Will Cousins Play For The Skins In 2018

[Skinsinparadise]

1 hour ago, wit33 said:

 

In my view, this is flawed logic and I prefer to look at each game as it’s own entity. The Skins have been in most games when the 4th quarter comes around over the last 48 games and many variables have resulted in wins and losses. This is true with a defense that wasn’t a strength or an offense that was above average last and average this year.

 

I was sitting in the stands in New Orleans talking to Saint fans who were complementing Kirk and the Redskins offense saying the dude has our number.  The Saints guy in back of me left thinking the game was over and his team lost.  I told the remaining Saint fan behind me with 6 minutes or so left in the game -- that the Redskins defense is a dumpster fire especially in clutch situations where they have to hold a lead, I wouldn't leave if I were you.  And, we know what happened. 

 

I haven't looked recently but at that point in the season Kirk led the league in 4th quarter comebacks.  

 

40 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

Rodgers is the kind of guy you CAN cut some corners with in certain areas because of his skill set. As was mentioned he doesn't necessarily need an elite OL because of his playmaking and escapability.

 

He has a pretty good O line. Ranked 5th in the league by Football Outsiders.  Why the heck are the Packers paying THREE receivers top money.  How are they pulling all of this stuff off?  You draft well.  Winning isn't about FA IMO.   The idea that you can't pay a QB and build a roster is overstated.  This decision doesn't seem to be a dilemma for other GMs.  Give me another example of a team in this situation that let their guy go?  Brees maybe but he was damaged goods. 

[mistertim]

41 minutes ago, NoCalMike said:

Question: Lets say the organization is neutral on Cousins staying or going.  Is there any good reason not to use the transitional tag on him just to at least see what other teams are willing to pay him?  What is the downside?  With that tag, you at least are giving yourself the opportunity to keep Cousins if the price tag is in the range of what you were going to offer him anyway.

 

I don't see a good reason to simply just let Cousins walk outright unless there is a specific QB or two out there in free agency that they want and sign pretty soon.

 

Yeah I don't see any way they just let him walk unless they really are simply ready to move on. But they'd have to have a plan in place for that and I doubt they do. With the transition tag a few things could happen. 

 

1) He's content to play another year on the tag....though it wouldn't be as much as on a regular franchise tag

2) He goes out and gets a LTD offer and we feel it's reasonable enough to match and he stays with us on a LTD

3) He goes out and gets a LTD offer and it's too rich for us and we part ways

3 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I was sitting in the stands in New Orleans talking to Saint fans who were complementing Kirk and the Redskins offense saying the dude has our number.  The Saints guy in back of me left thinking the game was over and his team lost.  I told the remaining Saint fan behind me with 6 minutes or so left in the game -- that the Redskins defense is a dumpster fire especially in clutch situations where they have to hold a lead, I wouldn't leave if I were you.  and we know what happened. 

 

I haven't looked recently but at that point in the season Kirk led the league in 4th quarter comebacks.  

 

 

He has a pretty good O line. Ranked 5th in the league by Football Outsiders.  Why the heck are the Packers paying THREE receivers top money.  How are they pulling all of this stuff off?  You draft well.  Winning isn't about FA IMO.  

 

That's true, you're absolutely right. It requires having a top notch scouting staff and a good amount of luck. Neither of which we seem to have at the moment. As far as Rodgers, couldn't that be said to be a case where a QB really does make his line look better than it is? He's one of the best I've ever seen at making things happen when pressured or when things break down.

[Skinsinparadise]

4 minutes ago, mistertim said:

That's true, you're absolutely right. It requires having a top notch scouting staff and a good amount of luck. Neither of which we seem to have at the moment. 

 

I agree with this.  Where I depart with some as to extending this point: IMO its much harder (not easier) for a limited FO to reinvent the wheel and showcase themselves as the team that proves the exception to the rule by bringing back the Dilfer model to new success  -- than it is to work it the other way around.

 

 

[clskinsfan]

55 minutes ago, nameuser1000 said:

Yep, the Flacco deal was supposed to hamstring the Ravens. Didn't end up happening.

 

I would argue it did. They have not fielded a team near the caliber of that Super Bowl winner since Flacco's extension.

8 minutes ago, mistertim said:

 

1) He's content to play another year on the tag....though it wouldn't be as much as on a regular franchise tag

 

You have to figure this is what he would do. Sign the deal immediately for 28 million. Then he is guaranteed UFA in 2019 simply due to the financials of trying to tag him again. 

[SkinsBoss]

We just bring him back.  Long term deal

[Leonard Washington]

So many good comments in this thread.  Cousins is a good QB.  Is he the prototypical "put his team on his back" player? No  Does he make the offense go?  For sure.  Could he be as successful or more successful on another team?  I hope I'm wrong but I don't think so.  Cousins has benefited from above average offensive coaches throughout his career.  I don't think he has enough to carry a defensive minded team with basic offense.

[wit33]

14 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

I was sitting in the stands in New Orleans talking to Saint fans who were complementing Kirk and the Redskins offense saying the dude has our number.  The Saints guy in back of me left thinking the game was over and his team lost.  I told the remaining Saint fan behind me with 6 minutes or so left in the game -- that the Redskins defense is a dumpster fire especially in clutch situations where they have to hold a lead, I wouldn't leave if I were you.  And, we know what happened. 

 

I haven't looked recently but at that point in the season Kirk led the league in 4th quarter comebacks.  

 

Yes, a terrible finish by the defense. No doubt. With that said, the offense had a chance to seal it and didn’t.

 

Do a similar short story for all games and you’ll see the defense played great, to the point of dominating the other opponent 6-7 times, all leading to wins. 

 

All I’m trying to say is the defense made contributions to this years team and helped Kirk and the offense a great deal in almost half the games. Lack of consistency plagued the D though, but it’s tough in today’s NFL to stop offenses, especially when playing a decent opponent.  

 

Last years defense for example, I thought hung in by the skin of their teeth and were below average, not the worst defense in history like many thought. 

26 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

THREE receivers top money

 

Cobb and Nelson on there way out or will restructure. 

 

Im with you though, they usually have tried to give Rodgers weapons through the draft. 

[Commander -JB-]

Skins let him walk or tag/trade him.  He's in that tier of guys like Dalton, smith and Stafford who can get you close to .500 every year and you just pray you get one of those years like Falcons had last year but no way will you be winning divisions on a regular basis.  The man flat out sucks vs the Giants.  Couldnt beat the Giants last year to get into the playoffs when they were out there with a preseason game plan.  Played his worst game yesterday.  Adios.

[Skinsinparadise]

34 minutes ago, wit33 said:

 

Yes, a terrible finish by the defense. No doubt. With that said, the offense had a chance to seal it and didn’t.

 

Do a similar short story for all games and you’ll see the defense played great, to the point of dominating the other opponent 6-7 times, all leading to wins. 

 

 

Out of the 9 losses. 8 out of the 9 of them they gave up 30 points (1 of those was 29 points but that's close enough).  That's atrocious.  The only loss where the defensive wasn't lit up point wise which resulted in a loss was yesterday.   Going through the wins -- only game where there was little offense and the defensive carried them was Seattle.  And in that one the defense folded as it often does in the clutch.  And Kirk bailed them out with a comeback.  Other than that I guess you can say the Cardinals game was borderline.  

 

I know some are very fired up about Kirk leaving.  My point here though is really almost nothing to do with Kirk.   If anyone thinks Mayfield or whomever comes here and solves this issue -- you are likely going to be very disappointed.  If you give up 30 points plus which the Redskins did in just about every loss -- your QB is unlikely to bail you out much.  This is the NFL not the Big 12.    The defense has to be fixed.  I think getting healthy is 50% of the battle but if they use their draft picks on defense versus a reboot at QB -- I think the turnaround will come.

[Wildbunny]

I'm starting to wonder if Kirk didn't play like crap on purpose this last 2 years so Bruce can lower his offer and low ball him, giving him an excuse for moving away.

[actorguy1]

1 hour ago, clskinsfan said:

 

I would argue it did. They have not fielded a team near the caliber of that Super Bowl winner since Flacco's extension.

 

How much of that is also poor college scouting and poor free agent choices?

[Skinsinparadise]

13 minutes ago, Wildbunny said:

I'm starting to wonder if Kirk didn't play like crap on purpose this last 2 years so Bruce can lower his offer and low ball him, giving him an excuse for moving away.

 

A guy said on 106.7 on Russell's show this afternoon that season ticket holders got an email today about how fans blame Kirk for yesterday's loss.   Russell asked the caller to find that email for him if he could.  I haven't heard it mentioned again on the show.  But it created a little discussion from Russell about how Bruce is determined to make Kirk look like the bad guy in the negotiation.  And he said that Dan worked to make nice with Kirk ultimately last off season.  But Russell suggested he doesn't think its the same with Bruce-Kirk. 

[Burgold]

28 minutes ago, Wildbunny said:

I'm starting to wonder if Kirk didn't play like crap on purpose this last 2 years so Bruce can lower his offer and low ball him, giving him an excuse for moving away.

If this is true and a Bruce Allen play then it sucks. The one thing you ought never do is burn bridges. It's a small world. If Kirk doesn't work out then there's no need to make him a villain. Is Kirk a greedy athlete? I think all professional athletes are greedy so who cares. 

 

Ultimately, this is simple. Put your best foot forward, and present a good offer. Try to get the other side to sign or negotiate. If you can and you get a deal that's great. If he's so greedy or determined not to be a Redskin that it's impossible to sign him. C'est la vie. Thank him for his efforts, shake his hand, and find someone in the draft, free agency, or on the roster to take the reins.

 

I'd rather we sign Kirk because I feel like he's good enough to be signed. I also feel like the Redskins' FO made a bet, lost, and ought to pay up. I don't feel like Kirk is Tom Brady, Joe Montana, John Elway, etc. but I do think he can be a good to very good qb.

[LaxinFish29]

25 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

A guy said on 106.7 on Russell's show this afternoon that season ticket holders got an email today about how fans blame Kirk for yesterday's loss.   

 

I sure didn't get anything of the sort.

[HigSkin]

30 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

A guy said on 106.7 on Russell's show this afternoon that season ticket holders got an email today about how fans blame Kirk for yesterday's loss.   

 

I haven't received any email either....I call foul!  The optics of something like that would be really bad.

[wit33]

59 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Out of the 9 losses. 8 out of the 9 of them they gave up 30 points (1 of those was 29 points but that's close enough).  That's atrocious.  The only loss where the defensive wasn't lit up point wise which resulted in a loss was yesterday.   Going through the wins -- only game where there was little offense and the defensive carried them was Seattle.  And in that one the defense folded as it often does in the clutch.  And Kirk bailed them out with a comeback.  Other than that I guess you can say the Cardinals game was borderline.  

 

I know some are very fired up about Kirk leaving.  My point here though is really almost nothing to do with Kirk.   If anyone thinks Mayfield or whomever comes here and solves this issue -- you are likely going to be very disappointed.  If you give up 30 points plus which the Redskins did in just about every loss -- your QB is unlikely to bail you out much.  This is the NFL not the Big 12.    The defense has to be fixed.  I think getting healthy is 50% of the battle but if they use their draft picks on defense versus a reboot at QB -- I think the turnaround will come.

 

This years defense was incredibly inconsistent, but schemed up well in 6-7 others that led to wins. Definitely room for improvement. Not sure what being dominant in 6-7 games means as far as value to a season when they were poor in others.  Thoughts??

 

Last year the defense rarely let up 30 points and were considered historically bad by many on here. PPG allowed were average, but somehow they were used as the sole reason for not doing well, while the offense under performing was overlooked. 

 

This is why I continue to share the idea of viewing each game as it’s own entity. 

 

The playoffs have been realistic each season. I’m with you though, the team isn’t quite built to carry a QB. 

[JSSkinz]

I really want us to transition Kirk so we can expose his true value.

 

Now that the fanboys and beat reporters are out of the way we get to see what the actual decision-makers around the league think, you know the guys who actually do numbers for a living and make real business decisions.

 

Its gonna be interesting.

 

 

 

 

[BleedBNG]

47 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

A guy said on 106.7 on Russell's show this afternoon that season ticket holders got an email today about how fans blame Kirk for yesterday's loss.  

 

Another reliable source  

Don't get me wrong, I still feel that a 3 yrs. $78M guaranteed deal is the way to go (they can always add an extension if KC helps the team get over their mediocre hump), but this article sums it up for me... except for the Sam Bradford part

http://www.richmond.com/redskins-xtra/woody-redskins-decision-on-cousins-isn-t-that-difficult-it/article_c895b5f3-169c-53df-8323-54e84740343a.html

[Skinsinparadise]

40 minutes ago, HigSkin said:

 

I haven't received any email either....I call foul!  The optics of something like that would be really bad.

 

Glad to hear it.  Like I said the guy didn't follow up and no mention of it again after.

46 minutes ago, LaxinFish29 said:

 

I sure didn't get anything of the sort.

 

Good.  I am not rooting for that caller to turn out correct.

 

39 minutes ago, wit33 said:

 

This years defense was incredibly inconsistent, but schemed up well in 6-7 others that led to wins. Definitely room for improvement. Not sure what being dominant in 6-7 games means as far as value to a season when they were poor in others.  Thoughts??

 

Manusky said before the season, his #1 goal was to stop the run. That didn't happen.  The run defense seemed to fall off a cliff after Jonathan Allen got hurt.  They IMO need a nose and maybe another MLB.  In a few minutes, you should watch the Rose Bowl if you got time.  You got Roquan Smith MLB of Georgia who I think would be awesome teamed up with Zach Brown and could help.  The dude is like London Fletcher in terms of diagnosing plays before they happen.   Zach was really good but he didn't come off like Kuechly or Sean Lee where he seemed to have the opposing team's offense figured out. 

 

One of my many reasons why I hate to let Kirk go is if you go look for a QB in the draft -- you are blowing a prime opportunity to upgrade this defense.  The #13 pick I think is prime real estate to get a really good impact guy.  If you get Mayfield there is a good chance you have to trade up so you'd lose multiple opportunities to upgrade a unit that desperately needs it.  

[BatteredFanSyndrome]

So determining Kirks "true value" is that important to you, huh?  Even if you get your wish in that his value is say 25M rather than 27-28, said team will structure the deal to take us out of play.   To do anything else would simply be wasted time and energy.  So yeah if his "true value" is less, that's great for another team, not ours.

 

[Grizz]

I think there are only 10 teams that need a QB and are in position to either draft or pay big $ for one.  Based on Teams CAP space and draft position, I think Kirk won't have a lot of choices.  Now I realize that teams can create CAP space but as it is now, I think the main competition will be Buffalo or NY Jets.  I think the Jets draft a QB.  My gut says Kirk signs LTD to get stability

 

[JSSkinz]

35 minutes ago, BatteredFanSyndrome said:

So determining Kirks "true value" is that important to you, huh?  Even if you get your wish in that his value is say 25M rather than 27-28, said team will structure the deal to take us out of play.   To do anything else would simply be wasted time and energy.  So yeah if his "true value" is less, that's great for another team, not ours.

 

 

I doubt it, I just don't value Kirk the way you do, its nothing against Kirk he's a great guy and checks all the boxes but if there is a team that tries to create a "poison pill" they're idiots, let them do it.

 

Every dollar counts and I know Skinsparadise keeps posting about all those WR's at GB and why can't we do it if they do it but GB has invested heavily in offense and not so much on defense, it may be why they haven't won a Superbowl since 2011 and they have the best QB in football.

 

They pay Clay Matthews big money and that's it, nobody else on that defense has a chunky cap number.

 

Now if we transition him and his value is less, we match and pay less money.  Is that a negative?

 

 

 

 

[Skinsinparadise]

Just now, jschuck12001 said:

 

Every dollar counts and I know Skinsparadise keeps posting about all those WR's at GB and why can't we do it if they do it but GB has invested heavily in offense and not so much on defense, it may be why they haven't won a Superbowl since 2011 and they have the best QB in football.

 

 

2011 isn't that long ago and every time  Rodgers is healthy just about they are threat to win it again.

 

The thing about we can't pay the QB big money drill.  That's fine.  But what team are you hanging your hat on that let their QB walk like we are talking about doing here?    Teams are paying their QBs what the market commands.  I don't mean this sarcastically but to go a different route aren't we banking on Bruce just being a bit smarter than the rest of the league?  And if so, what has he done to earn that trust?

[clskinsfan]

54 minutes ago, jschuck12001 said:

I really want us to transition Kirk so we can expose his true value.

 

Now that the fanboys and beat reporters are out of the way we get to see what the actual decision-makers around the league think, you know the guys who actually do numbers for a living and make real business decisions.

 

Its gonna be interesting.

 

 

 

 

I dont think he will test the market if we transition him. Why would he? He can sign the offer and make 28 mill next season then be a FA in 2019.

[JSSkinz]

2 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

2011 isn't that long ago and every time  Rodgers is healthy just about they are threat to win it again.

 

The thing about we can't pay the QB big money drill.  That's fine.  But what team are you hanging your hat on that let their QB walk like we are talking about doing here?    Teams are paying their QBs what the market commands.  I don't mean this sarcastically but to go a different route aren't we banking on Bruce just being a bit smarter than the rest of the league?  And if so, what has he done to earn that trust?

 

But Kirk isn't Rodgers and I know this has already been debated so no need to beat a dead horse.

 

If we can just sign Kirk for about $22M I think that's fair, all this talk about $25M - $30M is ridiculous, he's not worth that amount of money.

 

That's all I'm saying, let's be smart, don't just give the farm away.

 

The Bruce Allen thing is interesting, he doesn't get credit for any of our good signings but everyone says he's been controlling things since he's been here, which is it?