Will Cousins Play For The Skins In 2018

[bobandweave]

15 hours ago, mistertim said:

What would really be the point of bringing in Bradford if they were basically admitting to it being a stopgap? Why not just save the money and roll with McCoy while we groom a draft pick? I doubt Bradford would be "cheap", at least not compared to McCoy. Though we will admittedly need depth so if we could get Bradford for a low price then I don't really see why not...bring him in and have him and Colt compete for the starting spot.

 

Seriously this is the way to go if 

 

1. Kirk is gone

2. Alex Smith trade is not possible

 

I must be the only one who gives a crap about getting the third round pick for Cousins in compensatory pick around here. The instant the team were to sign Bradford there goes that draft pick up in smoke. Not the right thing to do. If no Kirk then Smith. If no Kirk and no Smith then Colt all day. 

[Skinsinparadise]

1 minute ago, UK SKINS FAN '74 said:

Not sure I buy the whole 'Bruce will want to win' the situation thing. Think that perception is being overstated here. Retaining Cousins for another year, if a favourable trade can't be brokered, isn't necessarily being spiteful. You have keep him if the alternative is him walking for nothing right now. 

 

I think Burgandy Blog might be referring to what some said about the contract negotiation where guys like Albert Breer saying that compromise was tough because Bruce wanted to be perceive as the winner of the deal so he wasn't giving in.

 

I do think they look like bigger fools then they already do if they lose Kirk for nothing or a ham sandwich.  So will that factor in a trade negotiation if it happens -- maybe?  You also got the Shanny aspect of this.  He might eventually pop out of the shadows and some beat guys say Dan-Bruce hate Shanny.  I am guessing that's more Dan than Bruce.   So can there be an ego-component that becomes part of the soup?   Sounds plausible. 

 

Personally, the odds to me seem greater that they get little to nothing for Kirk.   So if they pull off a 2nd rounder or a trade up -- that would beat expectations for me.

[Gamebreaker]

25 minutes ago, BigHuv21 said:

Based on this team's past, I'd say it's going to be Kirk AND our first (#13) for their first round pick (#5) and then the Skins will draft Baker Mayfield. Maybe Denver will throw in a 5th rounder or something for Bruce's ego. Half the fan base is pissed and the other half is wearing Mayfield jerseys at the start of next season.   

 

Considering Philly was able to get a first round pick out of Bradford, I don't see how Kirk, a much better QB, requires we give up a first along with him. If that is the deal they can keep it. 

 

BTW, all of this talk that Kirk is gone doesn't surprise me at all. I've been saying this months for now, and knew it for certain after that town hall thing. 

[bobandweave]

31 minutes ago, skinny21 said:

Personally, I think Denver's 5th is reasonable.  He's far more valuable than a 5th, particularly since (as Doug reminded me) the draft is a crapshoot, and they could really use a good qb.  Heck, just looking at past qb trades is enough for me to think it reasonable.  

 

That's a hell of a price to pay for Kirk. The 5th pick in the draft AND the highest salary in the league? I can't see it imo. Too much

[zoony]

24 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I was just reading a Tandler exchange on this where he said no way you get Denver's first rounder.  His view is you got the big contract and a high draft pick so that = too much for a team to absorb.

 

He thinks you maybe can get Denver's 2nd rounder.  That sounds about right to me.  The other thing is if the Redskins are in love with one of the top end QBs in this draft then how about a swap of picks?  13 for 5?

 

 

This is where the rules are not clear to me.

 

It seems like they could agree to a contract in principal (cousins and broncos) and then we trade him under the franchise tag, he signs for his new deal

 

Advantage to broncos is that they are guaranteed his services, and dont need to worry about the browns offering $200 million guaranteed

24 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I was just reading a Tandler exchange on this where he said no way you get Denver's first rounder.  His view is you got the big contract and a high draft pick so that = too much for a team to absorb.

 

He thinks you maybe can get Denver's 2nd rounder.  That sounds about right to me.  The other thing is if the Redskins are in love with one of the top end QBs in this draft then how about a swap of picks?  13 for 5?

 

 

This is where the rules are not clear to me.

 

It seems like they could agree to a contract in principal (cousins and broncos) and then we trade him under the franchise tag, he signs for his new deal

 

Advantage to broncos is that they are guaranteed his services, and dont need to worry about the browns offering $200 million guaranteed

 

If i recall, this is exactly what we did to get Brunell from Jacksonville for a 3rd round pick back in the day, when he agreed to a contract before jax traded him

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

20 minutes ago, UK SKINS FAN '74 said:

Not sure I buy the whole 'Bruce will want to win' the situation thing. Think that perception is being overstated here. Retaining Cousins for another year, if a favourable trade can't be brokered, isn't necessarily being spiteful. You have keep him if the alternative is him walking for nothing right now. 

 

I'm not saying that Bruce needs to just lay down and get ran over here....

 

But paying 34M for one season is an awful move anyway you slice it.  I understand the team has to at least give off the impression that they are okay with doing so, but it's a god awful 'alternative' that undoubtedly will impact their ability to do anything else this offseason.

 

We can sit here and pray for bidding wars all we want, but ultimately Kirk has to play ball.  If he wants to go to Denver, the team will be forced to workout a deal with them and them only.  No other team is going to trade for a 1 year/34M dollar contract where the player can bolt thereafter.

 

I don't think it's possible to overstate Bruce wanting to win deals.  Simply given the fact that we are forced to even have a conversation like this today is proof positive that it is indeed how the man does business.

[zoony]

24 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I was just reading a Tandler exchange on this where he said no way you get Denver's first rounder.  His view is you got the big contract and a high draft pick so that = too much for a team to absorb.

 

He thinks you maybe can get Denver's 2nd rounder.  That sounds about right to me.  The other thing is if the Redskins are in love with one of the top end QBs in this draft then how about a swap of picks?  13 for 5?

 

 

This is where the rules are not clear to me.

 

It seems like they could agree to a contract in principal (cousins and broncos) and then we trade him under the franchise tag, he signs for his new deal

 

Advantage to broncos is that they are guaranteed his services, and dont need to worry about the browns offering $200 million guaranteed

 

If i recall, this is exactly what we did to get Brunell from Jacksonville for a 3rd round pick back in the day, when he agreed to a contract before jax traded him

24 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I was just reading a Tandler exchange on this where he said no way you get Denver's first rounder.  His view is you got the big contract and a high draft pick so that = too much for a team to absorb.

 

He thinks you maybe can get Denver's 2nd rounder.  That sounds about right to me.  The other thing is if the Redskins are in love with one of the top end QBs in this draft then how about a swap of picks?  13 for 5?

 

 

This is where the rules are not clear to me.

 

It seems like they could agree to a contract in principal (cousins and broncos) and then we trade him under the franchise tag, he signs for his new deal

 

Advantage to broncos is that they are guaranteed his services, and dont need to worry about the browns offering $200 million guaranteed

 

If i recall, this is exactly what we did to get Brunell from Jacksonville for a 3rd round pick back in the day, when he agreed to a contract before jax traded him

[Tsailand]

On 1/28/2018 at 11:32 AM, skinny21 said:

Took a look at career qb numbers - gotta say, outside of knowing he's had a high completion percentage (tied for 3rd all time with Warner), I had no idea Kirk ranked so high. 

 

The gold standard is ANY/A.  He's top ten there also.

 

 

20 hours ago, skinfan2k said:

Should i start anothr thread? I want to ask fans what is the mininum compenstation they would take for Kirk?

 

We are weeks away from free agency.  The whole point of free agency is we don't control Kirk therefore we get nothing in trade.

 

It's like you're two years behind on the mortgage and the bank is kicking down the door to evict you, but you're talking about how you won't take any less than $300k for the house.

 

 

20 hours ago, goskins10 said:

Let's see, so far he absolutely going to the Jets, the Broncos, AND Cleveland with Jacksonville, Miami, Arizona and any other QB needy team "in the mix."

 

This is what it's like when a healthy franchise QB hits free agency.

 

 

18 hours ago, Voice_of_Reason said:

The FO divide, in my opinion, is pointless because Colt is on the roster and Jay loves Colt so he’s going to get the first chance to play.

 

it would be different if there was a contract situation with Colt.

 

Hilariously, if Colt somehow has a good 2018, we will be stuck either tagging him or letting him walk with no compensation.

[mistertim]

I'm getting this weird feeling that the rules are not clear to Zoony.  

[bobandweave]

4 minutes ago, Gamebreaker said:

 

Considering Philly was able to get a first round pick out of Bradford, I don't see how Kirk, a much better QB, requires we give up a first along with him. If that is the deal they can keep it. 

 

BTW, all of this talk that Kirk is gone doesn't surprise me at all. I've been saying this months for now, and knew it for certain after that town hall thing. 

 

Bradford deal was the last week of the preseason deal in an emergency situation, not the same as the start of the off season where there are lots of QBs who are free agents or available to trade. Think of it like the year that Portis in a preseason game got injured running down a defender on a possible pick 6. The brass got spooked being how close the season was approaching that they ended up trading for a Falcons RB and giving up a second round pick. If they had traded for that RB earlier in the offseason there is no way they would have given up a second round pick for him. But the iron was hot and the team felt itself in a bind. Same with the Vikings and Bradford. When a team can capitalize on situations like that you end up getting more in trade. 

 

Not apples to apples 

[Tsailand]

1 minute ago, mistertim said:

I'm getting this weird feeling that the rules are not clear to Zoony.  

 

It's almost like he is seeing double.

[mistertim]

3 minutes ago, bobandweave said:

 

Bradford deal was the last week of the preseason deal in an emergency situation, not the same as the start of the off season where there are lots of QBs who are free agents or available to trade. Think of it like the year that Portis in a preseason game got injured running down a defender on a possible pick 6. The brass got spooked being how close the season was approaching that they ended up trading for a Falcons RB and giving up a second round pick. If they had traded for that RB earlier in the offseason there is no way they would have given up a second round pick for him. But the iron was hot and the team felt itself in a bind. Same with the Vikings and Bradford. When a team can capitalize on situations like that you end up getting more in trade. 

 

Not apples to apples 

 

This is actually a pretty good point. I had completely forgotten about the timing of the trade. It was basically a panic situation.

[bobandweave]

7 minutes ago, zoony said:

 

This is where the rules are not clear to me.

 

It seems like they could agree to a contract in principal (cousins and broncos) and then we trade him under the franchise tag, he signs for his new deal

 

Advantage to broncos is that they are guaranteed his services, and dont need to worry about the browns offering $200 million guaranteed

 

If i recall, this is exactly what we did to get Brunell from Jacksonville for a 3rd round pick back in the day, when he agreed to a contract before jax traded him

 

 

http://www.nbcsports.com/washington/redskins/need-know-can-redskins-tag-and-trade-cousins

 

He's not traded on the Franchise tag, his agents working this while Kirk is on the transition tag. Unless I'm confused and misreading

[Tay]

39 minutes ago, markmills67 said:

In you honest opinion what could we expect to receive from the Broncos if they sign Cousin's?.

 

HTTR 

From Denver I could see 2 scenarios. We get their 1st rounder or we swap first rounders' and get their 2nd round pick.

 

If Kirk doesn't want to be here, Bruce has a bit of leverage in seeking compensation unless Kirk is willing to go the Jets or the Browns.  

[Est.1974]

1 minute ago, Tay said:

 

If Kirk doesn't want to be here, Bruce has a bit of leverage in seeking compensation unless Kirk is willing to go the Jets or the Browns.  

 

Was just about to post the same thing. I agree.

[beachboy757]

If it's true that Kirk doesn't want to be here like many are stating the Jets or Browns are the 2 places I would trade him and I would not listen to any other team offers. 

 

He's good, but not that special for the team to kiss his ass on the way out the door. 

[UKskins]

2 hours ago, JSSkinz said:

That would be so sweet if we could parlay some picks out of his, I wrote that off a while ago.

 

A win for me would be swapping picks.

Absolutely.

 

Considering where we're at in the Kirk situation, getting any kind of draft capital for him is huge. Literally the only shot at gaining any leverage in this negotiation was if Kirk was dead set on going to Denver and given the way this whole thing has shaken out, it's an absolute win for the FO too. Losing Kirk is bad PR. Losing him for nothing is a PR bomb. Losing him but moving into the top 5 of the draft is like swapping a PR bomb for a PR hand grenade. There's still going to be damage but it will be on a significantly smaller scale.

 

I'd take swapping picks with Denver over losing him for absolutely nothing or paying him $34 million for a farewell tour. If he is absolutely dead set on Denver and we can get the situation agreed then surely we can just sign him to a LTD on Denver's terms, and then trade that over to Denver? I'm not totally au fait with how a tag and trade works but I presume that the player is free to work out a LTD with either us (which we sign and trade) or with the Broncos either before or after the trade?

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

I'm confused by why you guys think the Browns or Jets are viable trade partners if Kirk doesn't want to go there.  Why would either of those teams give up draft capital and 34M for one season with a QB that doesn't want to be there?

[markmills67]

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I was just reading a Tandler exchange on this where he said no way you get Denver's first rounder.  His view is you got the big contract and a high draft pick so that = too much for a team to absorb.

 

He thinks you maybe can get Denver's 2nd rounder.  That sounds about right to me.  The other thing is if the Redskins are in love with one of the top end QBs in this draft then how about a swap of picks?  13 for 5?

 

Swap 1st round picks and get Denver's 2nd round pick.

 

HTTR 

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour ago, zoony said:

 

This is where the rules are not clear to me.

 

It seems like they could agree to a contract in principal (cousins and broncos) and then we trade him under the franchise tag, he signs for his new deal

 

Advantage to broncos is that they are guaranteed his services, and dont need to worry about the browns offering $200 million guaranteed

 

If i recall, this is exactly what we did to get Brunell from Jacksonville for a 3rd round pick back in the day, when he agreed to a contract before jax traded him

 

This is where the rules are not clear to me.

 

It seems like they could agree to a contract in principal (cousins and broncos) and then we trade him under the franchise tag, he signs for his new deal

 

Advantage to broncos is that they are guaranteed his services, and dont need to worry about the browns offering $200 million guaranteed

 

If i recall, this is exactly what we did to get Brunell from Jacksonville for a 3rd round pick back in the day, when he agreed to a contract before jax traded him

 

 

From what Tandler explained, I understood it this way.   

 

A.  Redskins transition tag Kirk

B.  Kirk works out the parameters of a deal with Denver

C.  Redskins try to work out trade capital with Denver.  They reach agreement

D. Kirk signs transition tag with the Redskins

E. Redskins trade Kirk to Denver

 

Why would Denver bother?  They don't want to have to stack a deal to make it unattractive for the Redskins to match.

 

Why would Kirk bother?  If he truly wants to go to Denver and doesn't want to return, this would be the outlet to do it.  Otherwise the Redskins just match Denver's proposal and he's a Redskin for the length of the contract.  He can just sign the transition tag and play for one year but if he really loves Denver and doesn't like it here -- then he might not want to do that.  

 

 

 

 

 

 

[JamesMadisonSkins]

13 minutes ago, markmills67 said:

Swap 1st round picks and get Denver's 2nd round pick.

 

HTTR 

Which is draft chart equivalent to the 14th pick. Seems reasonable to me. Get the QB at #5 and then defense/RB in the second. Or get defense at 5 and get your QB in Rudolph or White or Jackson or whoever falls at 40. I’d be on board for that. 

[mistertim]

28 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

I'm confused by why you guys think the Browns or Jets are viable trade partners if Kirk doesn't want to go there.  Why would either of those teams give up draft capital and 34M for one season with a QB that doesn't want to be there?

 

Yeah, Kirk and his agent would have to play ball and be in on the trade deal for it to be viable. No way a team would give up a high draft pick as well as pay to have him there for 1 year, so we couldn't force it. Unless said team was INCREDIBLY stupid.

 

6 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

 

From what Tandler explained, I understood it this way.   

 

A.  Redskins transition tag Kirk

B.  Kirk works out the parameters of a deal with Denver

C.  Redskins try to work out trade capital with Denver.  They reach agreement

D. Kirk signs transition tag with the Redskins

E. Redskins trade Kirk to Denver

 

Why would Denver bother?  They don't want to have to stack a deal to make it unattractive for the Redskins to match.

 

Why would Kirk bother?  If he truly wants to go to Denver and doesn't want to return, this would be the outlet to do it.  Otherwise the Redskins just match Denver's proposal and he's a Redskin for the length of the contract.  He can just sign the transition tag and play for one year but if he really loves Denver and doesn't like it here -- then he might not want to do that.  

 

 

I think this will also be interesting because it would show whether or not he truly was just about the money. There is no doubt that the Browns or Jets could give him the massively front loaded contract that we've heard he reportedly desires, and there's pretty much no way that Denver or the Skins could (or would) keep up. If he truly wants to go to Denver and it isn't all about the money we can probably get a decent trade deal. If it really IS all about the money then he could sign the transition tag and go to the Browns or Jets and say "SHOW ME THE MONEY!" and we'd be screwed.

[Tay]

4 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

Yeah, Kirk and his agent would have to play ball and be in on the trade deal for it to be viable. No way a team would give up a high draft pick as well as pay to have him there for 1 year, so we couldn't force it. Unless said team was INCREDIBLY stupid.

 

This.

 

At the end of the day, it's Kirk's call on where he wants to play outside of DC.

 

With the Transition tag, any other team has 2 options: sign him to a LTD the Redskins can't/won't match or buy the Redskins out of matching the deal. If no team is willing to do that, it's likely that Kirk will be in DC at least 1 more year.

 

 

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

3 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

Yeah, Kirk and his agent would have to play ball and be in on the trade deal for it to be viable. No way a team would give up a high draft pick as well as pay to have him there for 1 year, so we couldn't force it. Unless said team was INCREDIBLY stupid.

 

Right.

 

I see some fans that get in their feelings a bit too much in regards to "wanting to be here" are of the belief that the Redskins can just ship him to wherever and get something shiny in return.  That ship sailed a while ago.

[bobandweave]

10 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Why would Denver bother?  They don't want to have to stack a deal to make it unattractive for the Redskins to match.

 

Denver has 28 million in cap space. We have much more then that. Poison pill contracts are illegal. So if Denver wants Kirk and doesn't want the Redskins to match a reasonable offer then they do need the Redskins on their side or Kirk will just sign a deal with Denver and the Redskins will match and keep Kirk.

 

The only leverage Denver has that the Redskins won't match is to make an agreement with the Redskins not to match and that's to give them draft picks.