CRobi21

Alex Smith Trade Thread (Details Inside)

Recommended Posts

We have Smith for at least 4 years lest things go bad. No need to waste an early pick on a guy you don't hope to see much action till his contract is up......and we have Colt. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Rufus T Firefly said:

But we won't, because we're "going for it". And "it" is likely going to stop them from even properly evaluating QBs, because we have to use all our resources to win as many games as possible, now, rather than thinking of the future.

 

Of course, "it" means still being a long shot for even a playoff spot, which is why it amazes me that so many people are OK with this path.

 

Yeah I agree.  That's what I meant on a post today that its Superbowl or special season or bust with Alex Smith during his tenure here.  That's not on Alex Smith at all.  It's on the FO for going older at the position and giving up draft capital and losing a top young player.  That's what teams do when they are all in.  So if this results in 8-8, 9-7 seasons with Alex here to me the whole drill was a failure.  Is that what I expect to happen?  Yes.  Is it because I don't like Alex Smith?  Not at all. It's because they brought in Alex Smith while also downgrading their draft position and defense.  So not only do they have to upgrade the roster -- they also have to make up ground for downgrading the roster.

 

So for me (to each their own everyone is entitled to their opinion) the ones who come on strong about how this is a no brainer slam dunk best case scenario as for Kirk leaving -- to me that's absurd.  But if people are looking at it purely as sort of keeping to being an 8-8 team -- yeah from that side of things, its IMO slam dunk brilliant.   And its nothing to do with Alex Smith.  To me its all about my lack of faith to build around him quickly. 

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, TheShredSkinz said:

We have Smith for at least 4 years lest things go bad. No need to waste an early pick on a guy you don't hope to see much action till his contract is up......and we have Colt. 

 

Why for at least 4?  The reporters talking about it said as far as what they heard the guarantees are 3 years top.  

 

We had Andy Reid with the exact same QB draft a guy in the top 10 -- heck he even traded up to do it.  And Alex was even younger then.   If a QB drops to our pick that Jay loves -- why is it smart for Andy to do it (KC reporters are saying fans are practically giddy about Mahomes taking over for Alex Smith) but not so sharp if we do it?  Especially if its for a guy like Josh Allen who is raw and could benefit from riding the bench for 2 or 3 years or a guy like Rudolph who has to adjust to an NFL offense from a spread or whomever.

 

The Browns were looking to trade for Alex and draft a QB.  The guy behind that, Dorsey, is no dummy and he knows Alex Smith as good as anyone.  

 

I am not saying force a pick for a QB.  And I like Alex Smith but I am not looking at him as a long term solution.

 

 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Skinsinparadise said:

 

Why is it an Alex Smith versus Kirk Cousins debate? 

 

 

Because that's what many in this thread and others are making it?

 

It shouldn't be. I think that was clear in my posts.

 

But it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Rufus T Firefly said:

But we won't, because we're "going for it". And "it" is likely going to stop them from even properly evaluating QBs, because we have to use all our resources to win as many games as possible, now, rather than thinking of the future.

 

Of course, "it" means still being a long shot for even a playoff spot, which is why it amazes me that so many people are OK with this path.

 

They could surprise us but I agree that it's unlikely they draft a quality QB in this draft. This constant win now mode has not yielded many wins.

 

The rest is not directed at you as I am certain we are on the same page here. Just building off your post:

 

Let's see if they actually address the issues. Do they get a stud RB and get the oline to block for them. Do they get a #1WR. NT anyone? Game changing FS is also needed. And a TE to replace Reed (he just cannot stay on the field. He should probably retire for his own safety.) Could also use ILB but not as critical as the others. 

 

Say Alex's $17M this year against the CAP saved the Redskins $13M (taking the extreme position here for argument sake. I think it could have been a bit less.). You have to likely spend some of that money to resign Breeland instead of rolling with Fuller's rookie contract - that leaves you will conservatively what $7M - maybe. That's not including resigning Brown - which I see as 2nd most critical after Kirk - Can $7M to $13M get you that much more than with Kirk on the payroll? All other arguments in terms of restructuring and others moves could have been done with Kirk's salary. The only additional resources are the delta in salary between Kirk and Alex. And you handicapped yourself in the draft by moving your 3rd. 

 

That's what they are saying is approximately $7M to $13M in CAP is the difference between winning and losing. Sorry, just not seeing it. 

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Dan73 said:

You said atheletes don't do it. I have show players who have. 

 

The same as the Falcons are expecting their qb to take a team friendly deal next time around.

 

Tampa Bali took a pay cut a few years ago.

 

Fitzgerald offered to take one to keep Boldin.

 

I am not doing your homework for you anymore.

 

So, you should really take @Taylor 36 message to heart. Personal attacks (Subway remark, Gerber Baby - schooling you! BTW: The 1990s called they want their catch phrase back - sorry could not resist) will eventually get you a "Hi There" that will not end well for you. I am not a mod nor do I play one on TV. Just some friendly advice to a new poster who either didn't read or didn't understand the rules here. Or you chose to ignore them. That is really not a good plan if you want to hang around here for more than a minute. 

 

There is also a real problem with your argument. It's clear you did not do your own homework or you would not have made the statements you did. 

 

Ray Bourque - Was under paid but in the 1980s and 1990s but when players had a lot less control or leverage. They would just ship guys off if their salaries got too high. At their level of income in the 1980's and early 1990's, moving their families was a big deal. So guys would routinely take less to keep from getting traded - especially from a good team. So Ray did take less money for several years. But then in 1993 he tried to get paid by taking the Bruins to arbitration. He wanted $4.25M they offered $1.875M. He got $2.25M. When his salary got too high they traded him to Colorado. Not exactly doing it for the good of the team. And it could be argued he was getting paid his worth based on the arbitration ruling. 

 

Sean Payton - Horrible example. He has nothing to do with the CAP. Has zero impact on player salaries. Not sure if it's possible to come up with a worse example.

 

Paul Kariya - The only time he took a pay cut was when he was dumped by the Ducks to keep from paying him a $10M bonus. He took $1.2M for one yr at Colorado. After the lockout he moved teams again but for much more at $4.5M per yr for 2 yrs. He was out of the league after that. His $82M lifetime puts him in the top 20 all time (as late as 2014 he was actually in the top 10). Not bad for a guy who never even made a Stanley Cup. More importantly, he was forced to take a pay cut. Did he take a biggerv one than needed? Probably. But he already made his money and it lasted all of 1 yr of playing. 

 

The other guys - 

Matt Ryan - This is not out of the kindness of his heart if it happens. He had a down year and is aging at age 33 in May. His comp % was the lowest since 2011 - yards lowest since 2010 - only 20 TDs to 12 int. Not exactly bargaining power there. I live in Atlanta now so I watched almost every game. Most fans want him gone.

 

Tamba Hali - He was forced to take the cut or be released. He had $9M coming to him in the last year of his contract. By taking the reduced contract he was able to still play. This was not to give the team a break. It was so he could get paid $6M instead of nothing. He was given an extension that could have been voided by the team 5 days after the SB. His cap hits were/are 2017 - $8.7M and 2018 $9.4M. He was on the PUP in 2017. Even if he played at his age that is not exactly a team friendly contract and the $3M "cut" was actually moved into those next two years extension.

 

Let us know when Fitz actually takes a pay cut. My understanding he is thinking about retiring.  

 

So none of your examples are accurate. They were mostly forced to take lower pay with the threat of being released or were in fact released and forced to take a pay cut. And the coach thing. No impact on player salaries. Should not have been used at all. 

 

There are only two players in the NFL that I know of that took an actual pay cut or significantly lower contract to help the team their team. One was Peyton Manning. In 2011 he took a lower contract than he could have commanded even after the Colts promised to make him the highest paid player in NFL history. Still at $18M/yr it was not too shabby had he actually gotten paid. However, his reward was in 2012 he was released so the Colts did not have to pay him a $28M roster bonus. No good deed goes unpunished. In 2014 he actually took a pay cut with the Broncos - $4M. He got a SB out of it so good on him. 

 

The other is Tom Brady. He has taken lesser salaries (never a pay cut), but then again his wife makes more then some NFL teams. I understand now though that he wants to be paid. Just a rumor - but would be interesting. But he could afford to be cavalier. 

 

Michael Jordan took lower salaries for years - they just paid the taxes for his endorsements. But still he wanted guys like Pippin, Grant, Armstrong, Kerr and Kukoc to get paid. So good on him too. 

 

There are guys that have taken slightly lesser contracts but nothing really substantial that I can think of. Aaron Rogers maybe? Not Drew Brees. I guess there could be a few but none of who you mentioned has. And ask Mark Schlereth about how contracts in the NFL worked in the 1980s and 1990's and still do for players that are not marque names. Also, all those contracts that were restructured just turned salary into signing bonus and included more years. So they help the CAP but are not a pay cut and it kicks the CAP issue down the road. See Tony Romo debacle. 

 

The actual argument you were trying to make is that Kirk Cousins should have been willing to take a lessor contract to stay here. The problem with that is it ignores that all the other player are getting paid their worth and that the team is ruthless in terms of players salaries. I will never understand why the players are characterized as greedy yet the team can crap all over players in terms of contracts and it's OK. If the teams just "cared about winning" like the players are supposed to be, there would be no salary CAP just revenue sharing to keep teams with lower earning capabilities competitive.  

 

Kirk had every right to expect to get paid. And the salary demands got that high because the team fumbled the entire process. He took advantage. Good on him. I bet Jimmy Garrapolo has already sent a thank you text. As has Mathew Stafford and Derek Carr. 

 

Again, may want to do some homework of your own before telling others to do so. Someone else might actually do so. 

 

Edited by goskins10
  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, goskins10 said:

That's what they are saying is approximately $7M to $13M in CAP is the difference between winning and losing. Sorry, just not seeing it. 


It's actually 3 starters if you're creative, but at least two and they'll be impact players. Look at 2017, could have had:

1) Markus Wheaton/M. Goodwin and Micah Hyde/J. Poyer
2) Latavius Murray and Bennie Logan/Dontari Poe

Yeah, that does make a huge difference. 

Yes, this further illustrates how awful committing $5.25M AAV to McClain was.

Edited by Silvernon

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I wonder if Smith's terms were that whatever team he goes to doesn't draft a FIRST round QB or that they draft no QBs at all?

 

I mean, a first round QB is a lot closer to getting on the field than say a 4th-5th rounder.

 

Reason I ask is because I think this is a good class for a developmental QB. Like the Lauletta kid from Richmond. 

 

A raw project QB drafted in the 4th or 5th would be perfect as he would likely be ready right around Smith's on his way out...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Silvernon said:


It's actually 3 starters if you're creative, but at least two and they'll be impact players. Look at 2017, could have had:

1) Markus Wheaton/M. Goodwin and Micah Hyde/J. Poyer
2) Latavius Murray and Bennie Logan/Dontari Poe

Yeah, that does make a huge difference. 

Yes, this further illustrates how awful committing $5.25M AAV to McClain was.

 

Not necessarily directed at you, but I see a lot of people using AAV as the new acronym of choice. The problem is it's the worst possible number to look at. It has no real bearing on the cost of a player unless they play out the full contract without renegotiation and/or it's fully guaranteed. Those are very rare contracts. McClain for example, yes if he plays his full 4 years he will make and average of $5,25M. However his CAP hit last year was just His CAP hit for 2018 is $4.7M. They can then dump him after next year with a relatively small dead cap hit of $2.5M or half that ($1,25M) if they designate him a June 1st cut.

 

Ok, now that we have that out of the way - and I did this for a reason. You used AAV for McClain but then used actual salaries for some of the other players. Can't have it both ways. Also, with all your slashes and 1 and 2, and then saying 3 players if you are creative, I am just not sure where you are going? I have to make some assumptions since it's not clear. If they are wrong, please clear it up so I can make a more specific response.

 

Again, not sure I see a 3 person combination anywhere unless I assume the slash means both players. But then example #1 is 4 players. WTF let's look at them all. 

 

Markus Weaton (WR) - 2017 - $5.25M - AAV - $5.5M

Latavius Murray (RB) - 2017 - $2.9M - AAV - $4.97

M Goodwin (WR) - 2017 - $3.25M - AAV $3.0M

Micah Hyde (S) - 2017 - $4M - AAV - $6.18M

J Poyer (S) - 2017 - $2.75M - AAV - $3M

Bennie Logan (NT) - 2017 - $7.85M - AAV - $7.85M  

Dontarie Poe (NT) - 2017 - $8M - AAV $8M

 

If you sign either NT, if you resign Breeland you are done - (which I hate both contracts. One year deal which will turn into much bigger money this year. Let's see what they command then talk about AAV, but Ok let's go with it.) If you don;t sign Breeland, yes you can get maybe two more players but you need a CB replacement or you go with Norman and a couple of second yr guys or a 1st yr draft pick. Didn't we just try that a WR? Didn't work so well. 

 

There is no combination of AAV that gets you 3 players if you sign a NT. If you don't, you can get there but not sure those are the guys I believe put us over the top. Even if you use 2017 salary, you can only get there by not signing a NT - arguably the most important position - but I get that is debatable. What woudl a RB look like. Hard to say a WR would make that much impact. Kirk still threw for over 4000 yds. A WR helps but is not as critical as S, NT and RB IMO. But let's look at some of those players.

 

Goodwin - 56 catches good for 2nd on the Redskins - 962 yds would have ledth team - but just 2TDs. Good value probably. Agian, though not sure how many wins that's worth since even without many targets Kirk managed to pass for 4000 yds. 

Wheaton - Really? - 3 recs 51c yds and 0 TDs in 11 games? He only has 110 lifetime catches. He is not worth what they paid him - not even close. 

Hyde is really a SS - but he did play a littel FS with Poyer and him mixing it up a lot actually. So Ok. Bleacher Report has Hyde listed as the #14 best SS. I like his play and he could be good - but after only a $4M hit this year his salary goes up quite a bit. 

Poyer - He is listed as the 18th best FS. They got a really good value there even with AAV. Jsut a 2 ytr contract. He will get a lot more after- but really good value here. 

 

I talked about Poe and Logan. If you sign them, it takes up all the money you have unless you don't sign Breeland which just pushes the problem some where else. I am still not convinced the money saved was worth it and gets us over the top. Thanks for listing the players though. It forced me to look at the actual numbers. I mean that sincerely. Some clarification of exactly who you believe makes up the 3 that push us over the top would be helpful. 

 

After looking at the data though I believe I was right to begin with.... :cheers:   But time will tell. Bruce may surprise me. Unlike others I do not hate his drafts. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Dan73 said:

You said atheletes don't do it. I have show players who have. 

 

The same as the Falcons are expecting their qb to take a team friendly deal next time around.

 

Tampa Bali took a pay cut a few years ago.

 

Fitzgerald offered to take one to keep Boldin.

 

I am not doing your homework for you anymore.

 

We were discussing Cousins and Tom Brady.  I assumed you understood that meant we were discussing NFL players but obviously I overestimated you.

 

So just to conclude this little side bar you are speculating on Ryan and offered nothing but your opinion, we'll see about that one.  I found no article of Fitzgerald taking a pay cut when he played with Bolden, I did find that years later in 2014 he did restructure to help the team but it didn't cost him a dime.  I suggest what you remember may be the same thing.    As for your third example I have no idea who "Tampa Bali" is and neither does Google.  So so far you have nothing that I can confirm.  Even with Fitz that's exactly one example to go with Brady.

 

So we are back to people asking Kirk Cousins to do something virtually no other player has done.  And for who?  A team that has disrespected him throughout the process.  He is supposed to take less to stay with them?  Why?  To satisfy fans whose feelings are hurt?  

Edited by Darrell Green Fan
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 hours ago, KDawg said:

 

Because that's what many in this thread and others are making it?

 

It shouldn't be. I think that was clear in my posts.

 

But it is.

 

Not IMO.  Some, yes.  You got a wide mix of topics but most center on the actual move (capital gained-capital lost-how do the decision makers look on it) versus most of it being a tit for tat Alex-Kirk comparison. A big chunk of the Kirk discussion is actually generated by his critics defining him as the villain here and the FO did great to make due.  And people respond.  And then it goes back and forth.

 

It sounds like you agree that the FO made the best out of a bad situation.  That's cool.  But there are some who disagree and its not about sour grapes.  In their defense, the Alex Smith option was vetted pretty heavily as an option way before the deal happened. Ditto getting compensation for Kirk.  And this wasn't painted as the best case scenario back then by most. 

 

But I agree with your core point -- Alex Smith is very similar to Kirk Cousins.  For me personally, I wish Alex was a FA and he was signed that way.  I'd feel much different about it all versus trading for him.  Ditto getting compensation for Kirk -- granted it still could happen but this scenario makes it unlikely.  And I am not pounding the FO just to pound them.  I made this case before I even knew this trade would happen. If Kirk leaves, my goal as I said then was to get trade value for him and go cheap-young.  None of that looks to be playing out.   If anything its the reverse.  Though, I do like Alex Smith if that's the pure focus. 

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I watched Smith closely when he was with 49ers while living in California.  Smith needs a running attack and all the other offensive players performing at a high level in order to be successful.  Andy Reed always seems to sucker the Skins on trades.  Do not look for Smith to take us far into the playoffs.  Start with low expectations.  If you like dink and dunk football Smith is your guy.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, goskins10 said:

 

I am still not convinced the money saved was worth it and gets us over the top.

 

I get what you're saying, and I think you can make the case both ways - does it get us over the top? Not in isolation. If we call Breeland and Fuller a wash talent wise (for arguments sake), and presume we resign Breeland then it's essentially Alex Smith + a starter vs Kirk + 3rd round pick. Does having an extra quality starter help the team more than not having one? Absolutely. Is it possible we could have got good value and a better player in the 3rd round? Sure. Is it possible that we could have picked up a scrub in the 3rd? definitely (see Matt Jones)

 

So another perspective of looking at the trade would be:

 

Alex Smith + Breeland + a quality starter (with maybe a bit of cap left over)

 

Kirk Cousins + Fuller + 3rd round pick.

 

Cousins and Smith is pretty much a wash in terms of quality. You could argue Breeland and Fuller both ways - Breeland more proven and experienced, Fuller more upside and potential so it's pretty much a wash.

 

So essentially we've traded a future unknown 3rd round pick on a rookie deal for a proven quality starter on a more expensive deal but with the money to pay them. Our last 5 3rd round picks have been Jordan Reed, Morgan Moses, Spencer Long, Matt Jones, Kendall Fuller, Fabian Moreau - so it's hit and miss in terms of overall quality and first year impact. You can make the case that at least with the money rather than the pick, we should be able to target a quality addition at a specific key position rather than going BPA in a position we don't necessarily need in the draft, or reaching for a position fit etc.

 

This is all presumes that Bruce is capable of signing a quality FA in a position of need, but that's another debate entirely.

 

You say the money wasn't necessarily worth it - that's fair, and like I say, I think you can make a case both ways for that. What is missing from that argument though, is the other factors in the trade - it wasn't just about money, it was also about security at QB. I'm sick of dancing to Cousins' tune and have a QB circus every year, I'm sure the players are too. Would Cousins have even signed a LTD here at all? Who knows. I have my opinion, and others have theirs, but we couldn't come to an agreement with him and for the sake of the team moving forward, it was important to get this position secured. I also don't think Kirk is a leader, Alex Smith is a proven leader etc etc. There's all kind of things that come into this rather than it being all about the money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not certain we can say that Cousins = Smith.  There's a chance (IMHO, a very good chance) that Cousins ceiling will continue to rise whereas Smith's ceiling has essentially maxed and could very well decline with age.  

 

I'll grant that Smith is okay, and could be a serviceable placeholder until the Skins find another QB, assuming the Skins get lucky in one of the next couple of drafts.  (However, the Skins have spent a lot of draft-picks,(made trades, FAs, etc ) in their search for a 'franchise' - level QB during Snyder's tenure -- the results were usually not good.)

 

BTW, Casserly may think Smith's okay and on a par with Cousins... but I'll note he also thought Heath Schuler was a great QB candidate too.

Edited by Wyvern
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Wyvern said:

I'm not certain we can say that Cousins = Smith.  There's a chance (IMHO, a very good chance) that Cousins ceiling will continue to rise whereas Smith's ceiling has essentially maxed and could very well decline with age.  

 

Kirk is nearly 30 - not saying he has no upside left, but I think that is a point which is massively over-rated by the fanbase. I don't think he has been improving year on year particularly - he's remained fairly stagnant in terms of progression over the last 2 or 3 years - I don't think he has much space to reach his ceiling to be honest - I think he does have some upside left, but he's never going to reach the next tier and become elite. They have different strengths and weaknesses but ultimately, there's not much between them. Kirk throws more yards, Alex throws less INTs etc.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

UK Skins-- it is your perception that he has remained stagnant. But, not mine... at least not from what I've seen of Cousins.

 

And it's hard to show marked improvement in 2017 when given support such as: a sub-par running game; a crippled offensive line with turnover at the center that couldn't provide reliable pass protection; and a very questionable WR-corps (minus his  go-to TE) .  

 

That said, I think Cousins extended plays, and made more off-script plays than in previous years, whenever he'd been given some kind of opening allowing him to elude all the pass-rushers the hobbled O-line was allowing to quickly pounce on him.  

 

The fact is, a QB can only make his players look just so good, and would need some unhurried times to do so. Cousins 2017 season was conducted under some awful conditions... and to expect him to exceed his results of his 2016 season (when he at least had some good receivers), is unrealistic.

 

... But this is ES Fan-Chat, and everyone is entitled to their opinion, and their perspective on how well a player performed.

 

 I indicated I thought Cousins ceiling might rise ... it's an opinion, not a fact.   And, We won't find out for a while.  Cousins might get on a good team and help make it great, or he might wind up on a team that has worse personnel/coaches than the Skins, and never get the opportunity to show improvement.

Edited by Wyvern
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have always been a Kirk supporter,but I got to thinking his career has been in parallel with T Romo.Puts up nice stats but in games at end of season always seems to make that one mistake.Now he’s not had a good defense behind him but top paid qb’s somehow win those games.Smith might  also fit that mold somewhat,but of the two he’s the one that wants to be here so let’s start to support him because talking about Kirk isn’t going to change anything now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, UKskins said:

 

 If we call Breeland and Fuller a wash talent wise (for arguments sake), and presume we resign Breeland then it's essentially Alex Smith + a starter vs Kirk + 3rd round pick.

 

Three different beat guys including Keim and Finlay think its still unlikely Breeland is back.  so I don't know if we count Breeland in the bag.  He's a mixed bag anyway on this point -- because you are likely paying the dude around $7 million give or take so that consumes a lot of the savings from moving to Kirk to Alex.  That could be the reason why the beat guys think its unlikely Breeland is back.

 

2 hours ago, UKskins said:

 

So essentially we've traded a future unknown 3rd round pick on a rookie deal for a proven quality starter on a more expensive deal but with the money to pay them. Our last 5 3rd round picks have been Jordan Reed, Morgan Moses, Spencer Long, Matt Jones, Kendall Fuller, Fabian Moreau - so it's hit and miss in terms of overall quality and first year impact. 

 

That's a good list of prospects.  Matt Jones being the outlier.  Matt Jones though was a borderline 4th round pick -- they took him at the tail end of the third round.  We got the 13th highest 3rd round pick.  I am done with the days of shrugging that stuff off.  I recall the days of forgetting about the trades and painfully being reminded about what happened with those picks years later -- hey for James Thrash the Eagles winded up with Trent Cole.  The trade down with Dallas that yielded that D. Lawrence.  hey the first 2nd round pick for RG3 = Janoris Jenkins.  

Edited by Skinsinparadise
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, goskins10 said:

Can $7M to $13M get you that much more than with Kirk on the payroll?

 

Not really.

 

However the other issue with that is Kirk didn't / doesn't actually want to be on the payroll.

1 hour ago, Skinsinparadise said:

Three different beat guys including Keim and Finlay think its still unlikely Breeland is back.

 

I'd agree. Gruden is big on Dunbar plus we have to plan on Moreau stepping up. We have all been on him as a steal in last years draft. Hopefully that one plays out in out favour.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Wyvern said:

 

BTW, Casserly may think Smith's okay and on a par with Cousins... but I'll note he also thought Heath Schuler was a great QB candidate too.

 

And Beathard drafted Ryan Leaf...great point ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Ray2844 said:

I have always been a Kirk supporter,but I got to thinking his career has been in parallel with T Romo.Puts up nice stats but in games at end of season always seems to make that one mistake.Now he’s not had a good defense behind him but top paid qb’s somehow win those games.Smith might  also fit that mold somewhat,but of the two he’s the one that wants to be here so let’s start to support him because talking about Kirk isn’t going to change anything now.

 

Not to derail the thread further, but for Kirk to be considered to have a career similar to Romo after around 55-60 starts, Kirk would have to have taken his team to the playoffs twice, (edit -- actually three times), won a playoff game, been to three times as many pro bowls, and have winning records against every team in the NFC East.

Edited by Nerm

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Poor Alex.  He's excited to come here, since he's wanted.  Of course, that nice contract extension he's getting sure helps.  San Francisco and Kansas City decided to move on.  It happens.

 

Thing is Alex had Harbaugh at end of his 49er days and had Reid in Kansas City.  He's a getting Jay Gruden, a very mediocre head coach.  He's going to a team with a very shakey offensive lineup at the moment.  Of course, he can count on a great front office to fix that problem.  Oh, wait a minute; he got traded to the Redskins.  One of the weaker front offices out there.

 

Alex, even though your new money doesn't kick in until 2019; you are going to find after one year in D.C. that smile and excitement of coming here; to be washed away.  Your only happiness here will be your paycheck.

 

You will not reach the promiseland. No happy ending.  You may take the team to a playoff birth or two, during your tenure here. That will be your highlight. Ultimately, the same fate that happened to you in San Francisco and Kansas City; will happen here. You will be replaced.  Thing is, you won't find that ride as enjoyable here.  It's not your fault.   You just got traded into football purgatory. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, UK SKINS FAN '74 said:

 

Not really.

 

However the other issue with that is Kirk didn't / doesn't actually want to be on the payroll.

 

Edit

 

I get that and was actually the point. Assuming he does not want to be here, what did Bruce get out of it. Bruce got nothing for Kirk and had to pay for a replacement. 

  • Confused 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Rdskns2000 said:

 

 

Thing is Alex had Harbaugh at end of his 49er days and had Reid in Kansas City.  He's a getting Jay Gruden, a very mediocre head coach.  He's going to a team with a very shakey offensive lineup at the moment.  Of course, he can count on a great front office to fix that problem.  Oh, wait a minute; he got traded to the Redskins.  One of the weaker front offices out there.

Actually, I'd argue that Smith is getting one of the better pass blocking lines in the NFL. Some of that is dependent on recovery from injury, but the only real weak link is a free agent not expected back, but if we look at this line over the last three years... they can pass block really well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.