Will Cousins Play For The Skins In 2018

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

5 minutes ago, Llevron said:

I think this could end up being the best thing for everyone involved. If somehow missing on Kirk got Dan, Bruce and whoever the **** else out of town forever I would officially call Kirk the best player to ever wear the uniform. I would even buy his got damn jersey and I dont own any of those. 

Yeah, I'm convinced that if the rumblings are true, that Jay really believes he can win with Colt and they opt to go with him next season, it will result in an epic failure that most likely will get everyone fired.  That's the only good thing that can come of it.  I'm not in any way convinced that Dan is capable of providing the FO the facelift it desperately needs for long term success, but perhaps he'll utilize a consulting firm to help him figure things out.

[PF Chang]

2 hours ago, goskins10 said:

 

 

 

As for the sacked question - 

Robert 35 games  - 101 sacks or 2.89/gm

Kirk - As a back-up (2012-2014) 9 games - 16 sacks or 1.78/gm - As the named starter (2015-2017) 48 gms - 106 sacks or 2.2/gm. - Overall - 57 gms - 122 sacks or 2.14/gm. 

 

 

 

In 2012 with the read option Robert took 30 sacks in 16 games, 1.98/gm.

 

Post injury, 2013 he takes 38 in 13 games, 2.92/gm.

 

2014, 33 sacks in 9 games. 3.66/gm. 

 

By contrast Kirk takes  8 sacks in 6 games in 2014, 1.33/gm. 2015 is 26 sacks in 16 games, 1.63/gm. 2016 is 23 in 16 games, or 1.44/gm. 

 

It gets ugly in 2017 where Kirk is sacked 41 times in 16 games, 2.56 a game. Because we're starting guys off the street. One of the worst injury situations I've seen a team deal with. 

 

If you look at the trends and consider the context of each season the picture is clear. Griffin can't read a defense. He was fine when we ran the one read system. He gets progressively worse after that, culminating in a legitimately ridiculous 33 sacks in 9 games. Griffin takes almost three times the number of sacks per game as Cousins in 2014. Blaming the OL doesn't hold up. 

 

I don't think "Griffin can't read a defense and his OL took a disproportionate share of the blame" is an extreme or inaccurate argument. The OL actually stopped helping him up toward the end, and it's obvious they resented taking the blame for the fact that he couldn't play. The players ("you can't do epic **** with basic people") knew who deserved the blame even if none of us wanted to acknowledge RG3 was done. 

 

 

 

 

[Llevron]

There is a reason we will never get over this RG3 thing and its not RG3 lol

[goskins10]

11 minutes ago, PF Chang said:

 

In 2012 with the read option Robert took 30 sacks in 16 games, 1.98/gm.

 

Post injury, 2013 he takes 38 in 13 games, 2.92/gm.

 

2014, 33 sacks in 9 games. 3.66/gm. 

 

By contrast Kirk takes  8 sacks in 6 games in 2014, 1.33/gm. 2015 is 26 sacks in 16 games, 1.63/gm. 2016 is 23 in 16 games, or 1.44/gm. 

 

It gets ugly in 2017 where Kirk is sacked 41 times in 16 games, 2.56 a game. Because we're starting guys off the street. One of the worst injury situations I've seen a team deal with. 

 

If you look at the trends and consider the context of each season the picture is clear. Griffin can't read a defense. He was fine when we ran the one read system. He gets progressively worse after that, culminating in a legitimately ridiculous 33 sacks in 9 games. Griffin takes almost three times the number of sacks per game as Cousins in 2014. Blaming the OL doesn't hold up. 

 

I don't think "Griffin can't read a defense and his OL took a disproportionate share of the blame" is an extreme or inaccurate argument. The OL actually stopped helping him up toward the end, and it's obvious they resented taking the blame for the fact that he couldn't play. The players ("you can't do epic **** with basic people") knew who deserved the blame even if none of us wanted to acknowledge RG3 was done. 

 

 

 

 

 

So did you miss or just choose to ignore that I stated specifically that Robert struggled reading defenses and that he came from a one read offense? Did you miss of choose to ignore where I said Kirk's sacks went up due to 22 different line combinations?  

 

What I see you did conveniently do is leave an important part of the argument out - which I also pointed out - interceptions. In those same years - 2012 - 2014, Robert had 23 interceptions in 1063 atts in 37 gms (35 starts) where Kirk had 19 interceptions in 412 atts in 14 gms (8 starts). 

 

For those playing at home - attempts per interception were (more fair metric since both guys started some but did not finish and vice versa. It also eliminates the Robert ran more so that's why he threw less Ints): 

Robert - Att/int = 1063/23 = 46.2

Kirk - Att/int = 412/19 = 21.7 

 

So in terms of attempts per int Kirk threw more than twice as many interceptions behind the same line. So, as I said above, that was a ****ty line for both guys. One guy took sacks (yes some of that was he struggled reading defenses, but not entirely by any means), the other guy threw twice as many picks (some of that was poor decision making but some of that was driven by a bad line).

 

Again, the facts are:

Oline - ****ty!!!  

Robert - good athlete that can't read defenses but was forced into some bad decisions that led to sacks by said ****ty oline. 

Kirk - Also a good athlete - more QB prototypical but made bad decisions that turned into picks, again at least some of that was driven by said ****ty oline. 

 

The argument that does not hold water no matter how many times someone whats to write it is that the Oline from 2012 - 2014 was actually a good pass blocking Oline (should have differentiated before, they were actually a decent run blocking line) and Robert was primarily responsible for the sacks and poor team performance. What's equally not true is that Kirk made the Oline all of a sudden look great, the implication being that all the teams issues were Robert's fault. Kirk threw picks instead of taking sacks. 

 

In the end, there is no comparison. Kirk is the better QB and the right decision was made by Jay and Scot (please people, stop forgetting Jay was on the table with Scot, if not in person in spirit.) and Scot. But let's not pretend Kirk was an amazing QB before 2015. Again, the difference is he has continued to improve and is now a very good QB. I hope we get to keep him. 

[PF Chang]

7 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

 

So did you miss or just choose to ignore that I stated specifically that Robert struggled reading defenses and that he came from a one read offense? Did you miss of choose to ignore where I said Kirk's sacks went up due to 22 different line combinations?  

 

What I see you did conveniently do is leave an important part of the argument out - which I also pointed out - interceptions. In those same years - 2012 - 2014, Robert had 23 interceptions in 1063 atts in 37 gms (35 starts) where Kirk had 19 interceptions in 412 atts in 14 gms (8 starts). 

 

For those playing at home - attempts per interception were (more fair metric since both guys started some but did not finish and vice versa. It also eliminates the Robert ran more so that's why he threw less Ints): 

Robert - Att/int = 1063/23 = 46.2

Kirk - Att/int = 412/19 = 21.7 

 

So in terms of attempts per int Kirk threw more than twice as many interceptions behind the same line. So, as I said above, that was a ****ty line for both guys. One guy took sacks (yes some of that was he struggled reading defenses, but not entirely by any means), the other guy threw twice as many picks (some of that was poor decision making but some of that was driven by a bad line).

 

Again, the facts are:

Oline - ****ty!!!  

Robert - good athlete that can't read defenses but was forced into some bad decisions that led to sacks by said ****ty oline. 

Kirk - Also a good athlete - more QB prototypical but made bad decisions that turned into picks, again at least some of that was driven by said ****ty oline. 

 

The argument that does not hold water no matter how many times someone whats to write it is that the Oline from 2012 - 2014 was actually a good pass blocking Oline (should have differentiated before, they were actually a decent run blocking line) and Robert was primarily responsible for the sacks and poor team performance. What's equally not true is that Kirk made the Oline all of a sudden look great, the implication being that all the teams issues were Robert's fault. Kirk threw picks instead of taking sacks. 

 

In the end, there is no comparison. Kirk is the better QB and the right decision was made by Jay and Scot (please people, stop forgetting Jay was on the table with Scot, if not in person in spirit.) and Scot. But let's not pretend Kirk was an amazing QB before 2015. Again, the difference is he has continued to improve and is now a very good QB. I hope we get to keep him. 

 

I generally agree with what you're saying. I'm not saying it was a great line. Sacks and INTs are often on the whole team, not just the QB or just the OL. But generally I think people blame the OL for sacks and blame the QB for INTs. So I'm not trying to ignore the interception argument, but if we're talking about QB vs OL perception sacks are more relevant. 

 

I guess I could say you missed or ignored the part about RG3's linemen hating him, while Cousins is respected by his teammates: 

 

“I take pride in protecting Kirk,” Williams, who is expected to undergo surgery any day now, told reporters this month. “He’s a good friend of mine. ... And I know that when he’s standing upright he’s a really good quarterback. And I want to see him be successful. And if I can help him be successful, then that’s what I will do.”

 

I think that's pretty telling -- that the players themselves have demonstrated clear frustration with Griffin, and that Gruden took it as far as slamming his QB after that disastrous Tampa Bay game. Cooley said that Griffin's performance was so bad that it wasn't even possible to grade the offense. This was after a preseason of people saying how much the OL sucks, and the last straw was RG3 trying to blame the whole team for that TB game. 

 

Long story short I think you're right about the sacks/INTs being driven by both poor OL and poor QB play. But the sacks get blamed on the OL and INTs get blamed on the QB. So Cousins gets the blame for the INTs but the reduction in sacks is credited to the improved OL. Not saying that's your take, just that it's the typical narrative. 

[Mooka]

Robert could've been the least touched QB of all time. Wouldn't have made any difference in the long run. There is something fundamentally wrong with his ability as an athlete to protect himself. That extends to every single play, not just when the stats say it was a sack. 

 

You can't play professional football if you can't protect your body. End of story. 

 

Kirk can take a blindside hit and still deliver a deep pass. When mic'd up you can actually hear him bounce back up and give the defender props for a nice hit.  

[goskins10]

5 minutes ago, PF Chang said:

 

edit

 

I guess I could say you missed or ignored the part about RG3's linemen hating him, while Cousins is respected by his teammates: 

 

“I take pride in protecting Kirk,” Williams, who is expected to undergo surgery any day now, told reporters this month. “He’s a good friend of mine. ... And I know that when he’s standing upright he’s a really good quarterback. And I want to see him be successful. And if I can help him be successful, then that’s what I will do.”

 

edit

 

 

I ignored them. I do not mean this to be ugly but I honestly just don't care. People don't have to like each other to work together. I don't like everyone I work with but I find a way to make it work. So I do not see the inter-relationships as relevant. Also, we really do not know the facts as we are not in the locker room. I'm afraid I can't speak intelligently to the relationship habits of Robert Griffin III (Ok this one should be more recognizable!) 

 

Ultimately I was specifically focused on performance. Relationship rumors are more tabloid stuff and really is not very valuable to me. 

 

BTW: For those that got there, the penguin reference was from Don Rickles. It was one of his go to statements. 

 

 

[Fat Stupid Loser]

22 minutes ago, Mooka said:

Robert could've been the least touched QB of all time. Wouldn't have made any difference in the long run. There is something fundamentally wrong with his ability as an athlete to protect himself. That extends to every single play, not just when the stats say it was a sack. 

 

You can't play professional football if you can't protect your body. End of story. 

 

Kirk can take a blindside hit and still deliver a deep pass. When mic'd up you can actually hear him bounce back up and give the defender props for a nice hit.  

I've never in 45 years of football seen a player take the hits that he routinely took. And the way he took them. Bizarre.

[PF Chang]

19 minutes ago, goskins10 said:

 

 

I ignored them. I do not mean this to be ugly but I honestly just don't care. People don't have to like each other to work together. I don't like everyone I work with but I find a way to make it work. So I do not see the inter-relationships as relevant. Also, we really do not know the facts as we are not in the locker room. I'm afraid I can't speak intelligently to the relationship habits of Robert Griffin III (Ok this one should be more recognizable!) 

 

Ultimately I was specifically focused on performance. Relationship rumors are more tabloid stuff and really is not very valuable to me. 

 

BTW: For those that got there, the penguin reference was from Don Rickles. It was one of his go to statements. 

 

 

 

Fair enough. We'll never know the entire truth of the locker room situation there. 

[bobandweave]

3 hours ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

Yeah, I'm convinced that if the rumblings are true, that Jay really believes he can win with Colt and they opt to go with him next season, it will result in an epic failure that most likely will get everyone fired.  That's the only good thing that can come of it.  I'm not in any way convinced that Dan is capable of providing the FO the facelift it desperately needs for long term success, but perhaps he'll utilize a consulting firm to help him figure things out.

 

No way that's the case. Jay would have given him a start as the season wore down. He didn't and this is just posturing to me

2 hours ago, Llevron said:

There is a reason we will never get over this RG3 thing and its not RG3 lol

 

You know they do say it takes a decade for a franchise to get over a first round draft pick bust and now we know why lol

[bobandweave]

16 hours ago, lavar1156 said:

Some interesting Kirk nuggets in this article. Not sure how reliable the source is tho.

 

http://draftanalyst.com/shrine-game-monday-night-notes

 

The Jets have been a quarterback-hungry franchise for a while but may be locked out of the top three quarterbacks with the sixth selection in the draft. Cousins would be the immediate remedy, and they could still keep one of their young passers around, likely Bryce Petty."

 

Browns at one 

Giants at two

Colts at three

Browns at four

Broncos at five

Jets at six

 

If Kirk went to the Browns besides me always referring to them as as the Browneyes from now on they won't take a QB at one or four. 

 

Browns at one

Giants at two

Colts at three

Browns at four

Broncos at five

Jets at six

 

Unless Andrew Luck is retiring they won't take a QB either

 

Browns at one

Giants at two

Colts at three

Browns at four

Broncos at five

Jets at six

 

Eli Manning is returning this year and is only 37. Brady is 40, Brees is 39, Eli won't be replaced so I think they are out too

 

Browns at one

Giants at two

Colts at three

Browns at four

Broncos at five

Jets at six

 

Which leaves the Broncos (I think they want to win now and just busted out on a rookie first round picked QB so I see them going vet QB this season more then a QB pick at 5) and then the JETS. If Kirk takes his services to the Browneyes then to me it's shaping up much more likely that the JETS take the first QB off the board then not getting a top 3 QB this draft. I know all guessing but better then reading about Griffin anymore. 

 

Taking this thought further

 

Buccaneers at seven
Bears at eight
49ers at nine
Raiders at ten
Dolphins at eleven
Bengals at twelve
Redskins at thirteen

 

Bucs aren't giving up on Winston three years after using the top selection in the draft on him

Bears just took Mitchell T, and not taking a QB

49ers are smart and in love with Jimmy G, and not taking a QB

Raiders are married to Derek C, and not taking a QB

Dolphins are a bit of a wild card. They have Ryan T. but are they ready to move on? Dunno. If they are then they would take a QB

Bengals have Dalton and have him signed under 20 million for the next three season, and not taking a QB

 

[Tay]

Of course Jay is going to show confidence in his veteran backup QB. You don't want the team to feel like they have no chance if you have to turn to that guy. That's why he's in the building. I think the narrative that Jay would turn to him is a bit over stated. Albert Breer said last week that the Redskins back-up plan last year was to go with Glennon, and that someone from the coaching staff was a fan of his.

[HOF44]

1 hour ago, Fat Stupid Loser said:

I've never in 45 years of football seen a player take the hits that he routinely took. And the way he took them. Bizarre.

I always said when he was going down he looked like Bambi on ice.  And right in the middle of those flailing limbs he would get blown up.  Weird. 

[Darrell Green Fan]

What is even weirder is there are still people saying Griff got screwed and he should be starting in the league.  Simply amazing.

 

 

[skinny21]

2 hours ago, bobandweave said:

 

No way that's the case. Jay would have given him a start as the season wore down. He didn't and this is just posturing to me

 

You know they do say it takes a decade for a franchise to get over a first round draft pick bust and now we know why lol

I’d say we were doing pretty well then considering we had a bust, traded two 1sts (and a 2nd), and now have mother potential bust (too early of course, but yeesh)...except here we are preparing to lose our franchise qb.  

 

Sidenote: I have to wonder what we would have looked like if we had just drafted Kirk and had those 3 additional 1sts and a 2nd...

[purbeast]

20 minutes ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

What is even weirder is there are still people saying Griff got screwed and he should be starting in the league.  Simply amazing.

 

 

That's the same kind of people who think the solution to all our problems is to just "build a top flight defense and running game so we can win with a serviceable QB" because doing that is just oh so easy and happens overnight.

[skinsfan35yrs.]

11 hours ago, skinsOLfan said:

Skinsfan35yrs what was Kirk's record as a starter while RGIII was here, not as good and how many times was Kirk sacked?

 

The thing is RGIII always looked touchdown and worked back to checkdown where Kirk is the opposite he looks checkdown and works to touchdown. RGIII had a way better longball than kirk, go back and watch the three game stretch in 2012 when RGIII beat the Giants, Eagles and Cowboys in succesive weeks.

 

Look at our record since Kirk became the full time starter, 9-7, 8-7-1 (8-8 to me) and 7-9 and prior to that has a losing record overall and couldn't beat a team with a winning record but all you Kirk fans want to pay him whatever he want but want the team to cut Josh Norman, Jordan Reed etc..

 

Only keep player ..... if he's willing to play for less than market value or send him packing but not Kirk give him anything he wants because we can't win without him I tell ya!!!

 

News flash we've been mediocre with Kirk to me he's average, if he needs everything around him perfect in order to win then why do the Redskins need to make him the highest paid player?????????????

 

 

 

 

done with your speech? Alls I did was make a comment made about the Oline with rg or kirk  based on my observations. I dont keep numbers and stats because, well, at the end of the day they are really meaningless to me other then wins and losses. If rg was so good why isnt he here? or anywhere for that matter. As far as your comment about being a Kirk fan wanting to pay, please show me where I said anything about wanting to pay kirk. Just so you know, I am on the fence about this but surely do not think he is worth tons of money but the market seems to dictate things like that now days

[Tay]

I can't believe we're still talking about RG3. I honestly don't know the context, because I typically ignore posts with his names but I'll share my thoughts:

 

1. I'm not disappointed with the team for giving him the opportunities they did for him to succeed. It was a huge investment and he has a ton of arm talent, so he should have been given ample opportunity.

 

2. He is not an NFL QB.

 

3. He should not be compared to Kirk. Kirk is a very good starting NFL QB.

 

4. I didn't care about his social media antics. All I care about is production. If a player wants off the field distractions, that's on him. You just better be able to deal with the distractions you create.

[Rufus T Firefly]

9 hours ago, skins island connection said:

the Colts are shopping for a new HC, so its a rebuilding thing going on there so that team won't take shape for at least 2 years.

 

The Titans just canned their HC, so they're gonna be in limbo for at least a few more years until their new HC shows anything.

 

In a year in which 3 first-year coaches and 2 second-year coaches made the playoffs, it seems a bit odd to be ranting about how hiring a new coach automatically means you won't be good for several years.

[HigSkin]

This is an interesting perspective on why Skins shouldn't do a transition tag but rather another franchise tag on Kirk.  It's a bit dated (Nov'17) but still applicable.  I keep thinking a deal with something around $26-27 a year guaranteed will get it done but speculation here is not likely, at least not in the first year.

 

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2017/11/29/why-redskins-wont-transition-tag-cousins/

 

“The franchise tag is $34 million,” he said. “Transition tag would be $28 million. Well then, whichever team creates a new deal for Kirk Cousins, and there’s going to be one — he’s going to have a really good market, whether it’s the Jaguars or the Jets, or even the 49ers if they sour on Jimmy Garoppolo, which I don’t expect, or the Browns. All those teams have a ton of cap space.”

 

“So what they would do is they would create a very front-loaded cash-up-front deal that would force the Redskins to pay more than $34 million in year one,” he explained. Well, that doesn’t sound good. “So either way, the Redskins are gonna be paying more than $34 million in year one, so why not do the franchise tag and just make sure that there is basically no competition?

 

“Because the other answer would be, then the Redskins have to pay something like $50 million in year one up front, because that’s what the competing deal would be. Because all those teams with cap space, they can actually do that. That’s why the transition tag doesn’t make a lot of sense, is because whatever deal is structured would make it miserable for the Redskins to match.”

 

 

 

[skinny21]

7 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Sheehan-Cooley talking this morning about how close the roster is to contend for a Championship.  Sheehan thinks they are far off partly because of who picks the groceries here.  He doesn't subscribe to let Kirk go and have this FO build themselves a defense-running game because he doesn't think they are capable of doing it. 

 

Cooley thinks if they keep Kirk, they aren't that far off.  He thinks they need another defensive tackle, WR and RB.

A guy that can play both DT and NT (well) would be huge for this defense.  Help stop the run and sub/replace our starting DTs if they are injured.  If we bring back Brown, I'd be comfortable with Vigil or Spaight playing next to him.  They aren't ideal, but playing behind a good dline would help a lot.  Still not sure how we go about stopping opposing TEs though.  I have hope for Harvey-Clemons, but we don't have a clear solution there.  

 

I think upgrading running back is possibly pretty easy with our 2nd round pick, or maybe we land Guice in the 1st and a NT/DT in the second.  Don't think we have the cash for a good DT/NT (Logan/Poe?) or receiver in FA if Kirk and Brown re-sign though, and it's kind of a tall order to find a good receiver in the mid rounds of the draft.  If that's the case, I'd rather try to land one of the top TEs - more than one way to skin a cat and all.  We'd still be lacking the outside speed Gruden talked about, but maybe we take a flyer on a faster receiver in the mid-late rds.  

 

We have so much room for improvement at stopping the run, the run game and in terms of pass catchers that I think he's right that a few additions could have a big impact.  We were surprisingly competitive this past year, so if we stay a bit healthier and get better at our weakest areas I can see what Cooley's talking about.  Of course it's pretty easy to see the glass half empty view as well...

 

[purbeast]

4 minutes ago, HigSkin said:

This is an interesting perspective on why Skins shouldn't do a transition tag but rather another franchise tag on Kirk.  It's a bit dated (Nov'17) but still applicable.  I keep thinking a deal with something around $26-27 a year guaranteed will get it done but speculation here is not likely, at least not in the first year.

 

http://washington.cbslocal.com/2017/11/29/why-redskins-wont-transition-tag-cousins/

 

“The franchise tag is $34 million,” he said. “Transition tag would be $28 million. Well then, whichever team creates a new deal for Kirk Cousins, and there’s going to be one — he’s going to have a really good market, whether it’s the Jaguars or the Jets, or even the 49ers if they sour on Jimmy Garoppolo, which I don’t expect, or the Browns. All those teams have a ton of cap space.”

 

“So what they would do is they would create a very front-loaded cash-up-front deal that would force the Redskins to pay more than $34 million in year one,” he explained. Well, that doesn’t sound good. “So either way, the Redskins are gonna be paying more than $34 million in year one, so why not do the franchise tag and just make sure that there is basically no competition?

 

“Because the other answer would be, then the Redskins have to pay something like $50 million in year one up front, because that’s what the competing deal would be. Because all those teams with cap space, they can actually do that. That’s why the transition tag doesn’t make a lot of sense, is because whatever deal is structured would make it miserable for the Redskins to match.”

 

 

 

The raw franchise tag is literally the worst possible thing they could do this year.  If they do that, KC is 100000% gone next year and 100000% a LTD will not be made this year unless the Redskins are offering him a 5 year deal at the AAV (that they would have set by franchise tagging him) of $34 million.  

 

And it would only further just show the incompetence of this stupid ass FO by them giving him $78 million for a 3 year rental but wouldn't even offer him anything REMOTELY close to that in guarantees in a LTD.

[zoony]

What about whatshisface who got injured in the preseason?  Phil taylor?  Was that his name?

 

Iirc he looked pretty good.  Any chance he comes back

[PigskinRedskin]

4 minutes ago, zoony said:

What about whatshisface who got injured in the preseason?  Phil taylor?  Was that his name?

 

Iirc he looked pretty good.  Any chance he comes back

 

Yeah Phil Taylor. I liked him a lot in training camp and according to reports coming out near the end of camp he was the clear favorite to take the role. 

He's a free agent but I doubt many other teams will take a chance on him since he does have quite the history of injuries (2016 - Broncos, IR in training camp for knee and then us in 2017), so he may be able to sign for vet min.

[Tsailand]

12 hours ago, skinsOLfan said:

The thing is RGIII always looked touchdown and worked back to checkdown .... RGIII had a way better longball than kirk

 

Easy to have a good long ball when the D has nine in the box to combat your gimmick offense.  How did that long ball look in 2013 and 2014 and 2016?