? A player leaves the team that the team wanted to keep. The team knew he wanted too much money and let him go. That message on any other team likely would be put out as a negative against the player being Greedy not the team being horrible.

 

Next news headline is the team is starting off a fresh new season with a new player. Hip Hip Hooray go buy a jersey everyone.

 

That type of thing happens across the league year after year. If people stop following the club because Kirk left I say oh well. Truth is if he stays he's going to leave eventually anyway. They all leave. Whats the big deal about that and what is so hard to sell about this? 

 

 

Quote

 

The sad-ironic part of that for an organization that supposedly cares about PR -- they are at the mercy of their own typical ho hum front office structures that many fans scoff at let alone trust a rebuild from scratch brought to us by Doug and Bruce. 

 

The issue here is that the front office has done so much bad that the reputation is crap. Cousins doesn't change that at all. Here's a guess about this off season. The butt hole reporters and papers will trash the Redskins when Terrell Pryor re-signs with the Browns. They will say how bad we are, how smart the Browns are to sign him back, how good he is yada yada yada.

 

Every year the punks like Florrio trash this team because they can and people eat it up. Truth is there is one fan base that likes the Redskins and 31 others that don't. Kirk or no Kirk that's not changing. Its not as bad as 1 vs. 100 like the game show but in reality its 1 vs 31 every year. 

 

It's not easy being a Redskins fan, then again it's not easy being a fan of most of the NFL teams the last 20 years not named the Patriots. If this bothers you then become a front running fan, it's easier

 

 

Quote

 

My point is you've been pushing letting Kirk go.  You might get you wish on that.  I doubt though you are going to get the Plan B scenario you outlined.  I bet if Kirk is gone -- some splashy replacement is in store, trade for a veteran or maybe sign Bradford.  And the cap savings isn't ultimately going to be that great.  Bradford I bet gets over 20.  Alex Smith is a FA the following season --  I think it was Joel Cory who said if Smith is traded it likely comes with a contract extension -- Smith, too will likely be over 20 million. 

 

Your doubt is worth as much as my suggesting as soon as the Chiefs were eliminated that we go out and sign Alex Smith. Both of us could be right, or wrong and time will tell. Both opinions mean nothing. We are just two fans looking at the glass half empty and half full

 

I find it interesting that you think suggesting other options other then making Cousins the highest paid QB in the NFL to be "pushing him to go" when all I want is the Redskins to win and don't really care who is the QB.

 

I've been saying all along that those saying "Kirk or burn it to the ground" aren't using their imaginations enough here. Really if the team won 10 games next season and it's QB was some guy named Rufus I wouldn't care any less about that then if the QBs name was Kirk. Team first over player is how I see things. I like some of the players and I like Kirk but a man's got to do what he has to do. If that means Kirk chases big money over loyalty I don't hate him for that. That's business. 

[Hail4Life]

Let Kirk walk...and re-sign RG3.  I'm sure he would sign on the cheap and that would leave plenty of cap room to put weapons around him.  He is still young and he can throw really really far.

[Skins199021]

The fact is Kirk isn't a top 5 QB, so he shouldn't be paid like one, or given the most expensive contract to date. I don't care what Carr got... that was a mistake, which wouldn't justify us to make a mistake.

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour ago, bobandweave said:

 

The QB class seems deep this year. I don't think anyone should be thinking that at 13 we can't find ourselves a QB. The teams picking before us in this random goofy draft prediction post

 

Now you figure if either the Browns or Broncos or Jets pick up Cousins which is likely if he leaves us then to me it would be asinine for that team to draft a QB with a top 12 pick the same year. I'm a huge fan of drafting two QBs if you draft one but a team that locks up Cousins and takes a top 12 pick QB in the draft would be epic in the level of stupid to me and almost guaranteed not to happen.

 

So considering all of that the Redskins should be looking at the 3rd QB pick off the board

 

D. Watson and Mahomes were mostly late first-2nd rounders in mocks at this time.  The hyped QBs typically end up higher than expected on draft day -- its practically a cliche.  Heck I was reading an article the other day from a NY reporter saying the Jets at #6 think they may have to trade up to get Josh Allen -- let alone the dude is going to be there at 13.  You never know but its unlikely. 

 

You got some questions about Allen-Darnold let alone we don't have to worry about a QB who is 4th-6th best in the draft that fall to us.  There isn't a guy with an Andrew Luck type of buzz in that mix at the top of the draft let alone the next tier.

 

I live in South Florida and I'd say I wouldn't sleep on the Dolphins take one if one they like drops.   Also a team like the Cardinals can easily make a trade and pick ahead of us.  That happened in last year's draft -- why not this time?

 

1 hour ago, bobandweave said:

 

What's so difficult to sell? A player leaves the team that the team wanted to keep. The team knew he wanted too much money and let him go. That message on any other team likely would be put out as a negative against the player being Greedy not the team being horrible.

 

Next news headline is the team is starting off a fresh new season with a new player. Hip Hip Hooray go buy a jersey everyone.

 

 

 

That narrative gets you excited, that's cool.   But its not hard to tell if you look at poll after poll done on the subject that the typical fan doesn't share the view that the FO did all they can here and or that Kirk is greedy -- let alone hey lets see who Bruce-Doug wants in the draft -- its going to be fun to watch and we can't wait to see it unfold.   JP Finlay-Tander among others like talking about the PR fallout if this happening if Kirk leaves -- ditto as Finlay says which is clear to him via the feedback he gets that the fan base doesn't care for this FO.   So yeah perception wise I don't think most of the fan base buys anymore into the old school Dan Snyder drill of we are turning a new leaf and isn't that exciting.  That goes double for QB.   The Redskins FO has traditionally been awful at judging QBs in the draft.  In their defense, the odds are against anyone for getting it right. 

 

1 hour ago, bobandweave said:

. If people stop following the club because Kirk left I say oh well. Truth is if he stays he's going to leave eventually anyway. They all leave. Whats the big deal about that and what is so hard to sell about this? 

 

 

If you don't see the difference about this situation versus the run of the mill FA.  Then, yeah I understand why you think its shoulders shrug, whatever. 

 

1 hour ago, bobandweave said:

 

The issue here is that the front office has done so much bad that the reputation is crap. Cousins doesn't change that at all.

 

It's the main feature of the movie.  And Cousins doesn't change that he reinforces it if he leaves.

 

1 hour ago, bobandweave said:

 

I find it interesting that you think suggesting other options other then making Cousins the highest paid QB in the NFL to be "pushing him to go" when all I want is the Redskins to win and don't really care who is the QB.

 

 Are you referring to another post I made?  I don't get the point on your end or for that matter what you are referring to on my end.  If I am reading what you are saying is that I just care about Kirk and you smartly have the bigger picture in mind since you just care about the Redskins?

 

1 hour ago, bobandweave said:

 

I've been saying all along that those saying "Kirk or burn it to the ground" aren't using their imaginations enough here. Really if the team won 10 games next season and it's QB was some guy named Rufus I wouldn't care any less about that then if the QBs name was Kirk. Team first over player is how I see things. 

 

It's an insulting point.  EVERY person here (maybe with the exception of one) just want to win and can care less with whom.  I think its just as easy if not easier to argue that the anti-Kirk people are more driven by the player versus the team than the pro-Kirk people have been.  Every time Kirk had a bad game last season, the Kirk threads were practically a party for some of the anti-Kirk people to bask and dwell in the loss. 

 

The idea of letting the franchise QB go is the anomaly not the norm.  It's not like hey what fan base doesn't embrace losing their franchise QB?   The abnormal position is hey let the dude go and lets start over -- now that's cool, that's exciting.

 

I love the draft almost as much as the NFL season.  I recall the QB search here very very well.  Every step of the way.  I recall the buzz.  I recall the different QBs talked about in each draft.   The stuff here that people refer to as no big deal, of course we have a good shot at landing a franchise QB at 13 -- it makes me cringe.  Because I recall every dance. 

 

People repackaging the old tactics from Heath Shuler on of hey can't wait till the draft -- watch us get our guy -- and selling it as fresh and new.  To me its old and stale and smells of failure.   Yeah the blind squirrel can find an acorn is in play.  But for me to get excited about it -- not happening.  And it has ZERO to do with any personal fascination with Kirk.  It's about a fascination about the QB position and over the years becoming more impressed with how hard it is to find that guy.  The fact that QB salaries are rising higher and higher -- isn't a function of the idea that finding QBs are easier and easier.  That would make no sense.  It's because these guys are so hard to find.

 

 

[Fat Stupid Loser]

1 hour ago, bowhunter said:

Sorry @purbeast I quoted the wrong post. Please ignore

What was Zach Browns salary this year? Was he a significant part of any improvements to our D?

And we had no problem paying him with Kirk's 24M salary. Nor did we have trouble paying Pryor 6 or 8, whatever it was. And he wasn't worth vet minimum. Paying Kirk 27 effects nothing. We will still have plenty of money to waste on painfully average D lineman, project receivers and mouthy CBs. I know this, cause we are already doing it.

[skinny21]

8 minutes ago, Skins199021 said:

The fact is Kirk isn't a top 5 QB, so he shouldn't be paid like one, or given the most expensive contract to date. I don't care what Carr got... that was a mistake, which wouldn't justify us to make a mistake.

Each time I consider responding to your posts, I find myself thinking you really need/ought to go back and read through the thread.  I say this because your posts seem to be unintentional trolling.  

 

 

If the team lets Cousins walk (or he so chooses), I’m thinking I’d rather them not be big players in FA.  Focus on the draft and roll over the cap so that when/if we do find ourselves a promising young qb, we have a young (hopefully fairly talented) roster, and can then go searching for missing pieces in FA.  It would also help us in terms of extending guys like Crowder, Scherff and Smith.  

 

 

 

[Skins199021]

1 minute ago, skinny21 said:

Each time I consider responding to your posts, I find myself thinking you really need/ought to go back and read through the thread.  I say this because your posts seem to be unintentional trolling.  

 

 

If the team lets Cousins walk (or he so chooses), I’m thinking I’d rather them not be big players in FA.  Focus on the draft and roll over the cap so that when/if we do find ourselves a promising young qb, we have a young (hopefully fairly talented) roster, and can then go searching for missing pieces in FA.  It would also help us in terms of extending guys like Crowder, Scherff and Smith.  

 

 

 

Trolling? How for stating my position on the situation?

 

We should always focus on the draft, but many skins fans have this funny notion that we should always sit out FA. No we just need our FO to sit out on overpaying guys that are 29-30 years old (that isn't a reference to Cousins FYI)

 

In Kirk's case the value proposition of making him a top 3 paid NFL QB in the league makes absolutely no sense. He is not worth taking that high of a % of our (or any team's salary cap up. 

 

We made a mistake by not signing KC to a longterm contract at a reasonable price when we had the chance. It wouldn't make sense to compound that mistake by completely overpaying him now.

[Voice_of_Reason]

2 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

My point is you've been pushing letting Kirk go.  You might get you wish on that.  I doubt though you are going to get the Plan B scenario you outlined.  I bet if Kirk is gone -- some splashy replacement is in store, trade for a veteran or maybe sign Bradford.  And the cap savings isn't ultimately going to be that great.  Bradford I bet gets over 20.  Alex Smith is a FA the following season --  I think it was Joel Cory who said if Smith is traded it likely comes with a contract extension -- Smith, too will likely be over 20 million. 

If Cousins is gone, I am willing to bet really good money that the starter at the beginning of the season is Colt McCoy.  I think Jay loves him, and is going to give him another opportunity.  For better or worse, I think that's the backup plan.  

 

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

2 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

If Cousins is gone, I am willing to bet really good money that the starter at the beginning of the season is Colt McCoy.  I think Jay loves him, and is going to give him another opportunity.  For better or worse, I think that's the backup plan.  

 

 

 

 

It might be.  My point on that front was Breer (who typically doesn't just throw stuff against the wall) said Glennon (not Mccoy) was their plan B in 2017 if Kirk left.  I mean maybe they just loved Glennon and it was specific to him.  Otherwise, it makes me pause that Colt is the guy they are going to ride with.

 

 

[purbeast]

We will be in for a fun long season if we have 3rd stringer Colt McNoodlearm starting for us next year.  Him throwing to no name targets without a run game is going to be something to watch out for.

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

At this point, I'm kind of over it.  My hopes for the franchise aren't that high even if we do lock Kirk up.  They just go even lower without him.  I don't expect him to be back next season and perhaps I'll come here and troll and relish in whomever else fails here next season like the AntiKirks do after every loss.

[Warhead36]

27 minutes ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

If Cousins is gone, I am willing to bet really good money that the starter at the beginning of the season is Colt McCoy.  I think Jay loves him, and is going to give him another opportunity.  For better or worse, I think that's the backup plan.  

 

 

 

I may end up just not watching a single game next year then. If that's not throwing the white flag for a year I don't know what is. I'd rather draft a guy in like the 4th round and hope and pray I hit on the next...well, Kirk Cousins, then start Colt freaking McCoy at QB.

[Taylor 36]

46 minutes ago, Skins199021 said:

The fact is Kirk isn't a top 5 QB, so he shouldn't be paid like one, or given the most expensive contract to date. I don't care what Carr got... that was a mistake, which wouldn't justify us to make a mistake.

This has been covered ad nauseum, and those that continue to harp on it are either trolling or incapabile of understanding how the business side of the NFL works.  

 

Look at it like going to the movies.  Several years ago, you could go to a premier theater for around $7 a ticket.  Now, the price is more like $11 per ticket, depending on the market you live in.  Sure, you can go to the cheap theater on the other side of town and still only pay $7, but there is no surround sound, the projector is dim, and the seats may or may not have lice and other fun friends for you to take home from the crowd that attends the Thursday night Adult Shows.  So, the market is around $11.  You can **** and moan and say it isn't fair/too expensive, but the fact is that if you want a good to great movie experience in a theater, you are paying that amount.  It doesn't matter how ****ty the movie is either; that's the rate. 

 

So, harping on the salary KC will get compared to other QB's is senseless.  Most of the other top QB's signed the highest or second highest deals when they got their LTD (which was back when the price for the movie ticket was 7 or 8 dollars).  If you want to pay someone in the price range that those players signed in today, you are going to be looking at a much lesser experience (the cheap theater).  When some of those other QB's resign to new deals, they will beat KC's price.  It is how the market works.  And, if McCoy plays next year because KC is gone, and he has any sort of success, you can bet that he will be looking for a market value contract the next year.  The fact is, no matter who plays QB, if they are worth a damn, they are going to end up looking for a market deal which will be even more than what KC is looking at this year.

 

Like it or not.  **** all you want.  But it is what it is, and the Redskins are 100% at fault for putting themselves in the situation to have to work on a deal in this current market.