Will Cousins Play For The Skins In 2018

[Paul Cumberland]

 

[Rufus T Firefly]

11 hours ago, bla bla bla said:

I think he means if Kirk is Franchised by the Redskins he will sign the tag and then not negotiate the LTD. Why would he want to negotiate a deal if he can play on the tag for 1 year and sign a massive deal in 2019.

Again, once he is tagged and signs the tag, he is signed for 2018. At that point, it's simply a question of whether he wants to sign long-term beyond that or not, and whether they can agree on a price or not. There's nothing that precludes him signing an extension. It's not a matter of choosing whether or not to play for that 34.5 mil, because he's already signed for it and it's not going away. It's not a question of him giving up the 34.5 mil to sign long-term, it's a question of what he earns after that 34.5 mil.

1 hour ago, purbeast said:

Yeah no **** numbnuts, that was my entire point in the first post you quoted of mine - that if he signs a tag there is no chance a LTD gets done.

 

Way to let logic slip your mind.

Well, I do apologize for being the member of this conversation who has trouble with logic.

[Est.1974]

My view, on balance over the season, is that Bruce will now have to cave and put an offer on the table that Kirk won't walk away from. I suspect it will top Staffords in total money, gtd money, and average per season. Signing bonus will be 50mil+.

 

That in turn will drop his 2018 cap number under 20mil and free some cap space short term for free agency. 

[Rufus T Firefly]

10 hours ago, bla bla bla said:

 

I think the Broncos are going to have to cut a lot of their talent to have a competitive offer with other teams or Cousins will have to leave a lot of money on the table to go there. Broncos will be sitting at $20M (after subtracting what it takes to sign a draft class) by comparison the Jets will be sitting at $70M (before cutting players who should not be overly missed Mo, Skrine, Ijalana, Forte, Smith will move them up to $85M). Another factor is the amount of endorsements Kirk will receive in NY vs Denver, Eli makes an extra $8M per year. It will ultimately come down to; how much money is Kirk willing to pass up on to play for the Broncos?

Denver isn't in position to structure an unmatchable offer if Kirk is Transition tagged. You're right, they don't have the cap space. They are more likely to be a team that deals for him if he's Franchise tagged or selling him on coming to a winner if he's not tagged at all. They can certainly make room to fit him in, releasing Talib or Roby gets them close to 30 mil and they have a bunch of room to re-work contracts to make some extra room. They have space in 2019 and very few FA issues the next couple of years. But again, you're right that they are not in a position to make the kind of deal that steals him under the Transition tag or just out-bids a team like the Jets or Browns if they are motivated to sign him.

[clskinsfan]

41 minutes ago, Rufus T Firefly said:

Again, once he is tagged and signs the tag, he is signed for 2018. At that point, it's simply a question of whether he wants to sign long-term beyond that or not, and whether they can agree on a price or not. There's nothing that precludes him signing an extension. It's not a matter of choosing whether or not to play for that 34.5 mil, because he's already signed for it and it's not going away. It's not a question of him giving up the 34.5 mil to sign long-term, it's a question of what he earns after that 34.5 mil.

Well, I do apologize for being the member of this conversation who has trouble with logic.

Rufus. I think once he signs the tag there can be no more negotiations on a LTD. And if we were to franchise tag him (not a chance IMO) then he would run into Redskins Park and sign the deal within hours. At that point he would definitely be an unrestricted FA in 2019.

[Rufus T Firefly]

5 minutes ago, clskinsfan said:

Rufus. I think once he signs the tag there can be no more negotiations on a LTD. And if we were to franchise tag him (not a chance IMO) then he would run into Redskins Park and sign the deal within hours. At that point he would definitely be an unrestricted FA in 2019.

No, that's not correct. He can negotiate up until mid-July, like he did this year.

[Bonez3]

19 hours ago, purbeast said:

With who?  

Keenum for likely 7-10 mil cheaper, basically him and top free agent WR in lieu of Kurt. Keenum is making Thielen look like Jordy Nelson. Build the D more and add a big talent at WR with Keenum, yes please.

 

Bortles likely out there as well for 7-10 mi cheaper, same scenario- him plus high end FA WR.

 

These are 2 guys, who basically rode their defense this year, have positioned their teams to be real title contenders. Do you really think Kurt is that much better than these 2 guys. He may be marginally better, but Skins can do more with equivalent talent.

[purbeast]

20 minutes ago, Bonez3 said:

Keenum for likely 7-10 mil cheaper, basically him and top free agent WR in lieu of Kurt. Keenum is making Thielen look like Jordy Nelson. Build the D more and add a big talent at WR with Keenum, yes please.

 

Bortles likely out there as well for 7-10 mi cheaper, same scenario- him plus high end FA WR.

 

These are 2 guys, who basically rode their defense this year, have positioned their teams to be real title contenders. Do you really think Kurt is that much better than these 2 guys. He may be marginally better, but Skins can do more with equivalent talent.

Yeah, replace him with QB's who are on other teams.  That makes about as much sense as saying we could just replace him with Tom Brady.  Hell let's just replace Gruden with Bellechick too while we're at it.

 

Figures someone who keeps calling Cousins "Kurt" has some fantasy scenario setup to replace him with.  Your logic is about as sound as the FO's logic up to this point.

 

Bruce is that you?

[Bonez3]

His GM calls him Kurt, Ima call'em Kurt.

 

Case Keenum is a FA this year. Bortles has easily a 50/50 chance of being released after this year, especially with a 1 and done in paloffs. Jags are seeing a window of opportunity with a top D and by most accounts aren't sold on Bortles being the guy who can take them there. Even though he has made chicken salad out of chicken poop at WR this year. 

[mistertim]

1 hour ago, purbeast said:

Yeah, replace him with QB's who are on other teams.  That makes about as much sense as saying we could just replace him with Tom Brady.  Hell let's just replace Gruden with Bellechick too while we're at it.

 

Figures someone who keeps calling Cousins "Kurt" has some fantasy scenario setup to replace him with.  Your logic is about as sound as the FO's logic up to this point.

 

Bruce is that you?

 

You do realize that Keenum was signed to a one year deal, right? At this point the Vikings will need to make a decision on whether they want to give Bridgewater another shot, since he was playing well for a young guy before he was injured or if they want to just cut ties with him and sign Keenum to a long term contract. Should be interesting to see what they do, but I'm guessing they'll sign Keenum. If they don't, he'll hit the free agency market.

[mistertim]

6 hours ago, Darrell Green Fan said:

 

Oh I think we all agree with that. My point is Kirk has had a much larger sample size to prove he is a better option long term investment than a guy who got hot for a few playoff games.  

 

Well, Flacco isn't a great QB but he has won multiple playoff games in multiple years, including a SB and has played well in them. So its proven that he can play well under the pressure of the bright lights in big game situations. Despite being a better overall QB statistically, that's something that Kirk has never proven he can do which is and has been one of the knocks on him. He laid an egg in his one playoff appearance, laid an egg against a Giants team that wasn't even playing half of their starters last year in a must win game that would have sent us to the playoffs, laid an egg 2 games prior against the Panthers that would have done the same. He's also 0-9 as a starter on weekday games and 0-6 on Monday Night Football. I realize its a team sport but c'mon...that's a worrying thing when you're talking about paying a guy a record breaking contract. 

[WelshSkinsFan]

On 12/24/2017 at 8:47 AM, squatch66 said:

@bla bla bla Good stuff on the cap and how the Jets can make it work, but you never once gave your opinion as a Jets fan. Do you like Cousins as a qb? Do you think he can win you a super bowl?

 

I agree with @Bonez3. I want to see the team make a good competitive offer to Kirk and let him decide. I'd offer him something just a little under what Stafford got.

 

And Keenum fascinates me. He is playing out of his mind this year. He would pair well with both Doctson (throwing it up and letting him make plays) and Jamison (underneath yac). I could see Jay really liking him.

 

Ultimately I think we see a tag and trade, but since we have zero leverage we won't get what we should for him. I could see maybe a 2 this and next year or a 2 this year and a 1 next year if we're lucky.

 

Edit: Just read @bradboyd80's post and I do think that the fans leaving could be a deciding factor into maybe trying to keep Kirk. Maybe, juuuuuuuuust maybe, the front office is feeling the heat from the fans regarding letting Kirk walk like it's no big deal.

 

The way I see it, Kirk is going to stare Bruce down all the way until they have to tag him. Tagging him removes all but the Browns, Bills, and Jets to try to trade him to so we would have to hope for a bidding war.

 

I see this all the time and I have no idea what it is people are seeing with Stafford, nice deep ball but ultimately a gunslinger who loses accuracy for large periods and clearly after all these years of coming up small in big games is no Top 5 QB.  I would happily pay Kirk more for the simple reason that by any objective assessment he is the superior player.

[Tsailand]

19 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

adjusted net yards per attempt,

 

Nice to see the sports media finally catching on.

[Alexa]

I just don't understand why the Redskins can't come in w/ a contract of 100 million dollars over 4 years w/ 75 million guaranteed. If Cousins turned something like that down then we'll truly know that he doesn't want to be here. But I think that will get a deal done, it's fair on all sides. 

[petedaddy]

8 hours ago, wit33 said:

 

Take a look at the games the Skins have won this year and you’ll see the defense played a leading role in most. 

 

Take a look at the games the Skins have lost this year and you'll see the defense played a leading role in most

[ncr2h]

3 hours ago, mistertim said:

 

Well, Flacco isn't a great QB but he has won multiple playoff games in multiple years, including a SB and has played well in them. So its proven that he can play well under the pressure of the bright lights in big game situations. Despite being a better overall QB statistically, that's something that Kirk has never proven he can do which is and has been one of the knocks on him. He laid an egg in his one playoff appearance, laid an egg against a Giants team that wasn't even playing half of their starters last year in a must win game that would have sent us to the playoffs, laid an egg 2 games prior against the Panthers that would have done the same. He's also 0-9 as a starter on weekday games and 0-6 on Monday Night Football. I realize its a team sport but c'mon...that's a worrying thing when you're talking about paying a guy a record breaking contract. 

 

Cousins is undoubtedly a better QB than Flacco.  The fact that Flacco passes this arbitrary test you've chosen, while Cousins does not, just means that your test is meaningless.  If Flacco has proven that he can play well under the pressure of bright lights, why is his playoff statline so pedestrian?  Here are his playoffs ANY/A stats by year:

 

2008: 3.92 (team went 2-1)

2009: 1.78 (team went 1-1)

2010: 4.85 (team went 1-1)

2011: 6.44 (team went 1-1)

2012: 10.02 (team went 4-0)

2014: 7.57 (team went 1-1)

 

As a reference point, Brock Osweiler's career average ANY/A is 4.94, Blaine Gabbert is a 4.25, Jamarcus Russell is a 3.93, and Ryan Leaf is a 2.71.

 

So Joe Flacco spent his first year in the playoffs playing at a similar level to Jamarcus Russell.  His team managed to win 2 games because they had the #3 ranked defense by points, #2 by yards, and #1 by turnovers.  In 3 games he managed just 437 passing yards, 1 TD, and 3 INTs.  He averaged 5.8 yards per pass attempt, so even when he wasn't throwing picks he was barely moving the ball.  His defense forced 8 turnovers in the two games they won.  In his career, Kirk is 2-0 in games in which his defense forces at least 4 turnovers, and 7-3 in games in which his defense forces 3+ (7-1 since the Tampa game in 2015).

 

He came back the next year and played at such a bad level that you would say that Jamarcus Russell is more than twice as good as him.  He was worse than Ryan Leaf.  In the entire history of the NFL dating back to 1920, there have been just 147 QBs who have thrown 45 pass attempts less efficiently than Flacco did in these playoffs.  Since the year 2000, there have been only 19.  Yet his team still went 1-1 because they had the 3rd ranked defense by yards, 3rd by points, and 7th by turnovers.  Baltimore's defense forced 4 turnovers in the lone game they won.

 

The next year he came back and played at about the level of a Brock Osweiler.  We saw how great that was yesterday.  His team still went 1-1 because against the Chiefs their defense gave up just 161 yards and forced 5 turnovers.

 

In 2012 he played at an insane level, no question there.  But look how quickly you gave up on Kirk and ask yourself - if you were the GM, would Flacco have even made it to his 2012 season?  Up to that point, he had already played 9 playoff games and looked absolutely abysmal.  Kirk didn't light it up in his playoff game at the end of the 2015 season, but at 5.58 ANY/A, it was leaps and bounds better than what Flacco was producing until 2011 (Flacco's 8th and 9th playoff games).

[Rufus T Firefly]

26 minutes ago, ncr2h said:

 

Cousins is undoubtedly a better QB than Flacco.  The fact that Flacco passes this arbitrary test you've chosen, while Cousins does not, just means that your test is meaningless.  If Flacco has proven that he can play well under the pressure of bright lights, why is his playoff statline so pedestrian?  Here are his playoffs ANY/A stats by year:

 

2008: 3.92 (team went 2-1)

2009: 1.78 (team went 1-1)

2010: 4.85 (team went 1-1)

2011: 6.44 (team went 1-1)

2012: 10.02 (team went 4-0)

2014: 7.57 (team went 1-1)

 

As a reference point, Brock Osweiler's career average ANY/A is 4.94, Blaine Gabbert is a 4.25, Jamarcus Russell is a 3.93, and Ryan Leaf is a 2.71.

 

LOL. You're right, up thru the age of 24, Joe Flacco had failed to establish himself as a spectacular playoff QB. 

 

He's played 10 playoff games since he turned 25. He has had a passer rating below 92 in exactly one of those ten games. As a comparison, Roethlisberger and Eli have failed to hit that mark in 5 of their last 10 playoff games. Brady, Brees and Rodgers 3 times. 

 

I'm far from a Flacco fan, but the guy has been a tremendous postseason performer, and to argue differently is just plain silly.

[Alexa]

No one is paying Cousins 40 million in year one of a contract. If any GM did that he should be fired on the spot.

[Rufus T Firefly]

7 minutes ago, Alexa said:

No one is paying Cousins 40 million in year one of a contract. If any GM did that he should be fired on the spot.

Stafford got 51 mil in year one of his contract. Actually, it was in year negative one, because he got that money the year before his extension started.

[Rufus T Firefly]

1 hour ago, Alexa said:

I just don't understand why the Redskins can't come in w/ a contract of 100 million dollars over 4 years w/ 75 million guaranteed. If Cousins turned something like that down then we'll truly know that he doesn't want to be here. But I think that will get a deal done, it's fair on all sides. 

I can't imagine he would consider signing that. No agent would advise him to take it, either.

[ncr2h]

15 minutes ago, Rufus T Firefly said:

LOL. You're right, up thru the age of 24, Joe Flacco had failed to establish himself as a spectacular playoff QB. 

 

He's played 10 playoff games since he turned 25. He has had a passer rating below 92 in exactly one of those ten games. As a comparison, Roethlisberger and Eli have failed to hit that mark in 5 of their last 10 playoff games. Brady, Brees and Rodgers 3 times. 

 

I'm far from a Flacco fan, but the guy has been a tremendous postseason performer, and to argue differently is just plain silly.

 

Could you explain more why the arbitrary cutoff of 25 years old is significant?  He was 24 and 359 days in his 4th playoff game and laid an egg (4/10 for 34 yards, 0 TDs, and 1 INT in a game they won).  That might be the worst stat line of a winning QB in playoff history.  On his 25th birthday he went 20/35 for 189 yards, 0 TDs, and 2 INTs.

 

He sucked to an astonishing degree in his first 9 playoff games, and 6 of those games happened after he had basically turned 25 ("basically 25" = within 1 week of turning 25).  Even taking all of this information into account, it's not clear why being 25 is relevant.

[heyholetsgogrant]

Seems like this thread needs to be merged, but I'll keep my short comment on the Jets.  The Jets are a worse destination than we are, their run game is no different, their receiving corps is no different, and their defense is worse.  Throw in a savage NY press and having to face the Pats twice a year, that would be a recipe for disaster for Cousins. Some team (Other than us) is going to roll up the bank truck.

[mistertim]

57 minutes ago, ncr2h said:

 

Cousins is undoubtedly a better QB than Flacco.  The fact that Flacco passes this arbitrary test you've chosen, while Cousins does not, just means that your test is meaningless.  If Flacco has proven that he can play well under the pressure of bright lights, why is his playoff statline so pedestrian?

 

 

So now the ability win and play well in playoff games is an "arbitrary test"? I'd say that's a pretty important factor when talking about an NFL QB...seeing as how that's the entire goal of teams playing.

 

Flacco's numbers were pedestrian/bad in playoff appearances in his rookie and second year. Since then he's been damn good in playoff games.

 

Total playoff numbers:  25 TD, 10 INT

 

6 of those INTs came in playoff games during his rookie and second year which I'll probably give him a bit of a pass on since he was still new to the NFL. Since then he's had 24 TDs to 4 INTs in playoff games. If you think that is pedestrian, I really don't know what to tell you. 

 

Flacco is a guy who overall is not a great QB, especially statistically speaking. However, he seems to be a guy who shows up well when it matters (aka playoff games). Kirk seems to be the opposite. He has excellent statistics in the regular season in general, but (so far) has tended to not show up well when it matters most...in playoff games or must win games to get into the playoffs. Sorry if you don't like it, but to me that's a problem. 

[Paul Cumberland]

27 minutes ago, Rufus T Firefly said:

I can't imagine he would consider signing that. No agent would advise him to take it, either.

 

gotta disagree...  that contract would be so non-bruce cause it would include 3 years fully guaranteed..  could actually work...  guarantee the last year for injury and he may just sign it...  personally, i'd like a longer term contract but hey...  get what you can get it if keeps him in the fold...

[Rufus T Firefly]

14 minutes ago, ncr2h said:

 

Could you explain more why the arbitrary cutoff of 25 years old is significant?  He was 24 and 359 days in his 4th playoff game and laid an egg (4/10 for 34 yards, 0 TDs, and 1 INT in a game they won).  That might be the worst stat line of a winning QB in playoff history.  On his 25th birthday he went 20/35 for 189 yards, 0 TDs, and 2 INTs.

 

He sucked to an astonishing degree in his first 9 playoff games, and 6 of those games happened after he had basically turned 25 ("basically 25" = within 1 week of turning 25).  Even taking all of this information into account, it's not clear why being 25 is relevant.

Yeah, chief, it's got nothing to do with 25 being a specific cutoff point. It has to do with being able to recognize that QBs take time to develop. If someone came in here and said that Cousins threw more INTs than TDs for the first three years of his career, then he must not be a very good QB, I'm sure you'd be fine with it.

 

Since  the 2010-2011 playoff runs, where Flacco threw 7 TDs and 2 INTs, scored 20 points or more in every game against good defenses, and had a passer rating of at least 95 in 3 of 4 games are being referred to by you as "sucking to an astonishing degree", it's clear you're happy to act like a clown and I won't waste any more time on this nonsense.