Skinsinparadise Posted February 4, 2018 Share Posted February 4, 2018 24 minutes ago, carex said: no it isn't, because there's always someone who comes out trashing me when I support a move the Skins make, when the people I'm arguing with take just as automatic a reaction against the moves. And I'm speaking to all non-homers, not just you, also, I didn't mean trying to avoid the issue when I said sidestepping, you just keep missing the point in a way I don't even get how it's possible. OK, if you are saying fandom isn't your intended point. That's cool. That's my only issue. I'll give that backing Bruce-Dan isn't an easy stance to take -- most aren't with you on that. As for the homers point. I don't agree with the premise of how you define that. But that's a separate conversation. Some of the bigger critics here of the FO are homers by my definition. We all have our own definitions of homers. Mine are people who are behind the players-team and positive during the season. IMO people's take on Bruce isn't the overriding factor of homerism. But again, there is no true definition. Everyone has their own take. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Veryoldschool Posted February 4, 2018 Share Posted February 4, 2018 Snyder isn't going to fire Bruce Allen now. He'll save Allen to sacrifice if the things head south in 2018. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carex Posted February 4, 2018 Share Posted February 4, 2018 6 minutes ago, Skinsinparadise said: OK, if you are saying fandom isn't your intended point. That's cool. That's my only issue. I'll give that backing Bruce-Dan isn't an easy stance to take -- most aren't with you on that. As for the homers point. I don't agree with the premise of how you define that. But that's a separate conversation. Some of the bigger critics here of the FO are homers by my definition. We all have our own definitions of homers. Mine are people who are behind the players-team and positive during the season. IMO people's take on Bruce isn't the overriding factor of homerism. But again, there is no true definition. Everyone has their own take. I always thought of homerism as always expecting the team t be great, never questioning it's moves and not bashing anyone, unless it's like issues between two people on the team and you have to pick one of the other Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Skinsinparadise Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 Just now, carex said: I always thought of homerism as always expecting the team t be great, never questioning it's moves and not bashing anyone, unless it's like issues between two people on the team and you have to pick one of the other If that's the definition than forgetting this team -- you probably have 2% of the fan base of any team fitting that category. Never questioning a move? But again to each their own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goskins10 Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 13 minutes ago, carex said: I always thought of homerism as always expecting the team t be great, never questioning it's moves and not bashing anyone, unless it's like issues between two people on the team and you have to pick one of the other With all due respect you brought the whole fandom thing up to start suggesting anyone not supporting this move should find another team. We all care deeply for this team - clearly too much. Labels are worthless and lead to nothing positive. Again, most everyone here has a vested interest in the team. A very few really like what's going on. A very few really hate most everything going on. The rest of us are in the middle and as far as I can see that makes up about 98% of the board - with people leaning one way of the other. You have made some good points. It's hard being fairly alone on one side of an argument. I admire your passion. Just let your points stand on their own merit. No need to bring how people express their support for a team into it. I really want this **** to be over so we can find the next ting about the team to all disagree on :-) Oh and go Pats!! Hate those ****ing ealges!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carex Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 13 minutes ago, goskins10 said: With all due respect you brought the whole fandom thing up to start suggesting anyone not supporting this move should find another team. We all care deeply for this team - clearly too much. Labels are worthless and lead to nothing positive. Again, most everyone here has a vested interest in the team. A very few really like what's going on. A very few really hate most everything going on. The rest of us are in the middle and as far as I can see that makes up about 98% of the board - with people leaning one way of the other. You have made some good points. It's hard being fairly alone on one side of an argument. I admire your passion. Just let your points stand on their own merit. No need to bring how people express their support for a team into it. I really want this **** to be over so we can find the next ting about the team to all disagree on :-) Oh and go Pats!! Hate those ****ing ealges!!! this was never about this move. As for the Super Bowl, I'm not watching one minute of this game, I hate both teams Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goskins10 Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 3 minutes ago, carex said: this was never about this move. As for the Super Bowl, I'm not watching one minute of this game, I hate both teams I am in China so not watching the game either. Same reason. I could really care less outside of saying 3-0 to all eagles fans is way too much fun! Hate to lose that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkinsFTW Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 I woke up this morning 7AM in the Philippines. Went to the beach, we went kayaking. Totally forgot there was a SB today. Sucks that the Eagles won but that almost doesn't even bother me anymore. Thanks Doofus Dan and Bumbling Bruce. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FrFan Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 15 minutes ago, SkinsFTW said: I woke up this morning 7AM in the Philippines. Went to the beach, we went kayaking. Totally forgot there was a SB today. Sucks that the Eagles won but that almost doesn't even bother me anymore. Thanks Doofus Dan and Bumbling Bruce. Lambanog can help Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HigSkin Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 Interesting... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bla bla bla Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 Didn't want to start a new thread but I thought I'd share my thoughts about the potential to franchise Kirk. I posted this in our Jets forum so I apologize for it sounding a little odd as I copied and pasted it. I think he is traded to the Browns and here is the rationale: "Why would Kirk sign the tag when he knows he'll be a free agent if he holds out?" - By signing the tag Kirk is guaranteeing himself $34.5M this year. I think he will receive a similar contract offer in 2019 to what he'd receive this year so why not collect the extra $34M? Heck if he waits 1 more year if more QBs get paid he's likely increasing his value. He plays the most protected position with the longest career length in the NFL, if there is one position to gamble a future on it is QB. "But Cousins would need to agree to an extension before a deal is made?" - yes, if that team wants to sign him to a multi-year deal. What if a team doesn't mind having him for 1 season though? "The Redskins would need to receive at least a 3rd round pick to make it worth it for them to trade him?" - yes they would receive a 3rd round comp pick that would be at the end of round 3 next year. What if the first pick in the 4th round were available for this years draft? That may look attractive as opposed to essentially getting the same value for his comp pick next year. I won't dive into that 4th round pick so much because I still believe the Browns could give up a 3rd round pick for Cousins just as easily. What do we know? - The Browns have 5 picks in the first 2 rounds. - The Browns tried to trade the last pick in round 2 for Alex Smith. They were not willing to extend Alex Smith if he were in fact traded there, that tells me that they only wanted the 1 year rental at $18M. - The Browns have the most cap space of any team that could want Kirk. If the Browns took on this Franchise Tag they are looking at a cap hit of $34.5M, that would leave them with ~$80M in cap remaining. Since Cleveland is not usually a top destination for Free Agents they will have to overpay players to go there. What if the Browns wanted to focus on a few big Free Agents instead of a plethora of them? The Browns already have 55 players under contract for next year. $80M and a ton of draft picks should give them plenty of options for talent. - The Browns have shown interest in Josh Allen, a player who most feel needs to sit for a year or two. Why would the Browns want to trade a pick for Kirk? - Browns could say "Kirk we have so much faith in you that we offered up a pick knowing you could leave us in 2019" - The Browns would have between now and the draft to work out a long term deal. If Kirk still wants to test Free Agency then he will either sit out or play on the tag, I don't see him sitting out and leaving $34.5M on the table. - If Kirk signs a long term deal with them before the draft then they can discuss how to use their top picks this year. If Kirk decides to play on the tag then the Browns will take Josh Allen at #1 while still likely landing Barkley at #4 or another top talent. - Josh Allen will sit on the bench for the year like most believe he should, Kirk in the mean time would play this season. - The Browns can then hope that he has developed enough chemistry with their team that he would want to resign with them on a long term deal. While in season the Browns are developing a winning culture while also grading out the roster to see if the talent is where it needs to be. If the talent is bad then they know where to focus their money, if the talent plays well then they realize they are just a QB away. - If he doesn't want to sign with them after the season, then he walks and the Browns have Allen vs Kizer in 2019. If Kirk does want to resign with them then they will be able to trade Allen and have Kizer as their backup. Since Allen sat all year his stock likely won't fall very far, I believe they could get a first round pick for him next year. Obviously that wouldn't be the #1 pick so you still lose some value but you would have signed Cousins so the goal of getting a franchise QB was hit. Think of it as getting 2 cracks at getting a franchise QB for the price of moving down in the first round plus a 3rd round pick. Why would the Redskins do this? - They would be receiving a pick this year instead of next year, if it were a 3rd round pick it would be even higher than the comp 3rd they would receive. - By franchising Cousins it removes Minnesota and Denver from the conversation, I don't think either team wants to risk a pick higher than what the Browns would give up for a 1 year rental. I could see the Browns offering as much as the 35th pick in round 2, that would mean that is higher than Denver or Minnesota could go before needing to offer a 1st round pick. I don't think either team would move a 1st for Kirk plus pay him all that money. - It would send Kirk out of the NFC - If the Browns are indeed the highest pick then the Redskins would send their QB to the worst franchise in the NFL as a big ole FU to Kirk for toying with them. - By the time Kirk becomes a Free Agent next offseason, the Broncos, Vikings, Jets, Bills, and Cardinals will all have likely found a solution or will be working on a solution at QB. This will throw Cousins world for a loop he'll need to move 2 times in 2 years if he doesn't want to play in Cleveland. End Conclusion I didn't believe it before but I believe it now, Kirk Cousins will be franchised and traded. I think at the very least the Browns offer a pick but knowing what we know from all that I just laid out, maybe another team offers more than what the Browns are willing to give up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Est.1974 Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 I'm with Bruce. Good chance the tag approach works in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NoCalMike Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 Why not use the tag to see what offers they can field? If nothing attractive enough bites, rescind it. What is the harm? Maybe I am missing something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
purbeast Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 2 minutes ago, NoCalMike said: Why not use the tag to see what offers they can field? If nothing attractive enough bites, rescind it. What is the harm? Maybe I am missing something. Can they rescind it if he signs it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JSSkinz Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 2 minutes ago, purbeast said: Can they rescind it if he signs it? No, and he will probably sign it immediately unless we have some sort of agreement that puts him in a winning situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Hangman- C_Hanburger Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 Can the Skins lock in a deal BEFORE the 20th that is binding with another club? Or is that tampering...Can Denver, say or CONTRACT with the SKINS that IF they Tag Cousins and commit to trade ONLY to Denver..be it one year @ 34mIL or a LTD..OR Browns...Cousins can't refuse a 1 year trade on the tag ..right. So the FO needs to be working the phones NOW and see who wants to lock in Cousins without a bidding war and/or let him go to a team of his choice. If we can get a binding agreement that covers the 34Mil BEFORE the BIG Free Agency Rush...then Do it. Hopefully the Browns or Jets would risk a 1 year 34Mil and plan on tagging Cousins if he won't sign a LTD. Lets see if there is a HUNGRY team out there now that Alex is off the market Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
crabbypatty Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 19 hours ago, TK said: If he's hearing it & I'm hearing it.... So Dan's getting sick of Bruce and all his crap? When does Dan get tired of himself??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tsailand Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 55 minutes ago, purbeast said: Can they rescind it if he signs it? Nope! The Norman thing only happened because Josh didn't sign the franchise tag. Kirk will sign the $34.5M tag instantly. When the Redskins give other teams permission to talk to him, he will tell them he is happy to play for them in 2018 but will not sign a long term deal before free agency. The interest will immediately dry up, because even though Kirk is a legit franchise QB, nobody is going to give the Redskins draft picks for a one year QB rental at $34.5M. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BatteredFanSyndrome Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 Only the Redskins hold a player hostage to play for them. I can't see any other team, no matter how needy at QB, wanting to bring a guy in that makes it very clear that no matter what happens, he will seek free agency. Not only is it a really costly decision to be uncertain at QB a year later, it's also a real pain in the ass for everyone involved having to discuss it every time a mic is put in a player, coach, or member of the FO's face. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickyJ Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 On 2/4/2018 at 12:24 PM, TK said: I've been hearing that Dan's finally been souring on him. At this point it's just when has Dan had enough of him. If he can somehow get McCarthy to play ball with him & pull off a tag & trade he'll prolly pull off enough redemption points to get a stay of execution. McCarthy as in Mike McCarthy of the Packers? Where do they fit in with Cousins? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJD2 Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 4 minutes ago, NickyJ said: McCarthy as in Mike McCarthy of the Packers Cousins agent McCarthy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Birdlives Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 20 hours ago, TK said: If he's hearing it & I'm hearing it.... Hopefully the conversation went something like this: "Bruce, If you don't get something meaningful for Cousins after botching our attempts to re-sign him, you're fired." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NickyJ Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 2 minutes ago, DJD2 said: Cousins agent McCarthy Oh.... Yeah.... I guess that makes sense lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carex Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 25 minutes ago, Birdlives said: Hopefully the conversation went something like this: "Bruce, If you don't get something meaningful for Cousins after botching our attempts to re-sign him, you're fired." that shouldn't be plural. Cousins made an offer after 2015 the Skins refused, we made an attempt last year Cousins refused, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stadium-Armory Posted February 5, 2018 Share Posted February 5, 2018 On 2/4/2018 at 9:38 AM, GoSkinsGo said: If they tag Cousins, doesn't that put a cap hold on the team even prior to signing? If that's the case he could hold up to 35 million dollars in cap space hostage by not signing. That seems like a fairly big risk to have up to 50 million in cap space tied up in the QB position. He can't be traded until he signs the tender as he wouldn't be under contract He could screw himself but really screw the team over. That risk / reward seems pretty poor. Admittedly I am not a cap/tag expert. But it seems to me that we would only tag him if we had a deal in place with a trade partner. And that Cousins is in on the deal and approves it. Once we have agreed to terms, we tag and trade, knowing that we already have the trade in place. Cousins would be on board because (like Smith) he could pick his landing spot and negotiate his deal ahead of time. Perhaps this doesn't make sense though since as a FA he can pick his spot. I think the leverage is around the Skins intimating that they are talking to trade partners and that might get him to play ball so he doesn't get traded somewhere he doesn't prefer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.